Ornaments that just get in the way. What say you?

Whistle
1

I’ve listened to Paddy Carty’s recording “Traditional Irish Music” more than a dozen times during the last week. It includes a recording of a jig titled “Whelan’s(Morrison’s).” To my ears it is definitely a setting of Morrison’s jig. What blows my mind is what he does with it in the first measure(and the repeated measures with the same phrase). Instead of rolling on E and B during the a part, he changes it to E/F#/E B/C#/B. No rolls that I can hear. This changes the tune from a minor mode feel to a major mode feel. It becomes much more melodic and less driving. My gosh, do I like it.

After listening to this version of the tune, I am really feeling that ornamentation is mearly a technical feat in most cases, where as tasteful variation is truely creative playing.

I’d like to know what everyone prefers ornamentation or variation. I’d make a nice discussion to elaborate on why you feel that way.

Cheers.
Mark Johnston

2

The A parts of both Whelan’s and Morrison’s are quite similar, but from memory the B parts vary from one another quite a bit.

3

Mark,
Variation of melody is one form of ornamentation. Other forms of ornamentation include rhythmic variation and things such as rolls, cuts/gracenotes etc. One of the older tradtions in Irish Music is the soloist tradtion. This is where the player takes a tune and “interprets” it and makes it individualized by the addition of all of the above, in tasteful moderation of course. The main idea is that when a phrase is repeated, the ornamentaion (including melodic) is changed. This is a form of improvisation that is highly regarded among traditional players. Of course the ornamentation that you do must stay within certain parameters in order for the music to still be considered Irish Tradtional Music. This is where listening is invaluable as every great player has their own interpretation of tunes within the tradition, and we can learn from them all.
Have fun listening & experimenting!
Sue

4

In addition to whistlepegs good comments. I would suggest that variation can sometimes be a more effective way of ornamenting a tune in terms of developing your own whistle playing style. Everybody cuts, everybody rolls, everybody triplets, but not everybody has the ability to vary a tune at will, and yet retain the ‘familiarity’ of the tune. Its an ability that never fails to make me smile.

5

When I first discovered ornamentation, I used to cram as much of it into each tune as I possibly could. Then I found that the tunes worked far better if I used less ornament and payed more attention to the rhythm.
Most of the tunes that ornaments are used in are dance tunes - Jigs, reels, hornpipes etc - and generally when people dance, they dance to the rhythm, not the tune.
I try to treat the tunes as if they are decoration for the rhythm. I don’t know how traditional it is, but it gets people on their feet!

6

Thanks for your posts everyone. Let me comment on them and then ask the question I REALLY wanted to ask.

On 2001-07-29 18:16, Champ wrote:
The A parts of both Whelan’s and Morrison’s are quite similar, but from memory the B parts vary from one another quite a bit.

Champ,
They are definitely different, but I think, just different settings of the same tune. Paddy O’Brien has recorded 4 different settings of Drowsy Maggie. Box players seem to gravitate to the setting used by Elizabeth Crotty, while the most common setting seems to be the one that L.E. McCullough chose put into 121 FIST. Whelan’s and Morrison’s may be the same tune in that sense; probably named after the influential musicians that chose that setting.

On 2001-07-29 18:26, Whistlepeg wrote:
. . .Variation of melody is one form of ornamentation. Other forms of ornamentation include rhythmic variation and things such as rolls, cuts/gracenotes etc. . . . This is a form of improvisation that is highly regarded among traditional players. . . This is where listening is invaluable as every great player has their own interpretation of tunes within the tradition, and we can learn from them all.
. . .

Sue,
Thanks for the in-depth explanation. I don’t think I posed my question well enough to express what I wanted to know. I think I got the two separated by Geraldine Cotters tutor which separates variation from grace note type of ornaments (like cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans). I personally see a big difference between the two. Cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans can be learned and inserted into any tune (tastefully or not) with no change in the way their done (other than the rhythm of the tune). Someone can teach a variation for a part in a single tune, but that variation is not likely to fit into a majority of tunes and sound good. Rolls require much more technical skill, while variations depend more on truely understanding a tune and having the imagination to alter a tune without loosing the tune. So with that, I would like to ask the question that I really wanted an answer to.

