Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk

Subject: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:07 AM

Gotcher attention?

For many years, I ran a folk concert series where I worked. Every once in awhile, I'd book a bluegrass group and I couldn't help but notice that half my regular audience didn't show, and half the audience was people I rarely saw at the series. They'd come because it was a bluegrass band.

At one of the bluegrass concerts, I talked about the fact that half the audience had come just because it was a bluegrass band and wouldn't come again until I booked another bluegrass band.) I asked them if that was the case, to talk to me after the concert and tell me why they didn't come to the folk concerts. Several of them stopped to talk as they were leaving, and the most common comments were that they didn't want to spend an evening listening to someone sitting in a chair, playing guitar and singing protest songs. I thought that was a rather bizarre perception of folk singers, and argued that only a very small percentage of folk songs are "protest" songs. I think that image comes from the 60's, where so many songs written at that time were tied to a movement... anti-war, civil rights, women's rights.. If you listen to the anthology of American Folk Music, or thumb your way through Allan Lomax's books on folk songs, "protest" songs are in the real minority (even counting Down On Penny's Farm, Farm Land Blues and similar songs as "protest" songs.) But, I was speaking to deaf ears. As far as they were concerned, folk singers sit around and bitch to guitar accompaniment.

(I noticed in another recent thread that a Catter commented that most folk songs are political... NOT)

This being Mudcat, someone can flip the title of this thread and make it Why Folk Musicians Don't Like Bluegrass.

But that's another topic.

I know that there aren't a lot of bluegrass fans in the Cat, 'cept for Martin Gibson and a handful of others. But, any comments are welcome.

Does this count as an American thread, Martin? :-)

Jerry

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Mooh
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:21 AM

Well, it's all just sound, isn't it? I have never understood the bias that distinguishes between one genre and another so readily, and perhaps that's just my personal disability. Rap I don't get, too damn repetitive, loud, and I don't get the message, and I'd feel the same about other musics if I couldn't relate for the same reasons. If there's an obvious connection to other musics, I'm generally okay with it, all music being deriviative and all that.

It's all just sound.

Pecae, Mooh.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:22 AM

As someone who loves both styles it's a shame that more fans don't cross over. The two styles have cross pollinated so often. I'm sure many folk fans look at bluegrass like they look at stock car racing. A lot of people going very fast in circles going nowhere. Some of the rules of bluegrass can be rigid but then again haiku is a ridig form also. It's how much freedom you find within those confines that interesting.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Les B
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:27 AM

I just betcha this evolves into a discussion of blue states vs red states - there are similarities! :)

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:28 AM

bluegrass music comes from the esteemed autocratic Bill Monroe who spelled out his cultural preferences pretty clearly. It's a hierarchy that tends to be rigid and up tight. The Newgrass is far more musically interesting and is often reviled by the bluegrass "purists". Bluegrass reflects a cultural point-of-view that is marginally accepted by those not a part of that "culture".
It's interesting that there are no African-American bluegrass musicians.
That should tell you something.

Frank

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:30 AM

Frank - My God you mean - Ricky Skaggs is WHITE ??

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:32 AM

The folk music scene, on both sides of the pond, has been fragmenting. In the UK, singers (generally) don't seem to play instruments; instrumentalists (with obvious exceptions) don't sing and dancers don't talk to anyone but other dabcers.

In the US, what was once "folk" has split oiff into Blues, Old-Timey, Bluegrass, Gospel,Country, Irish, Celtoid and a flock of oher specialties which seldom seem to inteact. Back when bluegrass was new (early 1950s), it was viewed as a commercial form of music that was being forced upon the folk scene--I remember the schism between "bluegrassers" and "Greensleevers".

Onct upon a time, I remember dancers who sang and played, and all the permutations possible. Prolly never no more.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: SINSULL
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:37 AM

I love Bluegrass, Jerry. But just as I can only handle trad ballads in small doses, I can only take so much bluegrass at one time. It all starts sounding the same. I haven't heard a real protest song in ages. How long a go did you take your survey?

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:46 AM

Hey, Frank: Two members of my gospel quartet are certifiably black and grew up in the south... one in Virginia and one in South Carolina. They both really like bluegrass and when we go to a folk festival, they always seem to find their way to the bluegrass workshops. As for blacks... how many blacks like folk music? Or even know what it is..

Joe and Frankie both grew up listening to the Grand Ole Opry and probably know early country music better than most white northerners. Some of it is cultural, but some is geographic, too.

