# Music by Genre > Bluegrass, Newgrass, Country, Gospel Variants >  Bluegrass Music's Civil War

## JonZ

Bluegrass Music's Civil War: Why New and Heritage Acts Don't See String to String, from Rollling Stone.

"As fans and musicians convene in Raleigh, North Carolina, this week for the annual World of Bluegrass gathering, they bring with them loads of talent, an unparalleled passion for the music and definite opinions on the ever evolving sound of bluegrass. A truly American artform, bluegrass music today encompasses everything from the jamgrass of Yonder Mountain String Band to the traditional sound of Del McCoury to the more eclectic flavor of Trampled by Turtles..."

----------

JEStanek, 

Rush Burkhardt, 

Scott Tichenor

----------


## JEStanek

My favorite quote.




> "There are hardcore people that [think] if you even have a microphone you're way too far out," Del McCoury says with a laugh. "I exaggerate, but you have the hardcore folks. They can listen to whatever they want to but you need variety. You need to have that. You've got to have young people coming in all the time. That's what brings young people in, more progressive sound and variety. I just like variety in music. I think it's a good thing."

----------

Michael Bridges, 

Perry Babasin

----------


## Timbofood

Interesting article.

----------


## Charlieshafer

"Though Hot Rize became one of the most successful acts in the genre before stepping aside in 1990, O'Brien says they weren't immediately accepted at first. "It was a little bit suspect. Our hair was a little too big. We wore suits and ties, but the ties were suspect. They weren't matching suits. We had loud ties," O'Brien recalls with a laugh."

My favorite quote. When will everyone just settle back and realize they're room for everybody? We just had a concert a week ago with Harpeth Rising (odd name, sure) but they're three young girls, all graduates of Indiana University's Jacobs Conservatory (just ranked #1 music school in the nation.) The violinist, Jordana Greenberg, was being fast-tracked to a soloist career, one of the very few Americans who would be able to tour the world with the best of them. Of course, she turned to the dark side, and their music is a strange blend of old-time, bluegrass, gypsy jazz, and a few other things, all played amazingly well. They had a great turnout, and an incredibly positive reception, save for three older folks who left at halftime, telling me "This isn't bluegrass. We want bluegrass." They missed their chance to see one of the most exciting young players around today, and we've pretty much had them all at one point or another. 

On one hand, everyone gets to choose what they like, on the other, can we be a little open-minded?

----------


## JeffD

> When will everyone just settle back and realize they're room for everybody?


There is even room for those who don't think there should be.




> They missed their chance to see one of the most exciting young players around today,


That's not what they came for.

----------


## JeffD

I am sorry, I guess that was kind of harsh.

While it doesn't reflect my tastes or musical curiosity, I have a whole lot of sympathy for folks who want the tradition, and I forgive folks for feeling "bait and switched" when it becomes "a strange blend of old-time, bluegrass, gypsy jazz, and a few other things" from a band billed as bluegrass. 

I was in Scotland more than a few years ago and sat in on a concert of Hamish Moore and Dick Lee, bagpipes and saxophone. The music did a complete journey, very tastefully, from hardcore Scottish piping to a jazz/swing type thing, and I loved every second of it. Also, the band Kornog did quite a few very tasteful transitions from very Scottish to traditional Bulgarian music. Just amazing. But in both these cases I knew it before hand, and its exactly what I signed up for. But as well in both cases I know folks who were taken by surprise and upset enough want to walk out.

While it is vitally important that folks attempt new stuff, its also good to try and let everyone know there is new stuff coming, and let folks decide.

I dunno, something like an announcement: OK folks, on this stage we have bluegrass, on that stage we have a strange blend of old-time, bluegrass, gypsy jazz, and a few other things. And if its the same band, then the band gets up and goes to the other stage. Symbolically if nothing else.


There is a killer modern jazz quartet, that go as far as going off stage, changing clothes and coming back on stage under another name, to do country music.  And they are killer at both. I am trying to remember the name.

----------

DataNick, 

Mike Bunting

----------


## JeffD

It is an interesting article BTW.

And it is extremely ironic that Bill Monroe didn't get there by holding slavishly to the tradition, yet many folks do hold on tight to what Bill created.

----------

Jonathan James

----------


## 2Sharp

> And it is extremely ironic that Bill Monroe didn't get there by holding slavishly to the tradition, yet many folks do hold on tight to what Bill created.


Indeed

----------


## tiltman

[QUOTEWhile it is vitally important that folks attempt new stuff, its also good to try and let everyone know there is new stuff coming, and let folks decide.
][/QUOTE]

Yup. We were at Wintergrass a few years ago and the Jerry Douglas Band came on stage. 

Drums.

My wife left right away - I stuck it out through a few more songs.

(and we weren't that old then!)

Kirk

----------


## Mandoplumb

I too like different styles of music and all types must grow but bluegrass is a simple hard driving( I don't mean it has to be fast) acoustic music. If you lose the fundamentals it ain't bluegrass. Monroe's music changed over the years but he never outgrew the basics. I love classical for all the different music happening at the same time in different ways I like Jazz for the free expression I like some rock for the beat, but to try to combine 2 or 3 style just lessens them all IMHO.

----------


## Amanda Gregg

The traditionalist point of view is a bit of a straw man in the article.

----------

Mike Bunting

----------


## allenhopkins

This "civil war" has been going on for decades.  The Country Gentlemen caught some flak in the '60's for playing _The World Is Waiting For the Sunrise_ and _MTA_ at college concerts.  Ask Sam Bush how the Bluegrass Alliance was received -- or the New Grass Revival, or the Earl Scruggs Revue, or the Dillard & Clark Expedition.  And it wasn't just "those darn kids," as first-generation bluegrass acts like Jim & Jesse and the Osborne Brothers "plugged in" to work the Nashville-country circuit.

Disputes over electric bass vs. bass fiddle, female lead singers, Keith vs. Scruggs style banjo, rock-influenced song repertoire, extended "jam" numbers vs. the standard 2:30 bluegrass song, harmonica, brushed snare drums, long hair, jeans and T-shirts vs. matching polyester and Stetsons -- seen 'em all.  Bluegrass is a genre that seems to generate orthodoxy vs. heresy conflicts pretty regularly.

I love traditional bluegrass -- but it bothers me not that McCoury sings _1952 Vincent Black Lightning._  And if a band wants to try something a bit different, give 'em a listen; some innovations work, some don't, some persist, some quickly vanish.  Doubtless there'll be bands playing hard-core trad bluegrass a century from now, and not as historical artifacts.  Doubtless there'll be others doing something different, and fans arguing about that too.

In the meantime, there's Bad Bascomb:

----------

Bernie Daniel, 

Ky Slim

----------


## Mike Bunting

Labelling is a mug's game.

