I would like to ask about the squeaks, squawk, huffs and other miscellaneous sounds that the various older generation flute players produce (or other older generation musicians for that matter). When do they stop becoming laudable hallmarks of music with character and flavor (if they ever were)? Where is the line drawn where the raw, some say harsh, gargley and gaspy sounds indisputably becomes examples of horrible playing technique?
It seems (to my limited exposure) that just about no one encourages playing the music in a raw sounding way. Even contemporary musicians with retrospective tastes, like Harry Bradley, don’t carry as much as rawness compared to the likes of Packie Duignan or Kevin Henry. Is this because the contemporary Irtrad muso’s have risen above the inferior playing techniques of the predecessors?
Is imitating the rawness of older musicians’ playing silly, regressive behavior even?
Why look at it that way Eld? Irish traditional music would be all but dead if it werent for someone going out and recording these guys before they all died. They never held themselves up as icons of traditional music. They just knew it and nobody else did. Now I happen to like all that girgaling and huffing and puffing but I wouldnt call it good technique just original playing. The new boys and girls of the flute world owe their knowledge of the music to these old huffers and puffers and of course have refined the sound to a performance level. I defy anyone to dance to some of the jigs and reels played at supersonic speed by these players. Thats not to say I dont enjoy listening to them. On the contrary I love to listen to them. I dont think its necessary to judge those who kept these tunes alive until someone discovered them again. Heck they probably had to be pretty sloshed to be at their best. Why do we tend to take so seriously the percieved right or wrong way to make music. Trad or folk music belongs to the people that make it. And they can do with it what they will. We can like it or not but there is no criteria to judge its exalence or lack there of. IN MY HUMBLE OPINION THAT IS
Maybe I misunderstood you Eld, but it sounded like you thought someone should draw a line that would define exceptable huffing and puffing and unexceptable huffing and puffing. Exceptable and unexceptable techneque. Was I wrong? I can take it Eld. Ive been wrong before, heck Ive been mostly wrong most of my life
Well no, I’m not exactly wanting someone to tell me which kinds of squawks and squeaks are acceptable or which are unacceptable. I would like to know, if the squeaks and etc supposedly added character and flavour to the music of the older generation players why doesn’t anyone encourage people to play the music raw like them? Even contemporary players that laud the previous generations of musicians for their sound and style don’t play as raw as the latter do.
Is it silly to imitate that rawness, gargling and gasping because it is “crappy technique”? Are the “noises” things that we as contemporary Irtradders should tune out, listen pass and “concentrate on the heart of the music”. Is “honest, raw, squeaky” playing something to be valued and passed down or something we just pay lip service to? Or perhaps something to be blotted out and improved on?
Of course at the end of the day the answer is, whatever floats your boat. But just to stir the pot a little…
Realise that in a lot of cases you are listening to people who are old and well past their prime, they may not have been wheezy and arthritic fifty years before. How do you think Molloy will sound playing in a backroom in twenty years time, sqeakless? It’s not always fair that people are remembered only for how they played late in life.
But there was [and still is] a different emphasis to an extend, I wouldn’t in all cases say the music has moved on [let alone moved up] now music and ‘perfect’ technique is formally been taught.
Peter beat me to the age bit; I was going to suggest that many of the “geezer” recordings we cherish seem to have been made by people who were, in fact, geezers at the time.
Also, I wonder if the fact that players can in most cases devote more of their lives to music now makes for the “cleaner” technique. That is, it’s probably easier to devote more time to practice and performance if you hold a relatively undemanding job as your day gig (as compared to, say, farming, or itinerant labor, for example) and have other modern conveniences about that allow you to devote more time to music. Heck, a few lucky folks actually make a decent living at playing trad music, so they can devote tons of time to developing technique.
Plus, nowadays wonders can be done in post-production, as my studio-musician friends like to say . . .
Anyway, if I could play as well as some of those huffy-puffy geezers, I’d be delighted. Whether that “dirty” technique is something that should, or even can be, taught: I dunno. But I suspect dedicated players now have more opportunity to “clean” up their technique – and take that opportunity – than older players did. That ‘style’ may have been more an accident of environment than something purposely aimed for.
