So, Ennis...educate me.

Uilleann Pipes
1

I was just about to reply to this:

http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php?t=49808

but thought I might start a new topic, instead.

Ive been listening to Uilleann pipes since I was a kid (Planxty, Bothy band, Chieftains - the usual), but have only been playing them for about a year. Now, I am well aware that it often takes years of experiance before being able to see and understand why someone is great in a field. Nevertheless, I was hoping that someone could give me some basic insights into Ennis.

Why is Ennis good?

When I listen to Ennis I hear all kinds of squeaks and sqwuaks. His tone is all over the place. His execution is sloppy and inconsistent (even when he was young), and so is his tempo. In fact, I’m really having a hard time hearing anything redeamable (or, at least, exceptional) in his playing.

I’m also aware that I’m not the first person to make these observations, but I find that when the subject comes up with players who have been ‘kicking around’ for a while longer than me, they usually respond with a kind of knowing, fatherly laugh, and make some funny comment that doesn’t really address the issue. It’s as if they know something, but don’t want to share it, or say it out loud.

Some of these people are no doubt full of shit. They see others doing this, and have no idea themselves why Ennis is any good, but they want to look like they know more about this music than they do, and so they just play the part of the wise old bard. But then again, Liam O’Flynn seemed to think pretty highly of Ennis, and I think highly of O’Flynn, so there’s got to be something to him. What is it?

Why do so many people in that poll prefer to listen to that shrill and shakey old Ennis clip, over the McSherry clip? Let’s leave McSherry’s music choice, and the historical interest in the Ennis clip aside. Isn’t McSherry just a much better piper than Ennis? If not, why? He sounds better to me. He sounds like he is in more control of his instrument, and of the music coming out of it. So what’s this interest in Ennis?

And no psuedo-sagely jokes, please. I’m really interested.

2

Some of these people are no doubt full of sh*t. They see others doing this, and have no idea themselves why Ennis is any good, but they want to look like they know more about this music than they do, and so they just play the part of the wise old bard.

I’m not sure how judging potential posters to your question the way you did in that sentence is going to help you get answers, be it them being full of s**t or not.

I’ve listened to a lot of great piping, and to me, Seamus Ennis’s piping stands out the most. That may mean nothing to you, but in my opinion, it means a lot. His piping is a huge influence on me, and part of the reason I took up the pipes. It’s the way he plays, the tone of his pipes, how he colors the music so gracefully and effortlessly, and if you ask me with precision. Squeaking and squaking just lets me know, that we’re human, and nobody is perfect.

Hopefully the more knowledgefull members can say more about the actual technical aspects on Seamus’s piping to better help you out.

-Eric

3

No two pipers play the same, and as there really is not set ‘rule of playing’ the Uilleann Pipes, you are going to get a lot of varied (and no doubt passionate) responses to your query.

There is a lot more going on than one or two hearings will reveal to your ear. As you progress and become a better piper you will someday hear these ‘goings on’, and you will understand better what makes Ennis the master that he is.

Until that time however, more intense listening is in order on your part, and playing too. Neither are easily accomplished by typing away at the keyboard and staring at your monitor screen. :smiley: :stuck_out_tongue:

4

You know, if you can’t hear musicality, you can’t be told.

5

You should ask John McSherry if he feels he’s a better piper than Seamus Ennis. :laughing:

6

The opinion of a beginner:

Niccolo Paganini was regarded as the world’s greatest violin virtuoso in the early 1800’s…but today lots of good highschool players can use his “impossible” techniques. Michael Jordan is still regarded as the greatest basketball player of all time, yet there have probably been players since (and surely will be in the future) who have more technical skill than him.

The point is, technique evolves over time…but musicality and talent remain constant. If you look past the squeaks and wavering pitches, you can hear the musical elements that people admire him for.

That’s my opinion. Although I admit that I, too, prefer listening to modern players. I guess it’s that sound that got me into the pipes in the first place.