----------

journeybear, 

Steve Lavelle, 

UsuallyPickin

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

I'll listen to almost anything,that's how i get to find out if i like it or not. If i like it i'll listen, & if there are recordings around,i'll buy them. If i don't like it,i'll avoid 'whatever' in future. It's certainly not trad.Bluegrass by any means,but i really like much of the music by the 'Infamous Stringdusters' & 'Greensky Bluegrass'. It's different enough to be 'interesting' & i like to play it because of that. It tells me that i'm not stuck in a trad. Bluegrass rut & it allows me to play a music that's parallel to that genre ie. ''the same as - but not quite''.
   All music evolves,if it doesn't,it stagnates & that's bad for everybody. Beethoven broke all the rules of symphonic composing & his music wasn't received at all well at the begining of his career. However the people who _actually listened_ & didn't dismiss it,came to realise just what an immense musical genius Beethoven was - the rest as they say....... !,
                                                                                                                                       Ivan :Wink:

----------


## Jeroen

Welcome to the world, "truly american artform".

----------


## Timbofood

I listen to lots of different music, I play pretty traditional bluegrass, the guys I play with listen to different genres too. We choose to play more traditional style, it's what we grew to love when we started this trip.
There are those who have never listened to the old guys or care are the ones that are missing something. I enjoy so many newer bands but, they are starting to sound a lot alike, girl singers who are just"waif like" send me to the cooler for a fresh beverage most of the time. Some are just fine but, how many Allison "clones" does the music scene need? How many "jam bands" who just drone out whangity, whangity, whang? And when it comes down to it, we can all simply exercise our right for ultimate censorship and turn it off or leave.
It's not going to change the way music grows, stagnation would be miserable,traditionalists will be in the minority more often than not. I remember so many of the "grand old masters" of several styles "Martin, Bogen, and the Armstrongs", "Peg leg Sam", "Tommy Jarrell",Bill Monroe, Lester Flatt, and so forth, it was always amazing to see living history. We are becoming that living history, the new guys , the old ##### like me, those who break new ground with respect to the old are the ones who impress me the most, Tim O'briens work is new but, tips the hat to the old school. 
I think I will go listen to something different!

----------

Bernie Daniel

----------


## farmerjones

> There is a killer modern jazz quartet, that go as far as going off stage, changing clothes and coming back on stage under another name, to do country music.  And they are killer at both. I am trying to remember the name.


(Was it really 35 years ago?) Hot Rize would leave the stage and return as Red Knuckles and the Trailblazers. Morphing from Bluegrass to Western Swing/Old Country. Added some comedy and it was Golden. 

My take: The title was misleading. Professional musicians can't afford to be purists. On the other hand, for the fan, that hard earned entertainment dollar is getting even harder to come by. In a world where Garth and his guitar command 500USD per couple, as a fan, I'm gonna get a little picky. Truth be told, that's why I play. We can go off behind the barn, camper, or trailer, and make the kind of music we want.

----------

Timbofood

----------


## JeffD

> (Was it really 35 years ago?) Hot Rize would leave the stage and return as Red Knuckles and the Trailblazers. Morphing from Bluegrass to Western Swing/Old Country. Added some comedy and it was Golden..


Another good example.

----------


## JeffD

> The traditionalist point of view is a bit of a straw man in the article.


Yes

----------


## journeybear

The most interesting thing about this article is that every one of the performers - to a man - is just fine with both traditional and progressive approaches. The civil war, if there is one, is in the fan base. So, perhaps the author would have better served his premise by interviewing some audience members to get some of *their* opinions, rather than making some broad unsubstantiated pronouncements (however reasonable-sounding). But if you take it as a given that this disparity is factual, perhaps fans might want to follow the leads of their idols, and give both styles a chance.




> There is a killer modern jazz quartet, that go as far as going off stage, changing clothes and coming back on stage under another name, to do country music.  And they are killer at both. I am trying to remember the name.


Well, yes and no. That was not a jazz band, but a bluegrass quartet, Hot Rize, who would slip off stage one by one in the middle of their set, then come back as a country band, Red Knuckles And The Trailblazers, and then change back the same way to finish their set with bluegrass, sprinkling some comedy in as well. And they were excellent in both incarnations. That was a long while ago; maybe your memory's a little fuzzy.  :Whistling: 

Oh, wait - you're serious? Well, then!  :Grin: 



PS: I see that while I was composing my brilliant, hilarious riposte, farmerjones did much the same and best me to the punch. Dang!  :Crying:  They say great minds think alike, but I don't know how to explain this.  :Confused:

----------

Steve Lavelle

----------


## JeffD

I think also there is a way to move the borders of the envelope that more folks can grasp, and there is a way that leaves folks behind.

What I mean is this. 

If the evolution you are trying to accomplish can be understood, if the antecedents of what you are going to do can be found by most listeners within the tradition, so that however surprising the end of your journey might be the path makes sense, it has a better chance of being accepted.

If the evolution seems arbitrary, or seems like "we'd actually rather be playing this other stuff", or seems like "we need to look cool with our contemporaries", then it can feel offensive.

Evolution and pushing the envelope and musical development are of course important. Its not a museum or cast in amber. But the need for movement is not a carte blanche to do any old thing.

----------


## JeffD

Bill Monroe put blues in old time fiddle music. That does not mean it will work to put rap in country music.

----------

journeybear

----------


## jaycat

> . . . 
> In the meantime, there's Bad Bascomb:


That's not funk. That's not real traditional funk. I wanted to hear some real traditional funk.

----------

journeybear, 

Steverb

----------


## journeybear

Ha! Yeah, me too. No idea who Bascomb is/was, but that was pretty bad. If I wanted to hear rap mixed with country or bluegrass, I'd just slap on some Big And Rich. (Actually, I like "Save A Horse, Ride A Cowboy," but I'm not gonna listen to it every day. Once a month is about right.) But thanks for sharing.  :Wink: 

And I agree about the bluesy component of Bill Monroe's music. That's a main reason why I also like Del McCoury's music as much as I do. The article didn't mention this at all.

----------


## Steve Ostrander

> I love traditional bluegrass -- but it bothers me not that McCoury sings 1952 Vincent Black Lightning.


I'm glad he did. I love that song.

----------

journeybear

----------


## farmerjones

> I think also there is a way to move the borders of the envelope that more folks can grasp, and there is a way that leaves folks behind.


I nearly started a reply thus: Folks don't like being force fed. I mean who likes condescension, if they paid for entertainment? Folks can smell condescension.  Liberal use of humor and respect goes for miles. Look at Jethro Burns. He was nose-bleed sophisticated, but never did he take himself too seriously.

----------


## Tobin

> The traditionalist point of view is a bit of a straw man in the article.


Personally, I think the entire article itself was not really intended to be an honest reporting of a "civil war", but more of a marketing gimmick.  And I don't mean that in a bad way.  Controversy translates to interest, and interest translates to business.  Journalists and advertisers know this very well, and will intentionally inject some measure of controversy into their work in order to get people talking, get them passionate, and get them out to support whichever side they want to promote.  

So even though it's not exactly news that there are purists as well as progressives in the bluegrass scene, it never hurts for advertisers or journalists who are covering these events to stir the pot a bit and get some buzz going.  It's all business!