The survey was many years ago, Sinsul, but I expect that the same opinions still hold. I agree that a part of the reason is cultural.
I've gone to a couple of bluegrass festivals, but they are probably more prevalent in "red" (voted for Bush) states than blue ones...

Jerry

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:55 AM

The real bluegrassers I come into contact with and play with, haven't much use for folk music or folksingers in general.

You can thank for the most part..............................Glen Yarbrough. A warbler to the max and the epitome of over production. Or Judy Collins and Joan Baez types.

the more folk, the more shunned. However, it seems like types like John Prine are tolerated and deservedly so.

Of course hippie grassers like Bela Fleck and Sam Bush (along with players like Herb Pedersen and the late Jerry Garcia are what neutralize the total redneck/hillbilly thing and in my opinion, make bluegrass all the more exciting.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Moses
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 11:58 AM

I just like good music. Bluegrass, reggae, ragtime, folk, classical etc. - don't care what you name it. If its good, I'll listen.

I'm not a musician though.....

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:12 PM

Well, that's just wonderful, Moses.

BTW, thanks for going up on that mountain.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Joe
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:13 PM

"In the UK, singers (generally) don't seem to play instruments"

I must be going to the wrong clubs - where very few singers don't play instruments.

Maybe they are the wrong clubs too, 'cause Bluegrass always gets an enthusiastic reception.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:26 PM

Special Concensus are coming to one of my local clubs here in the UK (Chase FC, (January 28). I'm a "folkie" and I'll definitely be there.

A US Bluegrass band in England - meets both sides of the "American thread" discussion!

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:26 PM

Let's think about the appeal of the two musics:

Bluegrass (in my view, at least) has two areas it focuses on:
It's a vocal/harmonic style, but the sung words are really not too important; the singing becomes just some of the music.
and
It's an instrumental/harmonic style which depends heavily on speed, instrumental virtuosity, and a certain kind of insistent rhythm.

Maybe there's a third aspect, too: The subject matter of the singing seems rather circumscribed. Themes that spring immediately to mind are old-fashioned Christian religion, and mother, and then a few others like trucks. But, as I observed above, the subject matter isn't as important as the musical style; the words are sort of a necessary evil.

In folk song, the appeal (at least to me) resides mainly in the words; the instrumental accompaniment, if any, is sort of a condiment to serve with the main meal of word meaning.

Folk music people are likely listeners who primarily enjoy the story or word stream.   Bluegrass people will be those who tend to focus on that hard driving rhythm and the characteristic harmonies found in bluegrass. As I see it, of course.

Now I know before I ever click the "submit" button that many here will see me as mistaken in this, if not wrong-headed, but that's my take on it.

Any comments? ("Come on, Dave! You know there will be comments!")

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Steve Latimer
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:27 PM

While there aren't a lot of black Bluegrassers, there some.

The Ebony Hillbillies


I have not heard these guys, but I have heard good things about them.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:32 PM

Aw, come on, Dave!

(I can also be found down the pub listening to some good ol' rock'n'roll with hard driving rythms. Mind you, the harmonies can be a bit scarce!:)

Pete

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: kendall
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:19 PM

I've been hired to do many bluegrass festivals, and they like what I do.They welcome the break. So, I can only conclude that it depends on the performer. I like bluegrass (in small doses) and I love folk. However,I would never do a thiry verse ballad at a bluegrass festival. I've seen many folksingers who put ME to sleep, so it's easy to imagine what someone who is used to hard driving bluegrass would think of them.

Bluegrass is "playing" music" and it's fun to jump in there and get all bruised up, but it's tiresome to just listen to for any length of time.
Someone called folk music, "Heavy Mental".

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:19 PM

I didn't mean that nobody who likes one likes the other. Sorry if I came across that way.

But I think there is a tendency in the way that I described, and that, for those who have decided and pretty-much-exclusive tastes, the division comes about based on the listener's preferred emphasis.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: frogprince
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:34 PM

I guess I've just been lucky; in the live music scenes I've been around lately, hardly anyone seems interested in the distinction.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:42 PM

I like the drive of bluegrass. I like the picking. I especially like the trading off of leads. And the high harmonies. On occasion, there are slower tunes, too, which my ear appreciates.

I do get tired of the simplistic lyrics. But when I listen to Doc Watson, I change my mind again.

