# Technique, Theory, Playing Tips and Tricks > Theory, Technique, Tips and Tricks >  Bill Monroe's Poor Technique

## JonZ

I have begun to suspect that implicit in some current learning materials is "Don't do this, even though Bill Monroe did it." For example: don't use down picking on eighth notes,_ even though Bill Monroe did it_. 

It seems like the authors make a particular point of telling us not to do certain things, because they know that so many people want to emulate BM, even though those author's don't come right out and say, "Don't do what Bill Monroe did."

Is my suspicion correct?

What are all of the things that BM did that are generally considered "poor technique" for the modern mandolinist?

----------


## journeybear

Blasphemy!  :Disbelief: 

Perhaps what such an author meant was "Don't do this, even though Bill Monroe did it, because he was so amazingly talented that he was able to flout conventional practices and succeed where you, puny human, are doomed to fail." Or something like that.

OK, now I'm done venting (for now), maybe these authors are referring to some unorthodox techniques that were the results of years or experience, and suggest that beginners adopt a more methodical approach until they achieve that level of expertise. I prefer the old more-than-one-way-to-skin-a-cat-or-pick-a-mandolin approach, AKA the Whatever Works, Works Theory (AKA the WWW Theory). I mean, emulation is all good and well, but ultimately it is up to the player to figure out how to play, and developing a natural technique will be most beneficial. That is, natural to the player, naturally different for each one.

----------


## AlanN

Invalid question. Need to look at end result. From the sports world:

Hal Greer shot his free throws as a little jumper.
Wilt The Stilt threw underhanded (granted, he stunk at the foul line, but overall...)
Tom Dempsey kicked a 63 yrd field goal with half a foot
Joe Morgan flapped his arm at bat

But, if I were to choose one aspect of Bill's technique to answer the question, it would be...hmmmm....can't right think of one.

----------


## Scott Tichenor

> I have begun to suspect that implicit in some current learning materials is "Don't do this, even though Bill Monroe did it." For example: don't use down picking on eighth notes,_ even though Bill Monroe did it_. 
> 
> It seems like the authors make a particular point of telling us not to do certain things, because they know that so many people want to emulate BM, even though those author's don't come right out and say, "Don't do what Bill Monroe did."
> 
> Is my suspicion correct?
> 
> What are all of the things that BM did that are generally considered "poor technique" for the modern mandolinist?


Oh, brother...  :Coffee: 

I think as curator of this forum I've earned the right to point out the title you've added has the tact of being a guest at a wedding and yelling at the top of your lungs, "boy, this punch tastes like ####!"

Carry on.

----------


## Fred Keller

I would--in a spirit of rationality and community--cast your question not in terms of technique but rather artistic choice.  

By virtually every accepted definition of "good technique"--that is to say, the mechanics of holding the pick, the neck, fretting and picking the strings--Bill's technique was in the range of excellent-to-superb.  I direct you to any number of youtube videos where Bill's technique is on display.  

I've come to understand good technique as:  great economy of motion, loose-wrist-picking movement (vs chugging your whole arm), loose pick grip (vs. holding it in a death), perpendicular attack (vs. angled to the strings), fingers-near-the-fretboard, and everything-under-complete-control.  I argue that by these generally accepted standards of good technique Bill's is amazingly good.  Sure there are deviations, sure some people can play crazy stuff by posting pinkies, etc., but this is what I consider to be the bell of the bell curve of "good technique."

His enviable technique enabled him to make and execute artistic choices that are not for the faint of heart.  Picking all down-strokes on 1/8th notes is only one such choice.  He used downstrokes for particular reasons and to convey particular emotions and feelings.  One may not enjoy or like or be able to appreciate his sound--his choices--but I believe it's very difficult to argue that he displayed poor technique...if one defines technique as I have above.  

Now perhaps you meant a different kind of technique.  In which case we should get our definitions all cleared up  :Smile:

----------


## MikeEdgerton

I seem to recall a David Letterman show where Steve Earle played Copperhead Road and made the remark that nobody could tell him he was playing the mandolin wrong because he wrote the song. Monroe invented the genre.