Think about life in Ireland and the complete disinterest in the music during a large part of the 20th century. Not great circumstances to play in and keep in practice.
Listen though to old recordings of, to stay with fluteplayers, Peadar O Loughlin [his new CD with Maeve Donnelly will be released in march], Martin Talty. Think of Josie Hayes, the reputation of the fluteplaying of Willie Clancy. Listen to JC Talty playing the flute with the Tulla ceiliband [JC doesn’t play the flute much anymore at his age but there’s nothing lacking in his whistleplaying to this day, quite the contrary] they were all impeccable musicians in their time.
After age, lack of practice time, you also have to consider that these “geezers” didn’t necessarily have to luxury of having the best instruments available to them. Back in the 60’s and 70’s, there were no Olwells, Byrnes, Wilkes etc. These guys were playing old cast off instruments, some of which weren’t too great to begin with. I believe Packie Dunigan played a German flute. They probably had leaky keys, cracks that the players were no poor to have properly repaired etc. Also there were no Matt Molloy or Kevin Crawford albums to emulate. If you learned flute from the guy down the road in your village, and he huffed and puffed etc., that’s probably how you’d learn to play. I know when I was growing up, my father had records of Dunigan, Josie McDermott, Micho Russell etc. I’d say that affected my own playing when I started.
Corin jumped in on this point before I could. We hear folks like Molloy, or even Joe Beginner (an Irish name, to be sure), on Olwells, Grinters, Hamiltons, and, of course, the obligatory well-restored Rudalls, et al. Try playing your tunes on an old German POS with plumbers’ wire holding it together, oiled not for the preservation of the wood, but to seal all the internal cracks and leaks. ‘nother kettle of fish, ain’t it?
Secondly, it’s not always that they needed to be sloshed when they played, but that many were when these recordings were made. I’m sure they sounded great, live, but – taken out of context – these recordings are often, um, flawed.. Modern, “professional” players rarely show up in a studio, or on stage, with few pints under their belt and one at the ready.
Modern music tends to be slicker, even live, but, well, rock n’ roll hasn’t been the same since everyone cleaned up their acts.
Lastly, and most importantly, folk music (of any sort or type) in it’s natural state is generally not pretty, doesn’t try to be, and wasn’t made to appeal to modern studio-saavy tastes. Listen to recordings of the folk singers that inspired the folk revival in the 50’s and 60’s, or original blues singers from the Delta. No one aims(ed) for perfection of tone, a wide range, etc. Few had great voices or flawless musical chops (distinctly different point from not being able to play or sing – they surely could and did!) They played and sang the way they learned, and that was often from the oldest and grittiest ancestor still breathing.
Playing “raw” often means just letting loose; very few modern players will really do this comfortably, because they have their modern tastes and know their modern audiences. Squawks and squeaks sound “unprofessional,” so they avoid such sounds. Which, all’s said, means few really “let loose”, and the concept of “raw” pure drop, while greatly heralded, is rarely heard and almost never appreciated.
Gordon
Gordon makes a good point. I like the Blues singer analogy, they may not have the best technical chops, but someone like Charlie Patton or Son House has soul and style that Eric Claptons and their ilk lack. I still go back to that Josie McDermott album. He may have had a lesser polished technique, but man did he have soul and style.
You’re joking right? The old musicians drank far less than today’s for a wide variety of reasons.
Good players in their prime were quite capable of playing music to a very high standard, today on the other hand there are loads more musicians playing than ever before and loads of terrible ones are among them.
"Listen to recordings of the folk singers that inspired the folk revival in the 50’s and 60’s, or original blues singers from the Delta. No one aims(ed) for perfection of tone, a wide range, etc. Few had great voices or flawless musical chops (distinctly different point from not being able to play or sing – they surely could and did!) They played and sang the way they learned, and that was often from the oldest and grittiest ancestor still breathing. " Gordon
Definitely wrong there Gordon as regards original country blues singers. You won’t find better singers or musicians in their idiom than say Robert Johnson, Blind Lemon Jefferson, Son House, Charlie Patton, Blind Blake, Blind Willie McTell, Sonny Terry, Mississippi Fred McDowell to name but a handful. These were professional musicians with great voices and flawless chops compared to the blandness of modern “blues” artists. Same goes for Howlin’ Wolf, Albert King, Muddy Waters, Elmore James, Sonny Boy Williamson, Lightnin’ Hopkins etc. Their modern imitators Eric Clapton, John Mayall, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Rory Gallagher etc., don’t even come close.