----------

farmerjones

----------


## Willie Poole

The term "Bluegrass" was given to what Monroe was playing when he had Scruggs and when you get away from that kind of sound it isn`t bluegrass any longer....I am like Ivan and few others, I listen to all music and if I don`t like what they are playing I turn it off but when a man comes of the stage using a wooden box and beating it while sitting on it to me this just isn`t any kind of bluegrass no matter what other instruments are being played...Sure I like to see people trying to expand and try new and different sounds but get a name for it and don`t call it "Bluegrass" because it just isn`t, bluegrass is what I would expect to hear if I came upon a cabin in the mountains after dinner and the family was sitting around playing music for their own enjoyment, sounds a lot like "Folk music" don`t it? Well bluegrass broke away from folk and called it by another name....This Civil war could end if some one would just classify those off shoots and name them something else beside bluegrass....

    I`ve posted this many time before and maybe one day it will come to past...While they are at it they can find a name for this noise they are now calling "Country" music which is nothing more than "bad rock and roll"...The music is so loud that the vocals cannot be heard and most of them can`t sing worth a hoot anyway so they cover it up with the loud instruments and the use of electronics to try and make it sound good....

      Willie   (Traditionalist until I die)

----------

DataNick, 

farmerjones

----------


## John Soper

Well, there's only two kinds of music- Good Music and Bad Music.  I only listen to Good Music.  However, I have been known to play Good Music badly sometimes...

----------

Rush Burkhardt

----------


## Mike Bunting

> The term "Bluegrass" was given to what Monroe was playing when he had Scruggs and when you get away from that kind of sound it isn`t bluegrass any longer....I am like Ivan and few others, I listen to all music and if I don`t like what they are playing I turn it off but when a man comes of the stage using a wooden box and beating it while sitting on it to me this just isn`t any kind of bluegrass no matter what other instruments are being played...Sure I like to see people trying to expand and try new and different sounds but get a name for it and don`t call it "Bluegrass" because it just isn`t, bluegrass is what I would expect to hear if I came upon a cabin in the mountains after dinner and the family was sitting around playing music for their own enjoyment, sounds a lot like "Folk music" don`t it? Well bluegrass broke away from folk and called it by another name....This Civil war could end if some one would just classify those off shoots and name them something else beside bluegrass....
> 
>     I`ve posted this many time before and maybe one day it will come to past...While they are at it they can find a name for this noise they are now calling "Country" music which is nothing more than "bad rock and roll"...The music is so loud that the vocals cannot be heard and most of them can`t sing worth a hoot anyway so they cover it up with the loud instruments and the use of electronics to try and make it sound good....
> 
>       Willie   (Traditionalist until I die)


Yes, it really is just about nomenclature.

----------


## DataNick

Though I play Monroe style mandolin(my feeble attempt) in a bluegrass band that plays professionally, I'm done with this whole traditional vs progressive thing. I personally IMHO see this as a hypocritical double standard and is exactly why I now feel comfort & refuge playing mandolin in our area's Chamber orchestra. Why? Because I know what I'm getting, there's no deviation from what's on the printed page and no one is trying to "change"  Vivaldi, Mozart, Bach, Chopin, etc; music btw which is hundreds of years old, and to which there are numerous young people taking part in, and shows no symptom of dying, which is what is decried as the reason that bluegrass has to progress and change.

If the music is perfect (the numerous classical works of Mozart, Bach, Haydn, etc. etc) then it doesn't need to change, as has been recognized in the classical music field. Some of us feel the same way about classic or "traditional" bluegrass as Jimmy Martin stated in the "High Lonesome: The Story Of Bluegrass Music" documentary. Jimmy describes going into downtown Sneedville, Tn on Sat nights and asking a person sitting in their car if they would put the radio on the Grand Ole Opry cause Bill Monroe & The Blue Grass Boys are about to come on. Jimmy states that when the guy asked him why he said "Cause it's perfect!"

It's quite refreshing to go into a musical environment(classical) and KNOW what to expect.

And I did state IMHO...

----------

Amanda Gregg, 

Mike Bunting, 

Rush Burkhardt

----------


## Mark Wilson

Keep the flame Willie!  :Mandosmiley: 

There's a tee shirt empire in that somewhere

"Real bluegrassers ......."  (fill in blank)

I'll buy the first one

----------

Mike Bunting

----------


## journeybear

> Personally, I think the entire article itself was not really intended to be an honest reporting of a "civil war", but more of a marketing gimmick.


Weeelll ... Considering this was in Rolling Stone, not known for being too terribly interested in bluegrass or acoustic music in general, this was pretty decent reporting. The author did talk to a bunch of well-respected musicians in the field, with a wide range of approaches. But no one from any of the more progressive acts so often mentioned, and certainly no audience members, which is where I contend this so-called civil war exists. But it's better than I had expected it to be. Not that I learned much I didn't already know ...  :Whistling:

----------


## Mike Bunting

I think that the OP was just trolling, considering how much this topic has been beaten to death.

----------

DataNick

----------


## John Ritchhart

Sam Bush - "We call it Newgrass, sir." Bill Monroe - " Yea, I hate that". Obviously Sam Bush ain't no Bluegrasser. Well we're all mandolin players here. And right now I'm loving what Mandolin Orange is doing with just two instruments. I'm sure Bill would say "That ain't no part of nothin'" but I still love it and it's all about mandolin for me. Still, when we do 'I'm on my way back to the old home" the crowd loves it and so do the guys playing it. I'm just saying.......

----------

Gutbucket, 

Mark Wilson

----------


## Mike Bunting

> Sam Bush - "We call it Newgrass, sir." Bill Monroe - " Yea, I hate that". Obviously Sam Bush ain't no Bluegrasser. Well we're all mandolin players here. And right now I'm loving what Mandolin Orange is doing with just two instruments. I'm sure Bill would say "That ain't no part of nothin'" but I still love it and it's all about mandolin for me. Still, when we do 'I'm on my way back to the old home" the crowd loves it and so do the guys playing it. I'm just saying.......


Bill Monroe had a sardonic sense of humour, you don't suppose that he was just giving Sam the gears do you? You do know that when Sam had his first go round with cancer, it was Monroe who quietly organized benefits etc. to raise money for Sam Bush.
  I'm pretty sure that Monroe would not diss Mandolin Orange, since they are not a bluegrass band, they would not have been in competition with him. I think he would have appreciated the simple heartfelt tunes that they write,

----------

DataNick, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## High Lonesome Valley

> Though I play Monroe style mandolin(my feeble attempt) in a bluegrass band that plays professionally, I'm done with this whole traditional vs progressive thing.


Nashville's underbelly of marketing again intruding into the purity of music.

What I mean is the delineation made between traditional vs progressive, and the fear of music groups and personalities to fall outside these management mandated micro-genres.

----------


## journeybear

> I think that the OP was just trolling, considering how much this topic has been beaten to death.