----------


## grassrootphilosopher

> Oh, brother... 
> 
> I think as curator of this forum I've earned the right to point out the title you've added has the tact of being a guest at a wedding and yelling at the top of your lungs, "boy, this punch tastes like ####!"
> 
> Carry on.


While Scott got reason to contemplate about the header - this brought you to comment, right (?) - the original post brings up a question that is asked from time to time in ever so many variations.

To maybe rephrase the initial idea: Is there a hint to something in Bill Monroe's playing technique that could be regarded as unorthodox or even flawed?

While certainly there are many points in the father of bluegrass´ technique that have not been previously incorporated in mandolin playing (closed four fingered "bluegrass"-G-chords?) there can be no doubt about it that nowadays these techniques are considered common ground. 

There is discussion though that over the years Bill Monroe lacked timing. Be this true or not, I find that an octogenarian playing with as much taste, speed and power must be thouroughly acknowledged.

Also there is not one singular Bill Monroe mandolin technique to my knowledge. The 1930ies Bill Monroe played a different technique on his vintage F-7 than the early 1940ies Monroe with his early incarnation of Blue Grass Boys. Neither did that Monroe play the same technique as the "classic" 1946-1948 Monroe who then changed quite a bit in the 1950ies with the Jimmy Martin outfit or even to the leader of citybillies Rowan, Grier, Greene (along with J. Monroe) up to the vernerable "slick" Monroe style of the late 70ies or the broadbrush octogenerian Monroe style.

I think it is imperative to focus on specifics in the technique to determine if they may be regarded as unorthodox, flawed or maybe just unusual.

If you browse through the threads a number of techniques with major mandolin heroes are discussed. An interesting thread was on the Mike Compton mandolin grip. While I could care less on anybody´s opinion wether a certain way of doing something is "proper" or not it is interesting to sometimes persue a path if only for education´s sake.

If you could elaborate on specific Monroe techniques that seem to be unorthodox to say the least I would be more than interested.

----------


## Ivyguitar

> Also there is not one singular Bill Monroe mandolin technique to my knowledge. .


This is a good point.  Monroe's playing on the early Monroe Brothers shows that he had prety well mastered the "down/up" style that is popular with teachers and players today.  In fact, he played about as clean and fast as anybody ever played.

----------


## Darren Bailey

Oh to be that poor!

----------

Tripping Springs

----------


## Glassweb

> oh to be that poor!


amen

----------


## AlanN

Another thing:

There's a reason all of the 2nd generation cats sat at the foot of the stage, tape recorders in hand, when Big Mon performed. They wanted to _learn_ first-hand the technique coming from that guy. There was no 'Well, he's good, but he has sloppy technique that I can improve on.' He was the man - lock, stock and barrel.

Caption for what is going through Duffey's mind: "_Now_ what's he doing?"

----------


## Brad Nicholas

I have heard some folks call Monroe's playing "sloppy."  I'll echo Ivyguitar that anyone who has listened Monroe's early clean and blazingly fast work with Charlie or Lester and Earl would be hard pressed to come to that conclusion.  Later on, he hit extra strings because that was the sound he wanted.  Heck, even his clean playing had more character than most speedster modern players.  I don't know why having every note with the same volume and tone is viewed as a plus.  I like a little gallop in my fast passages.

----------


## Jim Garber

> For example: don't use down picking on eighth notes,_ even though Bill Monroe did it_.


Since when is that bad technique? I know others have said it already, but, from what I understand, it is more a choice than a hard and fast rule. In fact, I believe that a lot of jazz guitarists use hard and fast downpicking for certain effects.

By the time I saw Monroe play he was certainly not the cleanest picker esp when compared to the more modern-sounding newgrassers, but his music was his own and certainly had that soul and punch.

----------


## Brad Nicholas

Oh, and go ahead and play those blues passages up-down-up-down and don't get too close to the bridge.

In all seriousness though, judging by a lot of players, folks seem intent on turning all mandolin solos into a perfectly smooth stream of single notes at breakneck speed with no rests.  It's really popular so someone must like it.  That someone isn't me though.