EDIT: Also…I imagine the instrument itself has become more reliable and easily maintained over the years? But I really don’t know much about that.

7

One important thing to understand about Ennis from strictly a technical perspective is that post-1960 or so, he fell into poor health and this had a noticeable effect on his technique. I would also guess that his pipes were perhaps not in an ideal state of playing order in his later years, though I have no evidence to back that up…If you’re interested in hearing him in his prime, some of the early recordings he made display a piper with a command of his instrument that has, in my opinion, never since been matched–most certainly not by John McSherry and I think he’d wholeheartedly agree. Check out the “Return From Fingal” CD and some of the cuts on the “40 Years of Irish Piping” disc.

Ennis’s knowledge of the repertoire was nothing less than astonishingly encyclopedic. The RTE broadcaster Peter Browne has opined that even if Seamus Ennis had never played the pipes, he still would have earned a place of respect in the tradition as a singer. Not only did he know Irish with native-like fluency (even though it was not his native language), he could reproduce the varied dialects of the west of Ireland (including the now-dead Clare dialect once spoken around Doolin) and he was reasonably proficient at Scottish Gaelic as well. One reason he played airs so well was that he often knew their words inside out (not always, though–he apparently didn’t know the words to “The Wounded Hussar”).

Even in his later years when he was no longer at the top of his game, there was a pureness of musicality to Ennis’s playing that managed to shine through some of the squeaks and wobbly drones. Listening to the elegies for Mstislav Rostropovich on the radio today, a young English cellist talked in awe about how he felt Rostropovich posessed a virtuosity beyond technique that pushed him to throw his life’s energy into every note he played. I can think of a few tracks by Ennis that would perhaps also be worthy of such high praise (mostly early ones, but maybe that’s just me). As much as I like and respect John McSherry’s playing, I’ve never heard any kind of emotional drive of commensurate level at all in his music.

A lot of older players invariably start out as a bit of a hard sell for people raised on glossy, commercial music. It can take a while to hear things that are legitimately worthwhile in music that is, more often than many of us would like to admit, technically lackluster. For some people, it just never grows on them.

If you find that playing in the McSherry and McGoldrick mold really floats your boat the best, however, perhaps you might also be interested in some of the recorded output of Kenny G and the Dave Matthews Band…

8

I’m not certain I’d go as far to make that comparrison, it’s a matter of individual taste at this level. But I will say that I prefer Ennis over the majority the of ‘newer’ or ‘contemporary’ pipers (not all of them, mind you) who have yet to reach the milepost in their playing that Seamus did at the time of his best known and great recordings.

All in all, it really boils down to a matter of “different strokes for different folks.”

… edited to add:

Oh, and just who do you feel that these newer players are attempting to emulate anyway? Who is their inspiration? :wink:

9

Kenny G huh… :laughing: Oh sorry, no psuedo-sagely jokes. :wink:

10

I have to point out that Ennis for the most part of his life played a flat set of pipes. McSherry plays a concert. There is a big difference in tone and colour. Flat sets, as you know, have a deeper, warmer, bassier sound than do concert sets with their sharper, more harsh sound. I think its much more difficult to control the concert sets and to create something special with their sound and tone. I think McSherry does this. There are only a few pipers that can handle a concert set with such contol and get such emotion from it.

11

I can see this topic eventually evolving into a “my favorite piper’s better than your favorite piper” argument. I hope it doesn’t, but should it go that route, then let my response be “who gives a rats ass? We should be focusing how good our own piping is”.


Other than that, I think the above statements are about as far as one can reasonably go with this discussion… unless I’m just plain stupid… and I haven’t ruled that out just yet. :laughing:

12

Nor have alot of other people!!!


RORY

13

… what, whether I’m just plain stupid, or they’re just plain stupid? :laughing:

14

In my opinion, many of Ennis’s earlier recordings are great. However, his later recordings are not so good. I think his style got tighter as he got older and lost out on much of the fluidity and musicality of his earlier days. Also, his pipes, which were quite old, probably needed some attention.