Saying that black people don't play bluegras, to me, is like saying black people can't swim or that black people don't sing country. I've seen and heard plenty of exceptions.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Maryrrf
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:42 PM

I joined the Virginia Folk Music Association and found that it is almost exclusively dedicated to hard core bluegrass with a little bit of country thrown in. I would really dispute the fact that bluegrass falls under the category of "Virginia Folk" music. I would have thought more of the old ballads (like in the Texas Gladden collection) for example. But they don't seem to question the fact that bluegrass is "folk". I do enjoy bluegrass is measured doses but I went to one of their festivals and it was all bluegrass, hardcore (no "Newgrass") and after 8 hours I've had my bluegrass "fix" for the year. I entered one of the vocal contests and did "John Henry" accompanied by an old timey banjo and I think they thought I was some kind of eccentric. I can't imagine how they'd have reacted if I'd sung unnaccompanied like some of the old mountain singers!

I would certainly agree that one of the major differences is that in bluegrass the words are very secondary, whereas in folk the words are the main focus. That stylized bluegrass singing just glosses over the words and the songs seem to lose their meaning. I have a collection where "Rain and Snow" is sung unaccompanied. It is so powerful it sent chills up my spine. In bluegrass you get none of that impact - it's just another song. I do appreciate the instrumental talent that exists in the bluegrass arena but have to say that I think in many cases speed seems to be everything.

Judging from the impression I had of most Bluegrass audiences I don't think most of them would be very amenable to any kind of "protest" song!

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:00 PM

OK, I'll put it this way.

The actual music is secondary in folk music. Doesn't matter much what the melody is about or the tempo or structure of the song, it's the words that really matter.

I'm sure that goes over just as well as saying that words to bluegrass songs don't matter.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Maryrrf
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:12 PM

Did somebody say that "words to bluegrass songs don't matter"?

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:17 PM

Hey, I'm a die-hard bluegrasser, and I also love folk music (of which I feel bluegrass is a part). I usually don't care much for watching a single performer with a single instrument, having experienced the joy of participating in as well as listening to harmony and instrumental ensembles in other genres, although there is the occasional performer who can keep my interest solo.

It's often true what they say about the lyrics in bluegrass vs folk, and sometimes it's hard to find songs our bluegrass band can do that don't make me gag. On the other hand, many singer/songwriter songs make me gag. And some of both types simply bore me. If I want intellectual stimulation (which I often do), I'm less likely to look for it in music than in some other medium. Music for me is more visceral.

It's not true that bluegrass is all fast, and it is true that some folk is very fast (e.g. old-timey tunes).

If I have my choice of listening to a solo vs duet vs trio vs quartet vs quintet (stop there) I generally feel that more is more and will more likely end up at a bluegrass concert than a folk concert because more folkies perform alone. Which also accounts for some of their "liberties" with rhythm and timing, which is less often found in ensembles.

At the risk of perpetuating more stereotypes and generalizations, I'll join in this fun discussion anyway. Jerry, you find some fine ways to get us talking!

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Maryrrf
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:21 PM

Well, vive la difference! In general I would choose to go and see a solo performer as opposed to a group. I'm less interested in the harmony aspects, more interested in words, how the singer expresses him/herself, etc. Obviously there is no right or wrong here - just a matter of what you are looking for.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Steve-o
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:32 PM

This is nothing more than the age-old snotty attitude held by those on both sides of the equation who have small minds. I think some of it is fear, and some is just plain ignorance...sort of a "prejudice" kind of thing. When the two cross-polinate, then you get the GREAT stuff- the Belas, the Grismans, the Rowans, etc. I went to a Bluegrass gathering in the park two weeks ago, and a bunch of those hard core dorks were there, as always. Once we played for a while, the open minds split off and had a great time- the hard cores stood around trading licks on "Way Downtown". It has ever been thus.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:33 PM

Oh, one more thing I forgot to mention. I do a lot of songwriting, so I'm a bluegrasser but also one of those "singer/songwriters" I complain about. Of course, MY songs are never about my navel or the cookies I baked or things mundane. I have indeed written protest songs as well as fairly cerebral pieces that might do better without any music at all, and I have also written my share of sappy, boring, down-home lyrics put to forgettable melodies. Some of these songs are performed by our bluegrass band, so I call them bluegrass.

What's my point?
Music is as music hears?
All generalizations are wrong?
I'll go now...

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Claire
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:41 PM

I come from the traditional scene (Old Time an Irish). I wonder if anyone else sees the following contrast the way that I do.