----------


## Skip Kelley

I would love to play with such "poor" technique as Big Mon!!!

----------

Tripping Springs

----------


## Alex Orr

I've actually seem numerous materials that specifically recommend playing down-stroke eighth notes to get the hard-edged bluesy sound that Bill got.  Wouldn't telling someone to avoid that be akin to telling someone that DUDU picking is a far more effective way to play Chuck Berry double-stop riffs?

That being said, there is a lot of recorded Bill Monroe stuff out there, and sometimes it can come across as a bit messy.  The guy was human.  Sometimes on a fast fiddle tune he'd hit a couple of dead notes or perhaps pull off too quickly and choke a note prematurely - it happens, even to the masters - and make no mistake, Bill was a master musician.

----------


## JonZ

Scott--Irony, like a martini, is best served dry.  :Cool: 

I think it goes without saying at Mandolin Café that Bill is one of the greats. There are plenty of other great players who use what most would consider unorthodox techniques--Jesse McReynolds, Sam Bush--I was just curious as to what techniques Bill used that are now commonly discouraged.

Grassroots--I don't have a list of Monroe techniques that are unorthodox, I was curious if anyone else does.

----------


## Geiss

I noticed something interesting when learning Southern Flavor.
Up/down has one distinct feeling and down/down has an entirely different feel.
Pick one tune and play eight notes in both styles and just make some observations and plug those observations into wherever you are at in terms of your development and style. It's the awareness that's important, the rest is just dogma.

To my ears, yes Monroe could at times be a "stringbanger" but that he did not have the sanitary runs of 
a Thile or Sierra does not detract from the pleasure of listening to Monroe. His melodic ideas stick with me much more than his technique. 

All of this from a player just learning.....so YMMV

----------


## allenhopkins

Well, he scratched his mandolin all up, broke a curl off the headstock, carried it around for years and then lost it, and gouged the "Gibson" inlay out when he got upset with the company.  We proper mandolinists frown on such antics, don't we?

I think a set of quotation marks around the "poor" in the thread title would have assuaged Scott T's wrath...

Lots of techniques are at the player's option, and those who choose others may find those techniques a "poor fit" for the way they like to play.  Perhaps a classical mandolinist would shudder at Monroe's approach to certain tunes.  Monroe set his mandolin up with very high action, and played aggressively; these variables may lead to notes not sounding "crystal clear."  There were times when he rushed tempos -- I've seen him do that "live" -- perhaps to add energy to an already-speedy song.

The last time I saw him was just about two years before he died, I guess, outdoors in Rochester.  I had heard all the comments of how his technique and musicianship were suffering as he entered his eighties.  When he asked for requests, I yelled out "_Roanoke_" (a tune I love and will _never_ be able to play adequately).  He accepted the suggestion, and proceeded to flat out _NAIL_ that tune.  Coulda been 1955, for all his "technique had suffered."  Took away a memory I'll always cherish.

----------

Tripping Springs

----------


## sgarrity

Bad Monroe technique?  I'm not aware of any.  

Let's see, he had:

Loose right wrist
Economy of motion
Consistent tone
Power and volume
Speed and clarity when needed

Nope, can't think of a single one!

Remember Monroe was an artist in the truest sense of the word.  He wasn't trying to win some kind of contest.  He was playing the music the way he heard and felt it.

----------


## Nelson Peddycoart

JonZ, 

You are off the Christmas card list (and you know Christmas Time's A'Coming)!

 :Whistling:

----------


## Roger Kunkel

The best technique would be to profoundly impact the history of American music and spawn thousands (millions?) of mandolin imitators.

----------

Tripping Springs

----------


## JonZ

> JonZ, 
> 
> You are off the Christmas card list (and you know Christmas Time's A'Coming)!


Dang, I was hoping for a '23 Gibson A!!!!

----------


## JonZ

By the way, my current repertoire goal is to learn several Monroe tunes. I'm no hater!