His regulator playing, particularly in his earlier recordings, was very good (at a time when there were very few pipers and those who were piping either couldn’t play their regulators or overplayed them).

Make sure you’re listening to the right recordings. I bought the Foxchase and the Pure Drop and thought this was representative of his work, when in fact they were some of his later recordings. IMHO, the best commercially available recording of Ennis is the Return From Fingal. Get that if you can and you’ll begin to see why he’s held in such high esteem. The final 7 or 8 tracks are particularly good.

Apart from Ennis’s piping, he was also an important collector. This is something that is often glossed over. His repertoire was quite extensive.

15

I think it is fair to say that only a few pipers can handle slow airs regardless of the set being flat or concert..end of
Slán Agat
Uilliam

16

Here are a couple reasons why I am so fond of Ennis’ playing:

His style suits me: his variations of melody are interesting and for the most part seem spontaneous. This alone puts him in the top class of pipers. Tempo is usually good (not too fast or slow).

With most pipers I get a bit weary of listening to a recording of solo piping after about 20 minutes. A bit tedious & draining. Not so with Ennis. 20 minutes of his playing is comparatively refreshing.

NIck Whitmer

17

It’s all about the Nyah…

While there’s nothing wrong with good technical skills, they don’t mean much to me if the style or soul are missing.

To use a fiddle analogy: Eileen Ivers has tremendous technical skill but her music does nothing for me. Pat O’Connor on the other hand is a bit scratchy sometimes and some feel he’s less skilled, but he’s got style and soul in bucketloads, I could listen to his music all day.

The combo of the two is deadly. Mick O’Brien is one of my favorites, to me he’s got both.

18

Well said. We all have our own tastes and learn different things from different musicians.
It’s what we try to do with it ourselves that counts.

19

I like Ennis’ piping but I prefer McSherrys. He’s got musicality, technical brilliance, great emotion, imagination and control. It think theres a lot of people here who are begrudging of modern pipers.
Canpiper, when you asked the question below;

Why do so many people in that poll prefer to listen to that shrill and shakey old Ennis clip, over the McSherry clip?

I was surprised to see this response from Peter Laban;

You know, if you can’t hear musicality, you can’t be told.

I can see why you feel the way you do about all this. [/code]

20

Let’s leave McSherry’s music choice, and the historical interest in the Ennis clip aside.

First point is: you can’t leave those aside, but I know what you’re getting at.

Music is in the hearing… so if all you hear are the squeaks and squawks from Ennis, it’s nearly impossible to explain otherwise. Regardless, Ennis has such a complete and intuitive understanding of the music, and this shows in his playing.

For me, the McSherry clip does not have the measured dignity present in Ennis. It does not contain the same level of thoughtfulness in construction of phrases, ornaments, and tone. McSherry appears to add ornaments out of habit, and as such, puts ornaments in places more effective in dance music.

McSherry’s phrasing moves from accented note to accented note, or from ornament to ornament, rather than glueing together shorter phrases as you’d hear in sean nos singers. When that glue is lost, the aesthetic that built the phrases is also lost. The notes lose their value; all that’s left is to move from accented note to accented note to try to find interest and meaning.

McSherry’s phrasing may be influenced by the accompaniment-- in other words, the phrases become more about lengthening notes to create texture with the harmony, rather than playing with internal stresses and ideas within the melody itself. It’s a different aesthetic. For me, the result is less interesting.

Liam O’Flynn seemed to think pretty highly of Ennis

There is no question here: O’Flynn holds Ennis in the highest regard. And why stop with him? Ask all the top traditional pipers their opinion of Ennis.

Isn’t McSherry just a much better piper than Ennis?

Alas, no. But there’s nothing wrong with saying McSherry appeals to you more. Ennis works on a whole different level; it is a highly complicated, highly developed level, and intrinsically integrated with the complete traditional aesthetic.