Although a lot of bluegrass has an ensemble sound, the attraction, both for the listener and the player, is the solo work. This is often incredibly intricate and showing off an individual players skill. At a bluegrass jam, people take turns to solo, something that almost never happens at an old time jam or an Irish session. The session and jam scene is all about playing together, fitting into lovely tight sound. Single players may be shown off in concerts, but even at concerts the the zen of group playing is really the core sound. Singing is a whole different discussion - but I don't have time to go into it right now.

So, I am interested to know if Bluegrass aficionados also find this contrast, or if maybe I have a slanted view.

Fun discussion - thanks

Claire

PS: now that the election is over, my brain can actually handle other things, so it is nice to check in with you all.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Arnie
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:48 PM

I've noticed and I'm sure some of you do too that there is definitely a cultural difference in comparing the bluegrass audience and the folk music audience (here in Canada anyway ). For example not too long ago before they outlawed smoking in the bars here if you went to hear bluegrass in any club around Toronto you could count on it being a smoking pit and a noisy audience (even though the performers may be top notch).(Beer available stuff and most popular -light beer and average like stuff like Molson Canadian). Go hear folk music at a club or pub - audience is quiet, attentive, (many premium beers on tap as well as light). The folk music audience is open to a wide variety of styles, and bluegrass audience is just focused on that style and it's culture for the most part.
I recently recorded a banjo CD "The Banjo Special" with bluegrass, old time, and Irish music all on the same disk. High hopes were made on bridging wider audiences with the recording with some success - but it did not meet expectations. The reviews on the recording of the individual genres were excellent, but acceptance of listening to the non preferred style of the listener remained difficult.
Observations. I love good music.
Arnie Naiman

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Mooh
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:56 PM

Arnie, I love that cd, and have been playing it for others lately. If it's okay for the likes of Bela Fleck and Simon Mayor to dabble in a range of styles, it's okay for me.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 03:17 PM

I have a wide and eclectic musical taste, (a multi-instrumentalist and singer too) encouraged by by parents when young - my mother had wanted to learn an instrument and could sing very well, but came the depression and there was no money, when the money became available, her younger brothers & sisters (who never touched an instrument again and rarely sang!) got the music lessons - my father was a very good classically trained violinist, who didn't see much in certain types of jazz, but liked swing, musicals, pop, etc. Both tended to like everything from opera to pop, but in mixed and varying doses.

So do I. In folk, I tend to prefer instrumental ensembles, with or without singers

With 'bluegrass', I often tend to have much the same reaction as with 'irish' music - the quote from the movie 'Amadeus' says it all "too many notes for the ear to hear". The locally available players seem to tend to concentrate on technical and agility & proficiency at high speed, and the availability of slower instrumental material, and unaccompanied vocal material is far less overall.

My father once was listening to a very young me showing off just how fast I could play things (with absolutely no expression!) and managed to open my mind. He told me that any fool with only very limited musical talent and ability can play fast and loud, because it's easier and requires less technical control than playing slower and quieter, and then picked up his violin and very slowly and steadily drew the bow from the frog to the tip taking minutes to generate a very soft and very pure unwavering tone (he used to play 'hot canary and other fast pieces occasionally too, you know).

I like all types of music, from the 'primitive' throat singing styles to opera, instrumental from accapella solo to massed choirs with orchestra & pipe organ, my personal preference when playing is ensemble rather than solo. I was trained as an accompanist by my father, and did a lot of it, playing piano & pipe organ for church singing from kids to congregations, and even in a school orchestra. Listening sensitively to what other are doing is far more satisfying than being a soloist - when I worked in amateur theatre with very limited resources, I found that lack of resources does not inhibit artistic expression, indeed a restriction on choices seems to promote creativity. I also prefer singing harmony to solo personally for much the same reasons.

I do like good practitioners who can belt out a tune faster than I can, but it seems just a sort of ego game to me, fun to do occasionally - like the 'how long can you hold a note' singing game, which if I know it is about to happen, I can 'turn on' the technique, and hang on with the best of them - as one who was thought to have asthma as a youngster and did breathing exercises and theatre techniques such as intercostal breathing so as one can 'play dead' - I do have quite a degree of breath control, but not as good as a professional opera singer!, but if you have put the effort into developing your technical skills to handle slower playing, just pure speed gets very boring after a while.