----------


## hank

To study Bill Monroe's music and mandolin techniques is a step beyond learning basic mandolin playing and general guidelines developed to help the new student. In almost every case the general rule or guideline can and perhaps should be broken to accomplish the desired effect.  I don't know much about classical mandolin and it's study but I would imagine it is more regimented to accommodate the large number of musicians playing together as one and subject to more technique criticism.

----------


## Roger Kunkel

> The best technique would be to profoundly impact the history of American music and spawn thousands (millions?) of mandolin imitators.


Sorry, got on my high horse there. It's a perfectly valid question. I think Bill's early technique is especially astounding. I don't think that playing smoothly and cleanly was his goal. It was all about intensity and he had that in spades.

----------


## Mandolin Mick

Monroe & technique? The 2 were exclusive! What a hack!  :Wink:

----------


## mandocrucian

The OP, imo, was just a pure _"troll"._  I've acquired loads of instructional book over the past 30 years, and I'm curious as to which of these materials (yes name specific titles) that fit your scenario of



> It seems like the authors make a particular point of telling us not to do certain things, because they know that so many people want to emulate BM, even though those author's don't come right out and say, "Don't do what Bill Monroe did."


But, consult the *"almighty oracle at the temple of ANKI"* and _please provide some of these  "suspect" examples._

In a graded technique "method" (becoming more complex and difficult as the method progresses) there may well be validity in telling a student to (first) "develop this technique" before confusing the issue with alternative RH articulations, that the student is mechanically may not be ready for.

Now, I've posted enough on the Cafe over the last ten years concerning "default" techniques (i.e. basic foundational technique) as well as advocating all sorts of numerous alternate (RH) articulations, fingerings, position shifting etc. for the advancing players so that pick direction, position, fingering won't eventually matter anymore.......anywhere on the neck, starting with any finger, whatever pick directional (and slurring) articulations produce the sounds in your mental "ear".

The whole purpose of developing "technique" is so that the individual can get (or get closer to) the "sound that turns them on". I have my own personal preferences which have evolved over the decades - but they are what_ I like and what I don't like._  There's some Monroe stuff which, to me, sounds just awful; there's also virtuosic "new acoustic" of BG playing which comes across, to me, as sterile, souless and robotic. And stuff that, to me, is over-the-top schmaltzy and cloying.

It's all personal preference in the end...one man's schmaltz is another man's soulfulness. I listen to what _I like_, which is all the justification it needs. I won't apologize for my tastes, and nobody should for theirs either.  ("You go to your church and I'll go to mine")

On the other hand, there's playing which is very ragged technically, but I love the sound. Yank Rachell.  (Or how 'bout Johnny Winter playing mando on _"Too Much Seconal"_ with Jeremy Steig on blues flute?)  The sound might be a result as big, heavily calloused laborer's hands.  But if a player wants _that sound_ , it may well entail _controllably_ developing _"bad"_ technique - for example, being able to play runs in which one string of the pair is intentionally and consistantly pushed sharp for that gutbucket, down in the swamp, raw sound that's on those old recordings.

Can you control, at will, "bad technique", turning it on and off, as the sonic situation demands?  It's the difference between "a drunk man fighting" and "Drunken-Man style Kung Fu".  It's the difference between being the "stompee" and the "stomper".

As I've said on numerous occasions...... there is no inherentally _"bad tone"_ (i.e. it is always _"bad tone"_ ), just whether it is _"appropriate tone"_ for the situation.  DUDU DUDU is a different sound than DDDD DDDD even if the left-hand pitches are the same - And, playing it with UUUU and UDUD  are also different.  Playing close to the bridge may be too bright and abrasive as opposed to playing over the neck istself for that "hollow" tone.......but what does the musical situation call for?  Is it a Little Richard moment or a Pat Boone moment?  Johnny Mathis or Tom Waits?

Most of the orchestral/classical flute players tend to _sneer_ at the "untrained" (in their opinions) jazz and rock flutists (usually sax players who double); think that their tone and technique is crude. Perhaps in comparison to what would be required for a orchestral job position, it is, but personally, I far prefer the jazz/rock (and ethnic) players sound-wise in comparison to that "golden classical tone" which (to my ears) is so "ultra-prissy" and gutless. It's like classical violinists sounding _ridiculous_ when they (try to) play "old-time fiddle".