Nah, it's an interesting article, even if it could have been more comprehensive. Besides, there's no beating this topic to death. It will outlive all of us.  :Wink: 

I'll reiterate - I would have liked some input from hardcore traditionalists. And on further reflection, it would have helped to have heard from some of the way more progressive musicians, the ones mentioned repeatedly but not represented. The only such band I have any familiarity with are Old Crow Medicine Show, who are well aware they are neither old-time nor bluegrass, even if they sound like both at times. They have developed a fairly recognizable sound, and usually use typical bluegrass instrumentation, or similar, to achieve this. But while their style owes plenty to both disciplines, they're going their own way.

With this in mind, I tuned in to CBS This Morning for their musical guest today, Trampled By Turtles. I've seen them once or twice before on late night talk shows, and wasn't too impressed. But I was today - unfavorably. I thought they were just plain boring. I can see how they can get booked into bluegrass festivals, as they use typical bluegrass instrumentation - mandolin, fiddle, banjo - but the songs were mid-tempo ho-hum affairs, more akin to bland singer-songwriter stuff, and they made little attempt to present them with any kind of driving force. Bluegrass it warn't; the only connection was the instrumentation. If I were a serious bluegrass fan, traditional or progressive, I wouldn't worry too much about losing fans to an act presenting this sort of snoozefest.  :Sleepy:  I don't know much if anything about Yonder Mountain String Band or Leftover Salmon, but I hope they're better than this.

It seems to me there is plenty of variety to interest different factions of the audience. Festivals succeed by presenting just this sort of variety to appeal to a wider range of fans. Some may benefit from being exposed to acts playing in styles different from what they are used to; some may turn up just for their favorites and tune out the others. I remember going to one festival and walking by a group of campers who spent nearly the whole weekend hanging out by their RV, parked right on the main road between the stages and the campground. Every time I walked past them, several times each day, they were there - cooking, eating, picking, or just talking. Then one time I passed by, they were gone. I looked at my performance schedule - The Whites were on stage. Sure enough, next time I went by, they were back. I guess that's all they wanted to hear. I dunno, I don't begrudge them for their tastes (and no problem with The Whites), but it seems a waste to spend all that time and money, and not even give any of the rest of the lineup a listen.  :Confused: 

The bottom line for me is open-mindedness, by performers and listeners alike. If young 'uns want to go to a festival and dance the hippie dance to progressive bands, fine. If folks want to play like they did back in the day, fine. As long as it's good. Whatever that is!  :Wink:

----------


## Mike Bunting

> Nah, it's an interesting article, even if it could have been more comprehensive. Besides, there's no beating this topic to death. It will outlive all of us. 
> 
> I'll reiterate - I would have liked some input from hardcore traditionalists. And on further reflection, it would have helped to have heard from some of the way more progressive musicians, the ones mentioned repeatedly but not represented. The only such band I have any familiarity with are Old Crow Medicine Show, who are well aware they are neither old-time nor bluegrass, even if they sound like both at times. They have developed a fairly recognizable sound, and usually use typical bluegrass instrumentation, or similar, to achieve this. But while their style owes plenty to both disciplines, they're going their own way.
> 
> With this in mind, I tuned in to CBS This Morning for their musical guest today, Trampled By Turtles. I've seen them once or twice before on late night talk shows, and wasn't too impressed. But I was today - unfavorably. I thought they were just plain boring. I can see how they can get booked into bluegrass festivals, as they use typical bluegrass instrumentation - mandolin, fiddle, banjo - but the songs were mid-tempo ho-hum affairs, more akin to bland singer-songwriter stuff, and they made little attempt to present them with any kind of driving force. Bluegrass it warn't; the only connection was the instrumentation. If I were a serious bluegrass fan, traditional or progressive, I wouldn't worry too much about losing fans to an act presenting this sort of snoozefest.  I don't know much if anything about Yonder Mountain String Band or Leftover Salmon, but I hope they're better than this.


So why are bands like OCMS labelled bluegrass (and they never sound like grass to me). You say yourself that they are neither old tome nor bluegrass, at a roots music festival they are fine but I think that a bluegrass festival by definition should stick pretty close to the music. Do you really think that having bluegrass instrumentation gets them in the door? BTW, I have never seen a BG band with a 6 string banjo so maybe they fail on that count too. Again, I'm not knocking the band itself, every band plays what they need to play and I've enjoyed some of their stuff, Down Home Girl comes to mind.
  I quite agree with your comments on Trampled by Turdles.  :Smile:

----------

DataNick

----------


## journeybear

Of course, my opinion matters not a whit to the folks booking acts into festivals. So yes, the instrumentation is very likely a key factor to some of these acts getting booked. Because stylistically - well, that just seems to be a whole 'nother somethin'.  :Wink:  I agree with you about the guitjo - not a bluegrass instrument, AFAIK - but it's an integral part of OCMS' sound. I think festivals have to offer some flexibility to get enough people to show up and shell out north of $100 bucks for a weekend. I also think it's important for any music genre to allow for progressiveness (progression? or simply, progress?) in order to keep from being relegated to dinosaur status - while still maintaining some fealty to tradition and heritage. It's a delicate balancing act. But it has to constantly move forward or it dies. And you don't want it to be a dead shark.  :Wink: 

BTW, "Down Home Girl" is an old pop song written by the great team of Leiber-Stoller, who wrote all those great songs for The Coasters and so many others, and it was done pretty famously by The Rolling Stones. OCMS do a nice job with it, in a kind of old-timey way. But hey - since it's over a half-century old, does it qualify for old-timey status?  :Confused:   :Grin:   :Whistling:

----------


## Mike Bunting

> Of course, my opinion matters not a whit to the folks booking acts into festivals. So yes, the instrumentation is very likely a key factor to some of these acts getting booked. Because stylistically - well, that just seems to be a whole 'nother somethin'.  I agree with you about the guitjo - not a bluegrass instrument, AFAIK - but it's an integral part of OCMS' sound. I think festivals have to offer some flexibility to get enough people to show up and shell out north of $100 bucks for a weekend. I also think it's important for any music genre to allow for progressiveness (progression? or simply, progress?) in order to keep from being relegated to dinosaur status - while still maintaining some fealty to tradition and heritage. It's a delicate balancing act. But it has to constantly move forward or it dies. And you don't want it to be a dead shark. 
> 
> BTW, "Down Home Girl" is an old pop song written by the great team of Leiber-Stoller, who wrote all those great songs for The Coasters and so many others, and it was done pretty famously by The Rolling Stones. OCMS do a nice job with it, in a kind of old-timey way. But hey - since it's over a half-century old, does it qualify for old-timey status?


None of this answers my question, if it ain't bluegrass, why call it that? Why call a festival a bluegrass festival if there is only one bluegrass band there?

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

I went to a Folk Festival recently... There were complaints about rock bands and too much amplification, and "this isn't folk...", mostly from Bluegrassers which was strange considering the only jams were Bluegrass jams and most of the bands had a Bluegrass flavor...  I guess for some folks it's all or nothin'...

----------


## jaycat

> None of this answers my question, if it ain't bluegrass, why call it that? Why call a festival a bluegrass festival if there is only one bluegrass band there?