Do folks feel that the excessive use of cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans in commercial recordings and session playing is at the expense of more creative variation of tunes?
OR
Do folks feel that the current frequency of cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans in commercial recordings and session playing is an appropriate expression of virtuosity and healthy for Irish traditional music?

This is a relative question focused on my percieved excessive use of purely technical ornaments such a cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans at the expense of what I percieve as more beautiful ornaments in the form of melodic variation.

Ciaran and Nick seem to have been on the same wave lenght as me, but that was just luck as my use of language was not that effective.

7

On 2001-07-30 06:20, nickb wrote:
When I first discovered ornamentation, I used to cram as much of it into each tune as I possibly could.

Of course, there’s never a “correct” level of ornamentation – but it certainly starts to get incorrect when it’s more than the player can pull off cleanly.

I recall reading a post (to IRTRAD, maybe?) where someone had tried out his new half-speed Marantz tape deck by trying to transcribe Matt Molloy’s interpretation of some reel or another, and found that slowed down as far as he could get, Matt pretty much ornamented every note – but you couldn’t hear each ornament when you put it back up to speed, just a fantastic interpretation of the tune.

I guess the thing is that playing ornamentation is about the tune, not about the ornaments.

8

Mark,
I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that many of the recordings these days are too highly ornamented (for my taste), both with variations & cuts/rolls etc. Sometimes I feel that the tune is so cluttered that it has been buried alive and is unrecognizable! I personally feel that all forms of ornamentation when used correctly and tastefully can enhance and personalize a tune, the more you have at your disposal the better! And yes, I agree that it is more difficult and more creative to use melodic variation than just slapping a roll any-old-where, after all melodic variation is re-writing parts of the melody while keeping it true to itself & the Tradtion. Have you ever had a chance to work with John Skelton? He calls the tune “the cake” and the ornaments “the icing on the cake”. I prefer the cake to the icing, but I know some people who would just eat a bowl of icing and forget the cake!!
Sue

9

Mark, those are very interesting questions. I’m not sure there is an answer.

I applaud your enthusiasm for what you heard in Paddy Carty. Melodic variation does add a wonderful dimension to tunes, and opens up a limitless world of fresh interpretations – yes, much more than ornamentation. (Actually, I wonder whether what you are talking about is not melodic variation within a tune, but what I would call a different setting of the tune.) But… not everyone can do melodic variation convincingly. As for ornamentation, yes, less can certainly be more.

It all depends. I think players interpret the tunes the way they feel them, and whether I like what they do is based on what I feel in response to their music. Whether I like someone’s music has little to do with how much ornamentation or melodic variation they do – lots or almost none of either, or both, is fine with me as long as the music says something to me. But if the melodic variations don’t sit well, or sound contrived, or if the ornamentation “gets in the way of the music” as you say, or if the music seems to be all skill and no heart, I tend to tune out very quickly.

You and I were at a concert recently where two top fiddle players – Tommy Peoples and Kevin Burke – provided an interesting demonstration of the possibilities or ornamentation and melodic variation.

There can be few players with more skill at inserting complex ornamentation, and none with greater ability to twist and turn the tune with totally unexpected and compelling melodic variations, than Tommy Peoples. It works in his case, because he’s just a genius. And his music expresses (to me) a complex, sensitive, moody, introverted man, hard to get to know, but with enormous depth of feeling, and utterly brilliant.

Afterwards came Kevin Burke, who uses ornamentation sparingly (comparatively), and does little in the way of melodic variation, other than small (but very effective) changes involving one or two notes in a phrase. On the other hand his playing has tremendous swing, grace and lyricism, and radiates a kind of simple, good-natured happiness that is fun and totally infectious.

It was interesting to note that the audience responded much more strongly to Burke, but then he’s 100 times more communicative on the nonmusical level. My impression is that many did not know what to make of Peoples, and indeed a friend told me that someone had asked him, “What is it with Tommy Peoples? Why do people admire him so much? I don’t get it…” I hope she will get it one day.

Anyway, isn’t it a wonderful thing that in this music you have so much freedom to interpret the tunes to express what you have to say? And isn’t it wonderful that we have both Tommy Peoples and Kevin Burke?

PS Sue – did John Skelton say that about cake and icing? I thought that metaphor was my invention! I guess I should be pleased that a fine player like John sees things the same way I do!

