Hi guys;
I’m going to buy one of Grey Larsens books, not sure which to get, or both…I can’t tell if one covers basics and the other goes a little deeper, or if there are enough differences to make both essential. I’ve searched the archives, still confused. If anyone has both, could you please tell me what you think of them. I guess I’m an intermediate player, advancing.
Thanks very much for any advice.
Adrian
I think I found most of the info I was looking for on Larsens website…I had been there before but not noticed it. So I’m going to get the ‘Essential Guide’, but still open if it would be a good idea to get both.
The Essential Guide has everything in it that the Tin Whistle Toolbox has plus more. No reason to get both if you’re getting the big 'un.
Doc
I can’t imagine The Essential Guide… lacking anything whistle-wise.
I have to disagree with my buddies–get the Tin Whistle Toolbox unless you someday want to learn flute. The Toolbox has all I needed to make a GOOD start!
No, go for the big book!
Wellll, if ADRIAN says so…maybe you SHOULD get the “big book!”
(He knows SO much more than I do!)
There is no need to get upset because I prefer the larger version. We are all at liberty to have our own opinions. I compared both of Larsen’s books and preferred the “The complete guide to Irish flute and tin whistle” which I bought. You yourself said that you disagreed with your ‘buddies’ on this matter and so I assumed that I was free to disagree with you.
I enjoy the whistle immensely and spend a lot of time playing them. But I am no expert on the whistle and have never claimed to be.
Riverman, your spiteful remark is too much for me and so this will be my last ever visit to Chiff and Fipple.
Goodbye all!
I must say that I’m a Larsen dissenter.
Many years ago (15? 20?) I went to a flute workshop he was giving.
Mind you, by this time I had already been playing Irish flute for quite a few years and had learned from some good Irish players (real traditional players raised in Ireland) and had studied old 78s of classic players from the 20’s and had heard, on recordings or in person, many of the top flute players from the 60’s and 70’s. In other words, I had a clear notion of traditional style and technique.
I was dismayed when Larsen let it be known that he had, through his innate logic and sense of what sounded “best”, come up with his own system of ornamentation. It was his approach, not the traditional Irish approach, which he was teaching in the workshop. If this is what is presented in his books, beginners might well be cautioned.
I call it the “Yankee ingenuity” approach to playing Irish music, that us clever Americans can, using good ol’ Yankee ingenuity, come up with a better way of doing things than the methods the Irish traditional players have spent many generations developing.
I reject this approach, and have always used a “musicological” approach: that the way the traditional players do things is the “right” way, and my job is to mimick what I hear traditional players doing as closely as possible (the goal being to sound “native”).
The analogy is in language. Every language has illogical aspects to its grammar, yet a person attempting to learn a target language doesn’t use their powers of reasoning to come up with a logical, consistent grammar at odds with the target language’s actual grammar, and try to speak their artificial “improved” language. No, the target language is accepted “as is” warts and all and the learner attempts to mimick native speakers of the target language.
Can you be a bit more specific in your dissent ? An example maybe.
I am happily working through the big book and what strikes me is that so far as the technique for making a whistle or flute do things is concerned there is very little that I read here or on other forums that differs much from what he says. And where there are different ways or he has his own strong views (holding the flute, fingers to cut with) he seems to be up front about it.
And if your problem is with his playing style and how he ornaments the tunes he gives as examples then fine, it’s his style, but he recommends listening to many other players and gives some fairly detailed transcriptions of different styles.
I can’t remember anything in your consistantly illuminating posts that has let me to doubt that his book is a pretty fair guide. Except your last one.
I hear your argument, but I’m not sure I agree. You presume that there is a single “Irish” style, and that Larsen tried to reinvent it. I consider that each player has a unique style, and most of the “mentors” are as different from each other as Larsen is from any of them. I also have the book, and don’t get the impression from it that he considers his way the “right” or “only” way. He presents it as something that works for him.
I am scheduled to attend a workshop with him next month. Maybe I’ll come out feeling differently.
Thanks for all the opinions…I went with the big book for now, may pick up the other one later.
Re: Larsen and ‘untraditional’ techniques…it’s only one part of learning the music, and I’ll read it with a critical mind. I just like books, and I’m looking for some deeper discussion around certain areas, in addition to what I pick up here or anyhwere else.
Thanks again.
Well, in the context of his books and transcriptions, this “system of ornamentation” refers strictly to the written notation, nothing more. He invented his own set of squggles and curlicues to notate the standard Irish ornaments - just as musicians have done from time immemorial. No big deal. That is to say that his understanding of the actual execution and use of ornamentation is no different from any other trad player, and well within the bounds of normal individual variation. Listening to his actual playing bears this out, and he’s not as dogmatic as he’s sometimes portrayed. So the Larsen ornamentation issue is something of a red herring.
The only “ingenuity” may be in encouraging students to think about ornamentation at a higher level of granularity than they might otherwise do at first. And that’s a mindset that experienced players arrive at naturally anyway.
As for the original question about the books … I own neither, but I’ve seen both and read the Essential Guide cover to cover. IMO, the historical background material, transcriptions, and greater detail make it worth the extra cost. And for whistle players, understanding something of the issues of concern to their flute playing cousins is important. Given a choice, I would always recommend the larger book.
I just read this thread, and the Essential Guide that I ordered the other day before reading this thread is on the way. I’m looking forward to getting it.
I got mine just before the break; I’m enjoying it. Exactly what I was looking for.
I attended a workshop last summer in Dublin, OH, and I have to agree with MT here. He is not dogmatic about any of it and comes across a lot more laid back in person that one might get from the books. His methods didn’t differ greatly from that which I’ve been taught from others, except that he uses different cut fingers sometimes, which is completely normal in the whistle world.
His main argument is that the written annotation as always been inexact and based partly upon classical notation which makes it ambiguous at times. He invented the notation he uses to make it easier to teach using his book–to improve his ability to express himself on the page–but I’m sure he has no illusions that it will become a worldwide standard or anything. Really, in person he seems reverent of and dedicated to the tradition.