Last festival I attended was Newport Jazz in 2007 . . . featuring Al Green and B.B. King. Festivals are not gonna break even without bringing in draws from other genres. Not nowadays.




> I went to a Folk Festival recently... There were complaints about rock bands and too much amplification, and "this isn't folk..."  . . .


Oh yeah, that was Newport in 1965, right?

For the record, here is the original of Down Home Girl (one of my all time favorites):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdhQwUiBKjc

I attend a quasi-bluegrass jam most weeks. Yesterday someone called Walking The Dog which I guess is a BG standard (what do I know?) I said "not the Rufus Thomas version, right?" and got a puzzled shake of the head as a response. Well, that is a soul music classic, my point being, I hope all this talk about purism isn't keeping the young'uns from exposure to the extremely wide spectrum of music that (for my money) constitutes "Americana."

----------


## Willie Poole

some years ago I went to festivals and they were a mixture of bluegrass and some country and the promoters were just trying to get a larger crowd to attend, I was jamming up on a hill and we had a whole lot of people listening to us and not many people were at the stage area, guess who was on stage?  Grandpa Jones, later followed by Doc Watson, the crowd didn`t want either of them and came up on the hill where we were jamming...Some other shows I went to weren`t called bluegrass festivals and they also had a mixture of country and bluegrass and Porter Wagoner changed his format on his second show and did all bluegrass tunes, and also J.D. Crow was plugged in for their first set and got a few boos so on their next set the played acoustically...

    About 6 string banjos, Sonny Osborne played one quite a few times, his was still tuned and looked like a 5 string and not tuned like a guitar, he just added a 6th string tuned to a low harmony note a D I believe...

     Willie

----------


## journeybear

> None of this answers my question, if it ain't bluegrass, why call it that? Why call a festival a bluegrass festival if there is only one bluegrass band there?


I can't imagine an event would call itself a bluegrass festival if there's only one bluegrass band in the lineup!  :Disbelief:  I also think it would be unlikely for a bluegrass festival to call itself something like "The Weehawken Bluegrass Etc. Festival" or ""The Caledonia Bluegrass And A Bunch Of Other Stuff Festival."  If it's mostly bluegrass and not hardly strictly bluegrass, you book a bunch of more or less appropriate bands and hope enough people like enough of the acts to turn up. As with deciding whether to attend any event, you weigh the pros and cons, including who's playing, and decide whether you want to go. If you go, you can stick to just the acts you figure are playing the kind of music you like, or you can also check out some others who might be interesting. Heck, they're on the bill you already paid for, might as well get your money's worth.  :Wink:  As an old act (hardly strictly bluegrass, though they used mandolin and fiddle) once put it, "you take what you need and you leave the rest."

Labelling is nowhere near as important as content. Not even close.

----------


## mikeyes

Of course this business about the definition of Bluegrass will never be settled and Bill Monroe didn't help.  His band just prior to the Scruggs/Flatt iteration had Stringbean on banjo, Howdy Forrester's wife playing piano accordion, and a tenor banjo.  He is the composer of "Bluegrass Twist", had new age bird sounds in his last set of tunes, played with a pump organ, drums, electric bass and even enjoyed the Elvis version of one of his tunes. ("Them were some powerful royalty payments.")

All of that is ignored by both sides of the equation in the argument or denied by re-defining every time the issue comes up.  The bottom line is that WSM was a genius who developed a musical style combining a number of elements and it took him a long time to put it together for his own profit.  He was a string band iconoclast but never made it big outside of a narrow demographic until Flatt and Scruggs (and especially Louise Scruggs) melded with the folk movement of the sixties and Ralph Rinzler dragged Monroe into the eyes of this audience.  Virtually every band after the first BG/Monroe band was a progressive advancement on Monroe including a number of the Bluegrass Boys incarnations (Bill Keith, Richard Green, etc.)

Flatt and Scruggs played a lot of 50s country songs, Jimmy Martin juiced up the music,  the Osbornes were all over the place with electronic instruments and drums, etc.  Perhaps the outlier was/is the Stanley Brothers and even they sang a lot of early country music.  After all these bands have to make a living and Monroe was the epitome of this meme with all of his attempts to make a hit.  (He really could have used Louise Scruggs  :Grin: )

So the argument really comes down to what groups of people like, how much they are willing to promulgate their point of view and how much the rest of us care.  For me, it is still the "two types of music" that dominates any dialogue in this vein.  The arguments are certainly not exclusive to Bluegrass, they occur with virtually any art form or performance and are never fully resolved even though the preservationists tend to either shift pardigms or get smaller in scope over time.

I enjoy the popcorn while watching, however, so keep it up.   :Mandosmiley: 

BTW, "Harpeth Rising" refers to the river that runs through my home town of Franklin, TN in Williamson County according to their web site.  I believe it as the Harpeth will flood on you in a second.  Just saying.

Mike Keyes

----------


## Timbofood

Greensky bluegrass ain't neither, IMHO
Nice guys but not my particular cup of tea musically, there are plenty of bands out there I put in the "and others" category at festivals for that matter.
If we all played the same stuff the same way we would not need this forum nor would we be terribly interesting, again, MY opinion.
It's the differences which keep life interesting, isn't it?

----------


## DataNick

> ... I also think it's important for any music genre to allow for progressiveness (progression? or simply, progress?) in order to keep from being relegated to dinosaur status - while still maintaining some fealty to tradition and heritage. It's a delicate balancing act. But it has to constantly move forward or it dies. And you don't want it to be a dead shark.


JB,

I'm glad you said "I also think" because your musings are simply not true! Just look at the classical musical field; over 400 years old and still going strong with many young adherents and devotees all playing "canned" music off the sheet that DOES NOT CHANGE!  And btw: the instrumentation is strictly relegated and defined. I was just informed by the conductor of our local Chamber Orchestra, that I could be considered in the future for working up a movement or two from a Vivaldi concerto, but that the mandolin cannot be accepted as a regular part of the orchestra.

This is such a double standard you people take with Bluegrass. You don't bat an eye when a genre is "closed" to change like classical music, and still attracts thousands upon thousands of young, devoted practitioners worldwide; but a genre such as bluegrass has to let anything come and go for fear that it will die. That's utter nonsense.

I for one don't get it!

----------

Mike Bunting

----------


## Mike Bunting

Bring this into the tent!

----------

Bertram Henze, 

DataNick, 

Timbofood

----------


## journeybear

> I'm glad you said "I also think" because your musings are simply not true! Just look at the classical musical field; over 400 years old and still going strong with many young adherents and devotees all playing "canned" music off the sheet that DOES NOT CHANGE!