NH

----------


## mikeyes

No less an authority than Roland White once said in a class he gave that he didn't know technique until WSM taught it it him.  Roland told our class that he won't listen to the early Colonels albums because of his poor technique on them.

I think that some critics listen to Bill Monroe's versions of fiddle tunes and remark that he doesn't play the entire tune note for note, which is true.  But what WSM is doing is playing in a more impressionistic radical style that he developed on his own and is now a standard.  He introduced so many variations and additions to the music that a lot of players these days don't even understand much less be able to name.  He was a genius who also had impeccable technique.  When you are like that, you can accomplish a lot and he did.

Mike Keyes

----------


## swampy

> Blasphemy! 
> 
> Perhaps what such an author meant was "Don't do this, even though Bill Monroe did it, because he was so amazingly talented that he was able to flout conventional practices and succeed where you, puny human, are doomed to fail." Or something like that.


That's pretty much how I interpreted it.

----------


## JonZ

> The OP, imo, was just a pure _"troll"._


Man, looks like you took the bait, big time.

I don't have a lot of examples to site. Like I said, it was more of a suspicion. I am asking to find out. 

(Sometimes I ask when I already know the answer, to show how smart I am.)

The only thing that stuck out was the use of down strokes, but just looking at where his pick was hitting on the face of his instrument suggests that there may have been some other idiosyncrasies at play.

Funny you bring up Anki. Can you believe it has been a full year since _Adventures in Super Efficient Mandolin Practice_ took the Café by storm? I have been preparing the annual _State of the Super Efficient Mandolin Practice Address_, to bring you all up to date. :Disbelief: 

Stay tuned!

----------


## Steve Cantrell

Bill Monroe, poor technique? Lol.

----------


## foldedpath

> The only thing that stuck out was the use of down strokes, but just looking at where his pick was hitting on the face of his instrument suggests that there may have been some other idiosyncrasies at play.


Well, you're posting this in the Theory and Technique section, not the Bluegrass section of the forum, where the question might be more relevant (IMO). Personally, I think if one's primary interest is Bluegrass, then it would be crazy not to study everything Monroe did, even if you want to end up more in the Thile/Marshall zone. It would be like trying to learn about jazz while ignoring Louis Armstrong.

In the context of _general mandolin technique_ however, then sure... there are aspects of his playing that don't work well outside the native soil of Bluegrass music. You're going to get the hairy eyeball from the other musicians, if you try playing chop chords and all downstrokes on melody lines in an Irish trad session. I take what I can use from Monroe's technique -- mostly some of the double stop and tremolo stuff, and leave what I don't need, since my primary music isn't Bluegrass. Some of the things I do (or try to) in Irish trad wouldn't move in the other direction either, like treble ornaments and rolls. That ain't no part of... well, you know what Bill would say about it!

----------


## Brian Ray

Anyone who says Monroe has poor technique is just ignorant on the subject.

----------


## Jim Broyles

I have slowed  many Bill Monroe pieces down to 20% and I am dead certain that I know for sure what notes are being played and I cannot adequately copy his technique. He did say that he didn't play all the notes people say they heard, but even with missing notes and so-called sloppy style, very few can replicate Monroe's playing exactly.

----------


## barney 59

Isn't the difference between a highly skilled player and a cultural icon just that ---That they play like nobody else? So called "proper" technique works for most of us --the correct grip, good posture and balance,how to hold the pick  etc. and people who teach will direct students to adopt what they perceive to be good technique. These are all good things to know and for most of us it can help us become better players by adopting skills that others have developed ahead of us. Bill Monroe didn't have much of a chance at taking advantage of preexisting models, he had to make it up from scratch. More than anything I think that Bill Monroe really has a leg up on any other bluegrass mandolin player  in that he is responsible for inventing an entire and enduring form of music AND he happened to play the mandolin.