10

Stevie,
Nicely put!
Maybe John heard it from you!
Sue

11

Do folks feel that the excessive use of cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans in commercial recordings and session playing is at the expense of more creative variation of tunes?
OR
Do folks feel that the current frequency of cuts, strikes, rolls, and crans in commercial recordings and session playing is an appropriate expression of virtuosity and healthy for Irish traditional music? >>

(Sorry, the quote function eludes me.)

For me, either the player/tune sounds good or it doesn’t. I tend to collect recordings of established players and they sound pretty good to me. Some do a lot of ornamentation and a few don’t. The important factor is they do what they do well and with discretion. They all maintain the rhythm either way, and they play cleanly. I listen for how the ornamentation supports the whole tune structure and phrasing. That’s what it’s supposed to do. I’m finding this to be the most difficult thing to learn about playing this music.

I attended a small concert by Kevin Crehan, fiddler, grandson of a famous fiddler/composer of trad tunes, Junior Crehan. I had the opportunity to ask Kevin questions about playing style. He said people played w/ less ornamentation back in the day. More ornamentation has become part of the continuing evolution of the music as it has become, besides dance accompaniment, listening music.

I’ve heard relatively new players way overdo ornamentation at the expense of rhythm, and I’ve heard session players abandon it for the sake of speed. (A local pub session near me, they abandon everything for speed. I"m not impressed. I am an artiste.) I don’t espouse either “technique.” Joannie Madden, as an example, uses a lot of ornamentation to great effect. It supports the whole of the tune, I don’t feel any of it is wasted. At the other end, listen to Jerry O’Sullivan’s playing of O’Carolan’s “Farewell to Music” on Gentle Breeze. (Don’t compare it to my pitiful attempt on Clips and Snips.) His spare use of ornamentation is powerful. For variation, listen to Martin Hayes, fiddler, play Paddy Fahy’s Jig. He repeats the tune many times with neverending variation. Fabulous.

When I transcribe cd tunes, I do all the repeats and learn the variations. I think it’s a good learning device. I don’t focus on transcribing ornaments, but definitely the melodic variations. For the sheet music learners (I respect you), Willie Clancy’s Dance Music of Ireland has verbatim transcriptions (not for the newby) of his ornamentation and repeats. Great learning stuff. I hope this wasn’t totally confusing and responded to at least one point. :slight_smile:
Tony

12

I really like the cake and icing analogy. I prefer less ornamentation. I also prefer spice cake, carrot cake, zuccini cake, banana walnut cake all without icing. I was think about the analogy as I sat and practiced my favorite tune, The Black Cat by Lothlorien. To my horror, I realized that I had ornamentation in over half of all the measures. Hmmmmm … Ahhhh, but thats where Tony’s comments seem to clarify it for me. Each and every ornamentation adds, enhances, enrichs the basic tune. Thats why I did most of them with out even noticing that I did them.

For me, I think thats my best guide. If on hearing the tune, I don’t hear ‘ornamentation’ I just hear depth, richness, harmony, and spritely tempo, then it the right amount of ornamentation for that tune AND for that group playing it.

That ‘AND’ is something I wanted to add to this discussion. Ornamentaion needs to add to the tune, and weather it does or not is modified by how the other musicians are playing the tune. If you have 5 other melody instrument and one rhythm instrument, any ornamentation needs reinforce the rhythm. If on the other hand I have a couple of rhythm instruments, and a couple of melody instruments, then the ornamentation needs to enhance the harmony. If everyones playing rhythms and harmonies, then the ornementation need to add to the melody. Add to this mix the one or two of us odd fellows that play strong rhythm the first time through and break off into harmony on the second time round, and draw close into the melody on the last time through. Being able to keep ornamentation viable in the odd fellows mix is as good a reason as any to learn a tune both with and without ornamentation.

That way however odd the mix you can always …

13

There has been some good and thughtful input to this discussion, and it is clear that matters of taste and context come into play where ornamentation /variation is concerned. However, the last thing you need while playing is to be worrying yourself to death about this.
I have one humble suggestion which is easy to bear in mind as you play: if you are doing it to show yourself off, rather than show off the tune, you are treading on thin ice…ALWAYS SERVE THE MUSIC FIRST!!!