You have probably heard this expression before. I have heard it over and over again with respect to tuning, but here I would like to apply the phrase to tune settings. When is it acceptable to be ‘close enough’ with respect to the setting of a tune? I’m thinking of a tune I recorded recently on the posting clips section called rocking the cradle. I had this tune in my head from the playing of Catherine McEvoy. I recently received her CD with her version of rocking the cradle, and discovered that I indeed had the tune, but not exactly her setting. I think I could easily learn her setting, but I also feel comfortable with my own interpretation. Any thoughts on this?
Yeah, it’s folk music. Every version is correct. Some just sound better than others. All who disagree need to get over it.
I’m no purist, I love much music; but coming up as a 60’s folk musician in the USA, it was considered important to make each song your own.
I have enjoyed Matt Molloy’s playing for many years, but I don’t want to hear someone cloning his playing. I think music is about feeling - not form.
But, as a noub to this forum I may well be in for it for my views. I’m just a variety musician. 
My pet peeve…them what thinks there’s only one “right” way to play a tune.
(usually the way they play it)
My second pet peeve…whenever I double post…sorry about that 
Then there are the people who think that because there are lots of “right” ways, then the way they’re playing it is therefore right.
Yeah, but funny how I never want to hear the crap ones a second time. Cheers,
Rob
There may be no right way, but there are a few wrong ways.
Yeah, apologies to all involved but “every way is correct” just can’t be true. I’m pretty open-minded, but I can’t sign off on the “anything goes” mentality. For one thing, there’s always room for interpretation, but we need to draw a hard line between different settings and half-assed versions of tunes. I don’t mean at all that every good version needs to have all the bells and whistles; on the contrary, Micho Russell’s beautiful, simple versions of tunes are frequently more to the point than what most of us play. But Micho’s playing is like the work of a master Bonsai gardener. Trim a bit here, train this bit over there, and the result is minimalist art. However, there’s a huge difference between that and just plain messing the tune up, either through misguided redaction or careless listening/learning.
Versions of tunes evolve, or are sometimes created, for a specific purpose. Certain tunes have become like little Paganini caprices, intended to allow flashy players to demonstrate their prowess. It’s easy to think, as you listen to the Green Linnet recording, “hey, that’s how I should play that.” However, when you’ve learned it off and trotted it out at the session, you may discover that the flash version doesn’t gibe with the sociable session version that everyone else plays. This also goes for the gentle East Clare/East Galway versions of tunes. Lovely as they may be to listen to, a Friday night session in Cruise’s pub is probably not the time to run that particular version up the flagpole.
If you find that your own version of a particular tune isn’t getting the respect you think it deserves, try to look at the bigger picture: where did this version come from? How does it differ from everyone else’s version? Does it fit in with what’s going on around me? Sessions are an exercise in design by committee; sometimes your idea is the one that gets chosen, and sometimes the will of the majority goes the other way. It’s not so much about absolutes of “right” or “wrong,” but rather a question of what’s appropriate to the situation. Above all, it’s important to be honest with yourself about whether you’ve learned a quare version of a tune, or whether you’ve taken a few too many liberties yourself. Every player is free to do either, but you shouldn’t necessarily expect the rest of the group to salute. Cheers,
Rob
Rob,
Thanks for the insightful reply. When I originally posed this question, I was referring to the playing of a slow air, which I wouldn’t necessarily be playing out at sessions. I am more concerned with whether or not I should stick with the version of the air I have in my head (maybe make a couple of adjustments per Catherine McEvoys playing), or keep it as I initially heard it and am comfortable currently executing.
Arbo
I was really commenting in general of course, rather than responding to your initial post. Slow airs are a special case, all right. I’ve not listened to your version of Rocking the Cradle, but speaking for myself, I always seem to end up putting my own stamp on slow airs; at the end of the day, I think that’s the point. There are many schools of thought on how to play airs, including the one which says that if you don’t know the original Irish words you can’t get it right. I’d say that’s going a bit too far, but it does mean something to have your own personal version grounded in what came before. You may find that your own version of an air changes over time as you explore the tune, or hear pieces from other players’ versions that please you. Unlike the dance music, you’re unlikely to have anyone else playing with you, so the personal approach is more likely to find acceptance. Cheers,
Rob
‘Every way is correct’ doesn’t mean every version is good, or worth listening to. I’m just not sure that right and wrong apply to any form of art.
On the other hand, if you view music as a craft, (which might be a more accurate label for ITM), then certainly right and wrong do apply. On that level, Rob, I agree wholeheartedly.
I think there is a right and wrong to every form of art. Good Irish music is good because it’s done properly. There is a correct way to paint in the style of impressionism and a correct way to play jazz and blues. For some reason, and it’s not so much the case here, people tend to think that in an art from that has an improvisational element, as long as it’s “from the heart” anything goes.
Think of it as language. In various forms of music there are various sets of grammar and syntax. There are a variety of ways to say the same thing but it must obey the grammar.
I’m no master (I used to think I was…) at all of the above but I just wanted to share my thoughts. I more or less agree with most of the posts above.
sorry double post.
personally speaking, I don’t keep pets - too much hassle to feed.
(that doesn’t mean there aren’t some stray ideas that follow me about )
Hmm…has anyone else noticed? WHERE THE JANEY IS COCUS!!!
I would’ve thunk he’d be all over this one. Cheers,
Rob
Right! A hot-button topic for sure. Looking back at what I wrote, I can see that I should have chosen my words better. There are definitely right and wrong approaches to ITM, blues, jazz, sculpture, knitting, cow-tipping and every other fine art.
My words were meant as an encouragement to not feel completely locked in by the form. A player who really masters the basics should feel free to experiment, take chances and try new approaches. That’s part of the folk process. I wouldn’t recommend experimenting in a session, and it should be done in a way that respects the traditions. “Anything goes” is fine, but it’s not part of any tradition. (Even “free-jazzer” Sun Ra was building on a foundation — and was a technical expert, at that).
I had dinner last night with a friend who is very down on ITM sessions for their adherence to “lock-step structure”, and their “stifling of the players’ creativity”. I disagree with him about that, but I understand why he might perceive it that way. It’s very different from a jazz, blues or other improvisational jam.
If more people waited until they had mastered the basics before they embarked on a world-fusion odyssey in public, maybe the practice would be generally perceived as more acceptable.
Most of the sessions I go to are very free-wheeling, but in their own way. I love the improvisational nature of Irish music, even though it takes place within different sorts of confines than does jazz improv. My basic feeling about beginning to incorporate variation into your playing is that you’d better make damn sure your rhythm isn’t going to suffer as you explore. There’s never any excuse for that in this music, and that’s the sort of “lock-step structure” that really ought to be there. Who could argue with that? Cheers,
Rob
My lurid brackets!
… … … 
Not me! (Well, I haven’t thought of anything yet…)
Hey, man…this is Tobacco Road. Do you have ANY idea how important brackets are in the month of March?
http://www.sportsline.com/collegebasketball/mayhem/brackets/viewable_men
Go Heels…
Rob