I ran across a quote by Neil Young that makes sense to me:
I like to play with people who can play simple and are not threatened by other musicians thinking they can’t play.
And that eliminates 99 percent of the musicians.
This, I think, has definite application to people who play irish music. Sometimes I want to give it all up after looking at all the youtube phenoms, esp. the young peeps you commonly see on “Comhaltas” postings playing cleanly and competently at a blistering speed.
But then I am reminded of what Neil says. In my mind, playing “simple” is not easy. And speed and ornamentation have their place, but only their place.
Hmmm … yes. I agree as well. At least as far as the KISS instruction goes.
But you do realise, mariajeff, that you’ve eliminated yourself as well from Neil Young’s ‘people he likes to play with’? After all, it looks like you feel threatened by those
[And in case you think I’m just being mean, I have a serious point in there somewhere …]
Yes, benhall.1, you’re right, I do feel threatened, I think that’s why I posted this. I’m guessing I’m not alone, and I need to be reminded of Neil’s principle on at least a weekly basis.
As a freshman at Rutgers College in NJ, USA in 1977, I used to frequent a used record and book store on George Street in New Brunswick called “Half Thoughts.” An excellent jazz guitarist, (let’s call him “Butler”) was a friend/hanger on of the proprietor, and was usually found in or around the store on most days. One day we got to talking about Neil, and Butler says, “You know, man, he needs a real guitarist, etc.” And I said that Neil needs no such thing, it wouldn’t be Neil otherwise, and wouldn’t be nearly as powerful. Listen to the “simple” electric guitar solo on “Southern Man.” Still gives me chills.
Butler, I later learned, ended up in L.A. doing reels, jigs, etc. in a hard core metal band. Would like to have heard that.
The problem is ofcourse that it’s never about ‘simple’ or ‘fast’. Look at the great players who are/were supposedly ‘simple’ in style. Micho Russell didn’t do anything complicated for example. Until you try play like him.
I think generally ‘less is more’. But not when it’s an excuse for lack of ability.
Agreed. Play “simply” or “slowly” because you choose to, not because you can’t play any other way. It seems like (in real life anyway) the majority of people I hear advocating playing slowly or simply, don’t have the ability to play faster or more intricately. At least when they’re complaining of youth and players playing too fast… well, good ones anyway. I’m right there with the complaints of people playing too rushed. But I think that’s a different kettle of fish.
I thought that playing a tune slowly and simply left a person’s mistakes out in the open. Intonation, timing, breath control, etc. are still important and piss poor playing would be apparent whether one is fumbling with speed or if the playing is at a pace that leaves mistakes naked and out in the open. Am I missing something?
I have nothing against Christine but I don’t think she caught the mood to this song at all. The theme of this song should not be to show off her range and skills.
I’ve given this a lot of thought over the years, and here are my conclusions:
First, let me lay out some rankings of ability:
Beginner (struggling but learning)
Fair (starting to get the hang of it)
Good (can make it through a tune pleasantly enough)
Very Good (impressive)
Excellent (professional)
Outstanding (virtuoso)
There’s nothing official about this; it just provides a baseline for discussion. Now, my contention is that to play classical music with a sense of satisfaction, one must feel he or she is at least Good - Very Good would be better. The reason is, the music is very unforgiving in most cases and really suffers if not played accurately, cleanly, with good expression and at tempo. On the other hand, trad can get by on Good and even Fair (IMO) because the music is fun to play and fun to listen to even with the occasional bum note, imperfect tuning, less-than-perfect embouchure, and slower-than-dance-ready tempo. It is music for people, not necessarily professionals. It can be as difficult and eloquent as classical music, but it doesn’t HAVE to be in order to give pleasure.
So I say, love the tune you’re with. That’s why we play it. You don’t have to get paid for it or be on YouTube.
I mean, if you play a tune, song, whatever, and it’s musical, has the right feel or groove, that’s what it’s all about. I don’t think one needs to have blazing technique to be an excellent musician. For music is about making the magic happen. Oftentimes, blazing technique actually gets in the way. Maybe I’m just saying that because I don’t have blazing technique. But I can think of many players in many different genres that are great but not speed demon, techno gods, e.g. Miles Davis, David Gilmore. How about the singer Sean Keane, one of my favorites.
Anyways, I was also thinking about this today. Trying to stay focused on what I think is important and not get discouraged being overly concerned about fluff.
When adding to this thread, I thought about a song I’ve recorded and have been meaning to share it. It’s a Beatles song done in an “Irishy” sort of way (I mean John and Paul come from Irish heritage, it has drinking in it, love found, love lost, sleeping in bath tubs–everything you’d want in an Irish song).
I bring it up because I think it’s fitting for the topic, simple and pretty good, combines a bit of Neil Young and Irish flute. Anyways, here it is:
I sense a whiff of anti-virtuoso or even anti highly skilled on this thread. I can’t help thinking that too often it’s just small minded begrudgery. I think anyone should strive for the best technical skills they can achieve. The art of music is in applying these skills in a way that serves the music rather than the ego.
I notice an absence of the word ‘feeling’ in the discussion. There are different kinds of simplicity - a slightly flat, dull simplicity and a deep, moving simplicity. I believe that playing with feeling is nothing to do with technique and virtuosity; there are technically great players of all sorts of instruments whose music impresses but does not move me, and there are technically great players who can pare it right down to beautiful plainness, and whose music moves me whether they go for complicated or simple.
The same applies in art. Technique is just technique. The more technique you have, the more easily you can express yourself in whatever way you choose, but no amount of technique creates that special ‘it’ thing. Picasso was a master of drawing & painting technique who chose to pare it down. Mark Rothko was technically not at all brilliant, but in his simpler works conveyed more emotion than is bearable.
Obviously one always has to achieve some basic level of accomplishment in order to perform musically or artistically at all, but beyond that, it becomes a highly individualised deal between the artist and the audience.
)