If that were true, then what'is the point of countless performances and recordings of classical pieces, if they're always going to be the same? They're not. If you think they are, you're mistaken. All these pieces are interpreted and performed differently by each conductor, arranger, and performer. Classical musicians work from notes on paper, but they all  interpret them differently. You think we split hairs around here? Hang out with some classical musicians sometime. A lot of them are several levels further along the noodly chain. Also, you should read what classical music critics have to say about this performance or that and how they compare to the other or that one particular time the piece was performed. Then there are the early music fanatics, who insist the pieces must be played on the instruments being used at the time the pieces were composed, using the tuning and intonation popular at the time, with orchestras comprised of the number of musicians in the orchestras back then. Bluegrass traditionalists have got nothing on them. Not even close.




> And btw: the instrumentation is strictly relegated and defined. I was just informed by the conductor of our local Chamber Orchestra, that I could be considered in the future for working up a movement or two from a Vivaldi concerto, but that the mandolin cannot be accepted as a regular part of the orchestra.


Of course it can't. There is no place for mandolin in a regular, typical, normal orchestra. But Vivaldi did compose two concerti for mandolin, if that's what you mean. Perhaps you can convince him to perform either of these and have you be the soloist.




> This is such a double standard you people take with Bluegrass. You don't bat an eye when a genre is "closed" to change like classical music, and still attracts thousands upon thousands of young, devoted practitioners worldwide; but a genre such as bluegrass has to let anything come and go for fear that it will die. That's utter nonsense.


Classical music is not closed to change. It may have stricter rules, but as I said above, these pieces are interpreted differently all the time. Also, people have been composing classical music all along ever since well before Bach, and there has been a tremendous amount of evolution in the field. Rest assured, there is plenty of resistance to change and new music among classical music enthusiasts, has been for a long time. but it still gets composed and performed. I'm sure a lot of music lovers from the 18th century would be appalled at many modern classical works, if they were suddenly transported here, without being able to adjust to the changes step by step. But I don't know, maybe Mozart would dig some of it.

Any genre will have traditionalists and progressives, and they're never going to agree. I don't know what your point is. But as far as I'm concerned, there's plenty of room at the table for everyone. (Except for me, apparently, but that's a whole different subject.) There are plenty of musicians I like who fall into both camps. All I ever ask for is the music be good, regardless of which. I'm all for musical evolution, as long as some standards of taste and excellence are maintained. That's subjective and open to interpretation, I know. But that's music. It's made by humans for humans, and it's as imperfect as we are. Get used to it - you'll smile more, and dance more, and hum and whistle more. Music IS supposed to be fun, remember?

----------


## DataNick

Dude,

The interpretations of pieces involve phrasing, etc. not fundamental differences in tempo, time signatures, chord progressions, etc. It still sounds like Mozart's Symphony No. 41 in G Minor...come on man, you're being ridiculous to compare a different orchestra's rendering of the same piece of music to DGQ's EMD and Monroe's I'm On My Way Back To The Old Home...Come on Brotha!  Are you serious?

----------


## journeybear

Absolutely. 100% serious. To say that music doesn't change, is always the same, is not only impossible, but nonsense.




> ... all playing "canned" music off the sheet that DOES NOT CHANGE!


Nonsense. When it's played, it's different. It may be a matter of degree, but it's different. 

Music is always different whenever it's played. Sometimes even when it's listened to, even a recording, it sounds different, or affects the listener differently. People are fond of saying they have heard something in a piece of music they had never heard before - but the recording is the same. Human perception, just like human action, is always changing.

Well, except when I saw The Cars on their first national tour they sounded exactly like the record. Exactly. Pitch, tone, timbre, melody, harmony, instrumentation, arrangements - everything was just the same.  :Disbelief:  It was one of the most boring sets I've ever heard. Good thing they were just opening for The Beach Boys.  :Wink:  But hey - what do I know? Maybe DGQ did EMD the same all the time. I can't say; I only saw them once.

----------


## DataNick

Dude if you're telling me that in your ears that EMD and On My Back To The Old Home are the same type of music, then we're going round in circles. What I hear today being called "Bluegrass" is for the most part "Progressive Folk" music. For the purposes of this discussion, I would call Progressive music "Head Music"; remember that term? I would call Bluegrass popular sing-a-long dance music. The 2 are complely different, though they may share commonality in instrumentation. Again I honestly want you to describe to me how that "EMD" is the same as "On My Way Back To The Old Home" like "The Old Home Place" to me is like (or of the same genre) as "On My Way Back To The Old Home". You don't see some very fundamental differences there? I know it's all music but that's not the point. When I order steak off the menu, I want steak, not a hamburger. I know it's all food, I know they're both red- meat that's beef, but steak is not hamburger, and the style of progressive music that "EMD" embodies is not at all the same as "On My Way Back To The Old Home".  If that is a stumbling block for you, we'll have to politely call it a day and agree to disagree on that one, but I see it all the time in people's reaction to those different musical styles or genres.

----------


## journeybear

I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't say any of that. Give it a rest. I am Good night!  :Sleepy:

----------


## DataNick

You too JB; I'm carrying on 3 conversations on a similar topic in 3 different places (Cafe & Facebook(2))...my brain's overloaded!

If I was offensive, I didn't mean to be!

----------


## journeybear

Well, maybe that explains the leaps in logic and unexplained inferences and references, because I couldn't follow you after a while. But I really could do without the condescending tone in the future. Peace - out.  :Cool:

----------


## ralph johansson

> I attend a quasi-bluegrass jam most weeks. Yesterday someone called Walking The Dog which I guess is a BG standard (what do I know?) I said "not the Rufus Thomas version, right?" and got a puzzled shake of the head as a response. Well, that is a soul music classic, my point being, I hope all this talk about purism isn't keeping the young'uns from exposure to the extremely wide spectrum of music that (for my money) constitutes "Americana."




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2cbkVZgUko

BG version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwnMZ9IB1CQ

----------


## ralph johansson

> Of course this business about the definition of Bluegrass will never be settled and Bill Monroe didn't help.  His band just prior to the Scruggs/Flatt iteration had Stringbean on banjo, Howdy Forrester's wife playing piano accordion, and a tenor banjo.  He is the composer of "Bluegrass Twist", had new age bird sounds in his last set of tunes, played with a pump organ, drums, electric bass and even enjoyed the Elvis version of one of his tunes. ("Them were some powerful royalty payments.")
> 
> 
> Mike Keyes


There never was an electric bass on a Bill Monroe recording session. Never. There is, however, a picture from early 1969 of James Monroe playing the electric  on tour with the Bluegrass Boys in Germany - obviously for  practical reasons. (Many musicians would agree that there are two things you just don't do on an electric: you don't walk it and you don't play simple roots and fifths.)

Bluegrass Twist was originally released as Bluegrass Pt. 1 in 1961. It's a12-bar blues in a walking 4/4, well within the group style established by Monroe in the late 40's and early 50's. 

Far more interesting is the fact that Monroe did a session with Doug Kershaw on guitar in 1957. Of the three songs, Kershaw's song Sally-Jo, was done with some kind of rockabilly beat, although completely acoustic. And it works. 

 Another example of Monroe picking up material
from a completely different genre is Milenberg Joys, a NORK number that Monroe learned from the Hoosier Hotshots - in their hands more like march than a jazz number.