----------


## JonZ

> Anyone who says Monroe has poor technique is just ignorant on the subject.


I admit my ignorance; it was the reason for posting the question. The ironic title was to get the most answers.

Do you mean he had a technique that bluegrass players should try to emulate, or one that worked well for him? Because that is what I want to discern. For example, are you wearing down the face of your mandolin from hitting it with your pick? Or do you try to avoid hitting the face of your mandolin? Should all bluegrass players be trying to wear down the face of their instruments?

Perhaps that is a technique that is no longer necessary in the age of modern amplification???

(Yes, I know he gouged off a lot of the finish on purpose, but there is that one spot, right where he picked.)

----------


## swampstomper

OK, let's listen to that poor technique. Get out your Bear Family box sets (you *do* have *all* of them, don't you??). Let's start with the re-make of Pike County Breakdown with Bill Keith (unreleased at the time). Now, set your metronome to the same beats. Now try to make that run from the low A all the way up as clean as Mon. Left-hand economy? Coordination? Hmm...

Maybe go back a few years to Monroe Brothers. Try those runs on New River Train or Rabbit in the Log. How's your left-right hand coordination? Of course it helps if you have a powerful rhythm man backing you up... or from a few years later, the same kind of two-octave run on Back Up and Push.

Now let's move to Blue Grass Ramble, the first cut for Decca from 1950 with Rudy Lyle, Vassar Clements, Joel Price and Jimmy Martin. Cross-tune as required (just lower one E string to C#). Again, get your metronome going. And then try to duplicate the double-shuffle rhythm on the last break.  Lose right hand? Hmm..

Time to get funky. You know where I'm going with this one... it has to be Blue Grass Part I (aka Blue Grass Twist). Not too fast so you can *try* to get those downstrokes going. Make sure to let the notes ring. Can you pull that tone out of your mando? Don't forget the grace notes and slides. If your right hand can still take it, get out the Knee Deep in Blue Grass LP and play along with other funky breaks like Goodbye Old Pal.

You say the man got old?? Alright, 1983 and Master of Bluegrass. Where to start? (I know the mixing job was terrible but we're talking about the mandolin technique here).  Maybe we can try Old Dangerfield. Not so many notes... can you get the dynamics of the B part down? Maybe that takes some technique with the plectrum?

OK, OK, I'm ranting.  But as Sam Bush says on the 2nd Homespun Bill Monroe DVD (where he breaks down Mon's style) "I can't play it exactly like Bill... no one can... if I could I would" or something like that.  There's a reason they wrote "'Cept Old Bill".

----------


## Mike Bunting

> I have begun to suspect that implicit in some current learning materials is "Don't do this, even though Bill Monroe did it." For example: don't use down picking on eighth notes,_ even though Bill Monroe did it_.


I have never heard or read of anyone saying this, where did you hear it?

----------


## JonZ

"Implicit" means they don't come right out and say it. But plenty of books stress the importance of strict down-up picking on eigth notes. Maybe not so much in bluegrass books. The answer to this question will either be "No, Bill's tecnique is pretty much what is taught in most Bluegrass books" or "Yes, there are some things that Bill did that are generally discouraged these days."

I think a lot of people want to argue against points that I am not trying to make--probably because of the thread title, and perhaps some people are a little over-sensitive about their heros. I know the Mr. Monroe was a great man--carrying his entire band around on his back and all. I am sure in the afterlife, I will see Bill Monroe and Chuck Norris sitting to the either side of Jesus--but that doesn't mean everything about them is beyond question.

Depending, of course, on whether I make it to the same place as Bill and Chuck.

----------


## Jim Broyles

Dude, you are trolling and you know it. Bill Monroe did NOT play all down strokes all the time and in fact my favorite Monroe stuff is 16th note DUDU. If I were to teach proper mandolin picking technique I would teach strict DUDU and encourage variation for creativity.

----------


## Nelson Peddycoart

> Dude, you are trolling and you know it. Bill Monroe did NOT play all down strokes all the time and in fact my favorite Monroe stuff is 16th note DUDU. If I were to teach proper mandolin picking technique I would teach strict DUDU and encourage variation for creativity.