Of course I have seen many people (often non-instrumental spectators) decry slow pieces and demand 'more speed', as if that is the only worthwhile musical criteria.

Often makes me wonder about their lovemaking techniques.... ;-)

Robin

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 03:24 PM

Foolstroupe

You obviously have heard very little of the great bluegrass ballads that are sung in a heartfelt manner.

It's far from all fast and hard.

True there is no right and wrong here. But there is boring and exciting.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:01 PM

"You obviously have heard very little of the great bluegrass ballads that are sung in a heartfelt manner."

So true - we don't seem to have much of that (that I know of) locally here in Australia.

Martin, would you like to mention a few so I can track them down please?

"there is boring and exciting."

'Boring' can be fast or slow - so can 'exciting'...

No!!!!...... I meant MUSIC!

Robin

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Steve Latimer
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:09 PM

Foolestroupe,

It was the slower ballads that first drew me to Bluegrass. Down In The Willow Garden by Charlie Monroe, Angel Band and Rank Strangers To Me by The Stanley Brothers were probably the first ones, but there are tons of great Bluegrass Ballads. Check out the Stanley Brothers or Ralph Stanley and The Clinch Mountain Boys.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Steve-o
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:18 PM

I'll jump in here before Martin comes back, Foolestroupe. As far as "modern" Bluegrass styling, you can find the answer to all your questions by getting any and all Seldom Scene albums. Should be readily available in Australia; if not, through the web. Of course, there is lots more, and lots more of the older stuff too, but I'll let others advise you on those.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:23 PM

Man, ask the question and leave the computer for a couple of hours and then settle in for a long, enjoyable read! I pretty much agree with everything that folks are saying in here, and I thought Uncle Dave-O was especially on target.

I dug out an old article I wrote on the difference between bluegrass groups, old-time string bands and folk singers and thought I'd throw it on here. With tongue firmly in cheek.

Bluegrass Bands:
Wear shirts and ties; sometimes even three piece suits
Do "shows"
Say Mam a lot
Entertain
Play instrumentals really fast
Always have a gospel segment of their show
Perform standing up and display fancy footwork
Don't encourage the audience to sing along

Old-time String Bands:
Tune their instruments a lot
Usually wear shirts, but never ties
Crack each other up
Perform sitting down, or if standing are on the clumsy side
Preface each song with a lengthy historical background about the band and the recording that was their source
Don't encourage the audience to sing along

Folk Singers"
Wouldn't be caught dead wearing a tie, except Bob Franke
Sit down while they perform as often as they stand up
Like to talk with the audience
Often grind their own axes
Encourage the audience to sing along
Don't generally think of themselves as "entertainers"

In the article, I also found some other quotes from the bluegrass fans:
"Bluegrass is for the lower call; folk music is for the upper class"


And I added: Bluegrass music does seem to be quintessentially Amurican. John Wayne, red, white and blue, Budweiser, hunting dog, pick up truck, feed hat music. Folk music is Public Television. Bluegrass is Hee Haw

Jerry

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Peace
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:24 PM

I like good music performed well. That's my criteria.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: SINSULL
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:30 PM

Down In The Willow Garden is Bluegrass? I don't think so. Angel Band? Or do you mean Blue Grass versions of old traditional songs? I too would like to know about Bluegrass ballads, especially ones written originally as Bluegrass.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:34 PM

I came back, Foolstroupe and Steve Latimer and Steve-O couldn't have said it better for me.

what they have mentioned is some great stuff.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:52 PM

I'm trying to think of a bluegrass group in the UK that stayed together long enough to do lots of festivals and stuff like that - recently I mean - obviously we got the odd visit from Country Gazette and the like - but thats a hell of a long time ago.

Bluegrass clubs in the UK are terrible - only so often you can listen to Don't Let Your Deal Go Down. One night I heard it five times. What we need is some really young charismatic singers to embrace bluegrass, show us what it can do....