The older generations of Irish traditional musicians flute players, pipers what have you, had a genuineness, soul, if you will and often a formidable technique. Listen to the piping of Johnny Doran, Willie Clancy, Seamus Ennis or Peter Horan, Josie McDermott, Seamus Tansy …
Oh dear, it appears poor old Steampacket has the blues real bad! Cheer up! (unless, of course, you woke up this mornin’, and found your woman was dead - in which case please accept my condolancies and the best therapy I can recommend is to write a song about it)
This is not a disagreement with anything that has been said, but I do have an additional thought as well:
When the oldest recorded generation were learning their instruments, it was before recordings and “mass produced music.”
I think all music, not just trad, has become much more “homogenized” than it used to be, and that modern players have an entirely different mindset than the older generations, not seeking to make the music their own, but instead for them to change to match the accepted norm of the music. So we still get variation of style and technique, but not in the way there once was.
In the late 1800’s you could identify a classical flutist by his sound, for instance, as to whether he came from England, France, or Germany. In 2004, you can’t.
Pooh. Well, as you said, “limited exposure”. OK, on a more positive note, you’ll hear more of this sort of playing mixed in on the 2nd volume of “Wooden Flute Obsession”. I wouldn’t be surprised if I receive comments that these are the performances enjoyed the most. Usually one take, honest playing, and al the better for it.
I’m in major agreement with the “not-as-great instrument” theory. I think a lot of these guys had to fight their flutes much more than we have to today. They played what they had – be it old, cracked, leaky, loose at the joints, in the tuning cork, etc.
And then there’s the care & maintenance. Humidors? Swabs? Refrigerated almond oil? Fitted cases? Superglue?
I’m paraphrasing here, but I’m pretty sure it was Fintan Vallely who said something like “the common notion of soaking a flute in Guiness is now found to be less than desirable.”
Anyway, I think there’s room for both old & new. But I firmly believe the fact that these guys (& gals, to be fair) had, and still get, a fair number of people tapping their feet and dancing – squeaks, squawks, and all – is the true measure of their greatness.
It ain’t just folk music either. I have a number of classical recordings from the early 30s. Looked at from one point of view, they are full of mistakes, sour notes, rushed passages…they had to record “live” 4-minute “sides” for 78s, no electronic tuners, no editing possible…but, for all their superficial flaws, there’s a touch of magic about some (not all!) of these performances that you really home in on, and you can ignore the limitations.
If you’re playing music, as opposed to an instrument, you’re there!
You didn’t read my post very carefully; I feel that the old players, blues and ITM alike, had great chops, style and abilities, but I believe they did not shoot for flawless perfection in their playing; that’s not what they were after. I wrote “distinctly different point from not being able to play or sing; they surely could and did!” You don’t have to list blues guitarists for this ol’ guitar player, and when I turned to ITM, it was under the tutelage (a flute reference if ever I heard one) of Jack Coen, who I still prefer to listen to and emulate over a number of newer flute hotshots I won’t bother to name.
It’s just that modern ears do not appreciate the same sounds and techniques of older players – Clapton, who is a fine guitarist all by himself, will have a wider appeal than an Albert King or a Muddy Waters to most modern listeners. Clapton, I’m sure, will tell you he prefers the older players as well, but then, he knows what to listen for in a blues player. BTW, I think Stevie Ray and Clapton can (or did) hold their own – not everyone on the new(er) side is soul-less.
Regarding my drinking reference, I was sort of kidding – I’m not sure they were more sober in those days, but I was joking when I said they were happily drunk when they recorded. Musta been thinkin’ about Jim Morrison…
