I started playing pipes with no nearby music of speakable quality. I had to travel long distances to get to listen to, learn and practice the music , if you think I was going to politely sit and not play on the 3 or 4 occasions I got in a year to mix with other ‘like minds’ you gotta be barking. It’s so easy to be complacent about your weekly Tuesday and Thursday night session that gets buggered up occasionally. I think that people will end up with a guilt that they might ruin something, that they might be to blame for the destruction of something sacrosanct. Anyway, don’t ever let that sort of thing happen in religion though
Bill, you still seem to be locked into the mindset that the only purpose for playing a musical instrument is for public performance. I don’t question the benefits of playing in public for the sake of gaining experience in doing so, but what’s wrong with just enjoying the playing itself? Can’t you just sit back and listen to your own sound and enjoy it without having to imagine yourself strutting about on stage with it?
I’m completely new to the pipes. But, even years down the line when (or if!) I become competent. I don’t think I’d necessarily feel the need to play in public. I too want to play the pipes simply because of my unrequited love for the instrument and it’s sound. Purely for my personal enjoyment. Besides, I play the fiddle well enough that I am a core member of my session. I don’t feel the need to bring something new to that. Besides, we already have 2 pipers! I did however, wait until I’d been playing the fiddle for a few years and recieved good feedback and invitations. Sometimes, I have off days and don’t play as many tunes in the session for the reason that I want to add something, rather than take it away. I’d still enjoy the music just as much as if I’d never started playing in sessions. But, it has been such a great experience, more social than anything, that I am glad I took the plunge. I can understand why someone would want to be able to be a part of it.
My original post was deleted. Below is a paraphrase of the original post:
Here I responded to DJM and said that yes, for me, performance was 100% of what it was about. That I liked practicing and getting better, but the real joy, inspiration, and thrill came from playing live with other musicians and for an audience.
I guess there’s the nub, then. Whether or not the playing is of itself satisfying enough for the individual, or if they have another agenda that requires an audience. I’m not knocking either path, but think we should allow for both, rather than saying only one way is the right way for everyone.
I was thinking along the same lines as DJM. I think it’s the very thing Pat Sky was getting at: that you guys see everybody who owns a musical instrument as ‘a performer’. I would never ever think of myself as a ‘performer’. I play music, for my own enjoyment and for the enjoyment of those who care to listen. I have little urge to get on stage, to record and all that malarkey despite considerable pressure to get me out there. While you can’t play a game of golf in your kitchen, you can play very real and satifying music there. In fact I think the best music is played in kitchens all over the place, not in concert halls or recording studios.
What do you think when you sit in your room and play only for your pleasure, do you applaud yourself in your mind, smile at the little variation you popped in at bar 3, shed a tear at the soulful expression you put into the air you were playing? Or did you pack up the pipes with no feeling except, there that’s to days playing… If you get a feeling from what you do, others will too, and if you got just an ounce of pleasure to give in this shitty world, get off your ass, down the pub and play that one tune with all your might, even if you sound crap…
For some people I suppose, personally one person who actually listens and appreciates what you are doing is more important than sitting in front of a hall with a thousand people in it.
There are very different mind sets here. I would play the pipes if I was on a deserted island with no hope of getting off (and the way I play UP’s that would be best). In other word nobody else would ever hear me. I play musical instruments because I love music and want to play it.
As I have mentioned previously, I played GHB’s in a rock band in the past, but that was only because my friends kept pleading with me to play the pipes in there band. Of those four band members (the typical guitarist, bass player, drummer, and singer) I used to point out to people that two are musicians and two are performers. Because two of the people just liked playing there instruments, and two just liked the performing. I am not saying that the people who are performers can’t play their instruments, it’s just what motivates you to learn the instrument.
It would be nice if you could have a session just for musicians and one just for performers.
Ah, backtracking a bit, Uilliam has a good point there, some sessions are just ridiculous. Too many players, too much noise, too fast. I’ve a tape with a lecture given by Jerry O’Sullivan at Elkins where he talks about the slow sessions almost being at the correcttempo (his words) for this music - which is or can be far slower than what you hear on records now. Jerry almost gets apologetic for all the zippy playing he’d done before. Players in the past would play like bolts of lightning in some instances of course but many liked to putt along. Much more relaxing and you can fit all sorts of ornamental bits in with no problem. Well, less problem. Much more rich music. Not as exciting and it won’t work for dancers of course but hey.
People used to listen for hours to the solo musician just for the enjoyment of it but to do so now seems like mere self-indulgence. Musicians were much more important when they were the only source of music - no radios, no record players, mostly no books (certainly not for the poor); and if you didn’t get the tunes out of the old piper well into the grave with them and you’ve failed. But anymore musicians can come and go and cue up that CD! and you’re back in business. It’s an aspect of modern life that has definite ups and downs.
I’ve a copy of the music journal Ceol from 1980 that has a just scabarous review of Pat Sky’s tutor. 50 pages of flaws! But what else was around then? Nothin’! Maybe you could hunt up a copy of Rowsome’s book, maybe not. Better a flawed tutor than none. I don’t think his book would do anybody damage somehow. Good work Pat.
The Rowsome book was reprinted by Waltons and freely available. The Crowley tutor was to be had without a problem the Armagh pipers club tutor was new. How useful they were, well the ywere flawed but they got me started in isolation and that’s not nothing.
My original post was deleted. Below is a paraphrase of the original post:
Here I was trying to make the point how playing by yourself could lead to stagnation:
"If you only play for yourself, my guess is that you will have a tentancy to get locked into a specific way of playing a tune. Playing with others forces you to listen intently to what is going on around you and never play it like it is on the CD.
True. I started learning the pipes in 1978, in the States, and had no trouble getting the Rowsome and Vallely (Armagh Pipers Club) tutors.
True up to a point, but in terms of session playing I think it’s the other way round. The musicians who spend time at home working on tunes, experimenting with variations, tend to be much more interesting to listen to than people who only play in sessions. Spending all your time in sessions can give you a more “uniform” sound and style than what you would get from listening to or playing with individual players in a more intimate setting. Most experienced musicians would play a tune differently in a session than they would on their own; a session might give you a few ideas for variations or maybe help you learn a tune, but you’re better off listening to individual players if you’re looking for inspiration for variations or new settings.
Almost all of the new organizations that I have played with have wanted to present a public performance as soon as possible. Most musicians work more diligently when working towards a public performance–sort of like studying for a test. Rehearsals are certainly more beneficial when working towards a performance.
That having been said, a public performance that is too early can be detrimental to the development of the musicians, and certainly hurts the ears of the audience. It can also damage the reputation of a new group or musician and make it harder to get gigs when more experienced.
A good test is to video tape the individual (group) and listen to the music. Simultaneously, watch the stage presence to see if the performance will stand the test of public display. Sometimes it is best to delay that performance for a wee bit. Objectivity is sometimes difficult, but necessary in this test.
My original post was deleted. Below is a paraphrase of the original post:
Here I also mentioned that two of the musicians I play with on a regular basis won the local all irish championship and went on to compete recently in Irland.