The bird effects were featured on My Last Days on Earth, recorded  in 1981. "Last set of tunes"? Monroe completed at least 6 albums after that session before being dropped by MCA in 1990. Obviously Monroe thought of that song as far removed from his usual style, as he always performed it without the two most characteristic instruments, the fiddle and banjo. The producer  (with Monroe's consent) added a vocal trio and a string section.

Drums were used on the two electric sessions in 1951. These sessions also featured electric guitar and some really hokey piano. They were the producer's idea. Monroe disliked the arrangement and was very uncomfortable with it - you'd have to be tone deaf not to hear it. A few songs were canned for 13 years, some were never released domestically. The most significant part of this experiment is that it never was repeated - Cohen and Bradley finally understood that Monroe was not just a singer playing the mandolin, he was a band leader within a highly profiled idiom. 

I don't hear a pump organ on any Monroe recordings, but I do hear an electric. With one exception it was used on gospel numbers, and it was always played by Owen Bradley, who produced these sessions,  or assisted their production, so we can safely assume that its inclusion was his idea.

 One should keep in mind that Monroe never recorded a gospel quartet with full Bluegrass instrumentation until 1962 (Wait a Little Longer had two fiddles but no banjo). His concern
in the beginning  certainly was not to "create" a genre, but to present a complete show. Gospel quartets then were a genre unto themselves, done without fiddle or banjo - in one case with just the guitar (and possibly bass).

I Saw the Light was Monroe's second album, and significantly it was presented  as a Bill Monroe
album, not Bill Monroe and his Blue Grass Boys, not even B M and his Blue Grass Quartet.

Monroe's band concept did evolve from 1946 to 1955: less 4/4, more 2/2, simplified role of the mandolin,
higher keys, Monroe doing leads on verses, stronger emphasis on the blues element. After 1955,
with marginal exceptions,  it remained fairly constant. I really don't know about "Monroe's attempts to make a hit". He wasn't really interested in recording, and often came poorly prepared, a fact that might account for the number of country covers  suggested by the producers.

I might return to the actual topic of this thread.

----------

allenhopkins

----------


## jaycat

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2cbkVZgUko


I like how Webb plays that A chord!

----------


## Tom Coletti

> It is an interesting article BTW.
> 
> And it is extremely ironic that Bill Monroe didn't get there by holding slavishly to the tradition, yet many folks do hold on tight to what Bill created.


Bill was never about adhering exactly to what came before and even professed against doing so, which is the ultimate irony of all of it. Probably one of the most memorable things that comes to mind is when Jens Kruger met his idol, Bill Monroe, and said that he wanted to be just like him one day... Monroe gave an interesting reply, suggesting that because Jens had a different upbringing in a different culture in a different country, he had something different to bring to the table that was unique to him and his brother Uwe. "Don't play bluegrass necessarily," he told Jens. "You have to find your own music." And the Kruger Brothers have certainly done exactly that. Because they followed their own path, there is a certain honesty that's inherent in all of their tunes.










Many people consider the banjo to be the "dark side," but in the case of Jens, it has been more enlightening than any genre infighting to date.

--Tom

----------


## allenhopkins

Anybody involved in this discussion should immediately go to *Ky Slim's new thread* and listen to Bela Fleck's IBMA speech.  Seriously.

----------


## Tom Smart

> Dude, ...come on man, you're being ridiculous... Come on Brotha!  Are you serious?


Show a little respect. Calling your opponent "dude" is no way to win a debate.

----------


## journeybear

Thanks for the support. Just so you (and anyone interested) know, Nick contacted me via PM days ago and we have made peace. No need to stir up anything. Now if only the traditionalists and progressives could do the same ...  :Whistling: 

Oh, and I agree about Webb's A chord. I don't think I've ever seen a guitarist use that fingering. With that high A on the E string, it's like  the mandolin chord, 2245.

----------


## Timbofood

I have played that "A" chord that way since I saw a friend do it, I have never thought about playing it any other way! Who'd a thunk it, me and Webb!

----------


## Manfred Hacker

I wonder whether Jens Kruger ever received any banjo award?

And, by the way, the journalist who uses "*Civil War*" for a little dispute has obviosly never attended any history class.

----------


## Timbofood

Maybe they think this thread will remain "civil" so far, not bad.

----------


## Tom Coletti

> I wonder whether Jens Kruger ever received any banjo award?
> 
> And, by the way, the journalist who uses "*Civil War*" for a little dispute has obviosly never attended any history class.


Jens was awarded the Steve Martin Award for Banjo Excellence and an IBMA nomination for Banjoist of the Year.

--Tom

----------


## Manfred Hacker

Thanks, Tom

----------


## ralph johansson

> This "civil war" has been going on for decades.  The Country Gentlemen caught some flak in the '60's for playing _The World Is Waiting For the Sunrise_ and _MTA_ at college concerts.  Ask Sam Bush how the Bluegrass Alliance was received -- or the New Grass Revival, or the Earl Scruggs Revue, or the Dillard & Clark Expedition.  And it wasn't just "those darn kids," as first-generation bluegrass acts like Jim & Jesse and the Osborne Brothers "plugged in" to work the Nashville-country circuit.
> 
> Disputes over electric bass vs. bass fiddle, female lead singers, Keith vs. Scruggs style banjo, rock-influenced song repertoire, extended "jam" numbers vs. the standard 2:30 bluegrass song, harmonica, brushed snare drums, long hair, jeans and T-shirts vs. matching polyester and Stetsons -- seen 'em all.  Bluegrass is a genre that seems to generate orthodoxy vs. heresy conflicts pretty regularly.



Jim & Jesse didnt just plug in; in the late 60's much of their output abandoned Bluegrass in favor of mainstream country, aimed at a different audience. I believe they even had a few hits. There never really was a controversy among Bluegrass fans over this, it was just something they deplored.
Besides, in the summer season J&J did travel the festival circuit with a BG band, or at least a few musicians (like fiddler Joe Greene or banjo player Carl Jackson), picking up the rest from other bands at the festival. 

The Osbornes are a different matter, as they successively, at least on records, augmented their sound with piano, drums, steel, etc. thus creating more of a hybrid. On stage (I watched them several times on my one and only trip to the USA in 1969) they used electric bass (Ronnie Reno) and had Bobby's son Robbie, home from school,  on snare drum,  The real controversy then was over their use of direct amplification of the mandolin and banjo.

----------


## DavidKOS

This issue is common in all forms of non-mainstream (read: not as popular as Miley Cyrus and that pop/hip hop/whatever stuff) "folk" music genres is the tension between the strict preservationists and the people that want to expand the style in question to include almost anything.

I've seen it is Irish music, Old-time music, of course Bluegrass, Klezmer, Jazz, French, Gypsy jazz, whatever.

Some people want to play the music with the exact same instruments, same repertoire, etc. as they perceive the "greats' to have done it.

If one of the originals in such-and-such style didn't do X, then it is not part of the genre to them.

On the other hand, the innovators can take fusion too far, and have very little left that musically resembles the original style they are expanding.