The late Thaddeus Kay and his brother George were that sort of country. Didn't see em billed in folk clubs too much.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Arkie
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 04:52 PM

People seem to gravitate to music for different reasons; some find the words appealing, some do not pay attention to words, some like it fast, some like it slow and melodic, and for some the appeal is how the music makes them feel. And then again, there are those who have a fairly wide tolerance for many types of music. One thing that I have discovered is that for many people, if they like the performer, they will like the music. Conversely, if for some reason the audience does not like a performer, nothing that person or group does will be entertaining.   In old time or folk music the emphasis is usually on the song or tune. In bluegrass the emphasis seems to be on the performance of a tune or song. Arrangements are a bit more intricate and harmonies more practiced.   While I would think that most Mudcatters would know the differences between bluegrass and folk or old time music, the general public does not seem to care all that much and refers to almost all acoustic music as bluegrass. At least neither bluegrass or folk performers have succumbed to the practice driving pop and country music these days - that the least essential element in music is music. That it is far more important to express attitude and seduce the camera.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 05:06 PM

Pop music video clips are mostly just soft porn. So much for 'hard' rock... :-)

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 05:06 PM

Here are a few more generalizations (tongue also in cheek) from my own experience in both worlds:

Folkies tend to be:
-better educated
-higher socio-economic class
-more rule-bound at festivals (low chairs in front, full-height in back, no high-back chairs in the audience pulleeeeeezzz! enter by this gate, camp in neat little squares of this many square feet, etc.)
-better singers and likely to sing along in the audience
-more diversified (race, sexual preference, ethnicity, religion)
-more likely urban
-more interested in the lyrics, message

Bluegrassers tend to be:
-better instrumentalists
-more interested in tradition
-more formally dressed on stage (my husband insists on wearing a tie when he performs to show his respect for the music and to counteract the hayseed image)
-rural or small-town
-interested in lyrics that continue the "tradition" and "values" embraced by the bluegrass "culture"
-more fun

One should never generalize. (I've got dozens more...)

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 05:15 PM

Barbara,

as a musician who has played his share of both types, you are so right on.

am enjoying your observations.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: radriano
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 06:23 PM

Martin Gibson said:

OK, I'll put it this way.

The actual music is secondary in folk music. Doesn't matter much what the melody is about or the tempo or structure of the song, it's the words that really matter. ---

Now that all depends on the definition of "folk music." For me, melody matters immensely. Maybe that's why I much prefer traditional music. Traditional melodies are much more interesting and satisfying.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,CK
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 06:33 PM

Interesting question. I think of bluegrass as the rock n' roll of acoustic music---a lot of it has a frantic nature to it, and I guess that people who like that sound and that beat might not care much about an evening with Michael Smith. I like bluegrass music...in small to moderate doses. I get weary of the themes (Jesus stuff especially), and the banjo can give me a headache. But I also like other forms of acoustic music in moderation too, such as Celtic especially. But I think you're onto something: bluegrass festivals I've been at have a blue collar family picnic ambiance while the folk festivals often have a hep, alternative, old hippie, college, left wing crowd. While we all might say we like all kinds of music, let's face it, when it comes to putting down one's cash, we're probably selective and the folk and bluegrass audiences are 2 distinct sub-cultures with a little overlap.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: PoppaGator
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 07:00 PM

I'm wondering if one genre's audience tends to include more people who actually play (or sing) than the other's.

Much of the awestruck commentary you hear about a picker's speed and/or technique comes from amateur players who only wish they could do the same themselves. There has always been a lot of this type of adulation for rock lead-guitar players, and I think the same thing goes on for bluegrass heroes. On the other hand, a very large proportion of the fans of *any* folk genre are also participants, so I'm not at all sure that the bluegrass audience includes would-be pickers than does the audience for other types of folk music.

But I'd of course be interested in anyone's thoughts...

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 07:53 PM

I think the bluegrass audience has many more participants (pickers) than the folk audience. In fact, the bluegrass culture includes going to festivals and pickin' your brains out all weekend, skipping meals and sleep to jam all day and all night. People who never picked up an instrument before end up taking up guitar or mando or banjo or fiddle or bass and joining in. That's part of the attraction of bluegrass, the welcome to beginners and the campsite jams ("field picking") in addition to the stage shows.

At the folk festivals I've been to, there are a few people who play some instrument or other (many more to pick from in folk music), but not nearly the widespread participation that is standard in bluegrass. And folkies rarely jam until the stage show is over for the day, while some bluegrassers never even get down to the stage area.

My personal opinion about those folks who go crazy for pickin' speed and dazzle is that it's another gearhead thing. The same ones (usually guys) who are into cars and machines and things with PARTS are the ones who spend hours, whole weekends, talking about (usually) banjo PARTS and licks and breaks and such. Don't get me started on banjos. I live with one. Make that, I live with FOUR.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 15 Nov 04 - 08:12 PM

What, you mean Ricki Scaggs isn't a girl??

Art