I can see both sides, and allow the hardcore preservationists points for keeping the original music alive as it was, if even under glass, so to speak - and I credit the innovators with , well, innovation!

If the preservationist get too nit-picky, I have heard them referred to as "the ethnic police" or "Folk Nazis".

Any style needs both to both keep the tradition and to grow.

----------


## Gutbucket

I think Monroe would have embraced Mandolin Orange because of his own roots of playing with just two instruments and vocals along with his brother in the early days of his career.   But what do I know?  I used to listen to Ted Nugent.

----------


## DavidKOS

> There never was an electric bass on a Bill Monroe recording session. Never. There is, however, a picture from early 1969 of James Monroe playing the electric  on tour with the Bluegrass Boys in Germany - obviously for  practical reasons. (_Many musicians would agree that there are two things you just don't do on an electric: you don't walk it and you don't play simple roots and fifths_.)


Frankly, as a string bassist and electric bassist since 1971, I *strongly disagree* with the statement that electric bass isn't good for walking lines nor simple root-5th patterns. Every good bassist I know can walk on electric and play simple root movement patterns - and a whole lot more.

Honestly, in all respect, where did you get that idea that electric bass can't do walking lines?  Jazz electric players have been doing that since Monk Montgomery (yes, Wes' brother) played electric bass in Lionel Hampton's band in the early 50's.

You have heard Jaco, Steve Swallow, James Jamerson, Carol Kaye etc? Even Yes' bassist Chris Squire used walking lines. Who are the "many musicians" that make this invalid claim?

Nashville electric bassists have played root-5th since the late 50's with that "tic-toc" bass sound, sometimes both upright and electric bass.

I do grant you that electric bass is still not a part of the traditional Bluegrass band, but I'd be careful of making such blanket statements about the wonderful electric bass.

The only thing the string bass can do better is bowing.

----------


## Timbofood

Electrics don't "slap" very well either, aside from the "hybrid" style.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Who are the "many musicians" that make this invalid claim?
> 
> ......
> 
> 
> I do grant you that electric bass is still not a part of the traditional Bluegrass band, but I'd be careful of making such blanket statements about the wonderful electric bass.


I don't remember any names; I've just seen that kind of statement in, e.g.,  a Down Beat blindfold test. As for Bluegrass I have never heard convincing examples of the use of electric bass for purely musical reasons. (The exception being those upright electric basses with bass fingerboard that are designed to simulate the sound of an acoustic upright).

----------


## ralph johansson

Here are a few excerpts from an essay that I wrote for a small publication and later translated to English.

.....
When jam culture in the US (as related to me) defines Oldtime by negating certain traits in
Bluegrass it therefore often becomes an excuse for amateurism and rigid purism.
Many of the styles recorded in the early days could easily be elevated to the same level of professionalism as today's Bluegrass. I would really like to see that genre as just part of 
contemporary American string band music. No kind of music thrives on isolation.

Bluegrass has certainly had its share of definition quarrels. When citybillies like Mike Seeger and Ralph Rinzler became aware of its folk roots, drawing the line against commercial
country music - "the Nashville treacle" to quote Seeger - became important,
marginalizing the  Bluegrass-Oldtime dichotomy.
The darlings of the citybillies were the Stanley Brothers,  the first prominent Bluegrass group
to tour Europe, typically as part of a folk music package.

The Country Gentlemen, based in the  DC  area, seemed to divide the folkniks.
Seeger produced them for Folkways records, Rinzler  purely hated them. I believe the
Gentlemen  simply
saw Bluegrass as an art form. They were equally capable of handling traditional songs from the archives of the Library of Congress, and material by contemporary artists like Bob Dylan and Tom Rush,
not to mention show and pop tuned like Heartaches and (The World is Waiting for the) Sunrise.
Typically, their name derived (at least indirectly) from a tune by the eclectic and unprejudiced Chet Atkins.

In the 70's Bluegrass appeared to have painted itself into a corner  of stylistic expectations, to the extent that any step out was a step into something else - already existing. Frankly, most of the "experimentation"
was driven by survival rather than curiosity. When the commercial potential of these changes had been exhausted, and the situation for Bluegrass had brightened, many artists went back to their roots.

......

Gene Lowinger was the first Yankee to fiddle with Bill Monroe, in 1965. In his book "I Hear a Voice Calling" he relates how Monroe once accompanied him to a synagogue in Nashville.
Monroe was immensely fascinated with the minor dominated music. Afterwards he thanked the rabbi and
expressed his hope of incorporating some of these sounds in his own music.

I've looked into Wolfe-Rosenberg's Monroe discography. Up to this time I find only one minor tune (bordering on the Dorian), Kentucky Mandolin, a live performance with Doc Watson. The Lonesome Moonlight Waltz (also performed live with Watson) progresses from d minor to its relative major, F. The bridge of
Cheyenne is in g minor, the relative minor to Bb flat. And that appears to be all.

Later in his career we find, e.g., Land of Lincoln, Jerusalem Ridge (which Kenny Baker more than helped write), Crossing the Cumberlands, My Last Days on Earth, Southern Flavor, and My Love is Gone.
The last song (never recorded by Monroe) has found interpreters far outside the Bluegrass tradition, most notably Katy Melua. 


Of course, none of these songs sound particularly Jewish, but inspiration is not the same as
slavish reproduction.

I cite Monroe mainly because the myth portrays him as jealously guarding his creation against
blasphemy, unwilling to develop after his sound was established. But then many people forget
that he recorded a Rockabilly number, Sally Jo,  in 1957, and a Dixieland number, Milenburg Joy,
in 1976, which he learned in Chicago more than 40 years earlier. Why wasn't there more of that?
I believe the angriest purists are among the fans and festival promoters (recall Cadillac Sky being
run off the stage at a festival a couple of years ago). Musicians as a rule are more curious and often
frustrated by the expectations of the audience, real or imagined.

As for myself  I did not grow up with this music and have always approached it without prejudice. If I play a Bluegrass standard I care only about my fellow musicians, the melody, the groove I feel and the way I hear the harmonies. Listening to others I am often drawn to mischief and impurity. I rejoice when Dailey&Vincent record with strings, when Rhonda Vincent and Claire Lynch do swing type  numbers, 
when Sam Bush and David Grisman race through Daybreak in Dixie with flute and drums, when Cadillac Sky contribute a novel virtuosity as arrangers and players, when IIIrd Tyme Out do Only You a cappella,
or Chris Stapleton lends his gravelly voice to some of the most musical lyrics in the whole genre.

Drawing lines and quarreling about definitions therefore is not my bag. But I wouldn't mind a speed limit.

----------

wildpikr

----------


## Mark Wilson

> But I wouldn't mind a speed limit.


 :Grin:   that was cool - enjoyed all

----------


## High Lonesome Valley

> Absolutely. 100% serious. To say that music doesn't change, is always the same, is not only impossible, but nonsense.


I guess when we say "in the tradition", we're just podunk unsophisticates.

----------