What a load of DUDU!
 :Laughing:

----------


## hank

Jon Z I think what most of us are trying to say gently to you is this thread is ridiculous.  There are better ways to learn about Bill Monroe's technique than this.

----------


## GVD

> ...has the tact of being a guest at a wedding and yelling at the top of your lungs, "boy, this punch tastes like ####!"...


OK I admit it was a poor choice of words but it really was bad punch  :Wink:

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Lol

----------


## mikeyes

> In the context of _general mandolin technique_ however, then sure... there are aspects of his playing that don't work well outside the native soil of Bluegrass music. You're going to get the hairy eyeball from the other musicians, if you try playing chop chords and all downstrokes on melody lines in an Irish trad session. I take what I can use from Monroe's technique -- mostly some of the double stop and tremolo stuff, and leave what I don't need, since my primary music isn't Bluegrass. Some of the things I do (or try to) in Irish trad wouldn't move in the other direction either, like treble ornaments and rolls. That ain't no part of... well, you know what Bill would say about it!


There are times in ITM in which the down strokes work very well, polkas for instance.  And WSM did not use the chop all that much even though it was an iconic move for him.  Rumor has it that he had to use it to keep his young musicians in time and that it was so effective that others used it just to sound like Bill.

But I know what you mean  :Grin:

----------


## M.Marmot

> What are all of the things that BM did that are generally considered "poor technique" for the modern mandolinist?


Just how do you personally define the modern mandolinist?

Is it simply a contemporary mandolin player or does the 'modern mandolinist' boast a more certain set of characteristics, values, and goals than that?

----------


## JonZ

Listen, I posted the title the way I did to get people to read the question. The title was meant to be ironic, but the question itself is a reasonable one. If you think questioning any aspect of BM's playing is "ignorant", "ridiculous", "trolling", or otherwise reprehensible, I direct you to the Bill Monroe Appreciation social group.

Thoughtful responses are welcome.

I did not say Bill Monroe played all down strokes on 8th notes. I said that some books say to always use down-up on 8th notes, which BM did not always do. I would add to the list the angle of attack. I think most books these days would not recommend picking in a manner that carves a hole in your mandolin. The condition of his mandolin would also bring into question whether he had the loose grip that is now commonly encouraged.

I am not saying that these practices (if my assumptions are correct) made him any less of an artist. It is a purely technical question about how technique has evolved since the man invented it.

When I refer to the "modern mandolinist", I am referring to the various professionals currently teaching and performing.

----------


## Mike Bunting

> I have begun to suspect that implicit in some current learning materials is "Don't do this, even though Bill Monroe did it." For example: don't use down picking on eighth notes,[I] even though Bill Monroe did it[/I
> Is my suspicion correct?
> 
> What are all of the things that BM did that are generally considered "poor technique" for the modern mandolinist?


I'd still like to know which materials implied this notion.

----------


## Cullowheekid

Seems like I remember a quote from Ol' Bill where he said something like "It's not the left hand or the right hand, it's in between." He had it going on, in between. Eric

----------


## JonZ

> I'd still like to know which materials implied this notion.


For the sake of moving the thread forward, let's just assume I am wrong about it.

Now how about the question as to whether there are things that BM did while playing that are now either discouraged by teachers or avoided by professionals. Or, as I previously put it, has bluegrass technique evolved? And by evolved, I don't just mean changed. Do professionals now use different techniques that have been found to be more effective?

----------


## M.Marmot

> I am not saying that these practices (if my assumptions are correct) made him any less of an artist. It is a purely technical question about how technique has evolved since the man invented it.
> 
> When I refer to the "modern mandolinist", I am referring to the various professionals currently teaching and performing.


Thats still rather a broad and indistinct genre of player.

The reason that i asked just what you mean when you refer to the 'modern mandolinist' is that until you bring some definition to this we really are going to be huffing and puffing in circles.

You have provided no clear and quoted examples of reasoned critique regarding Monroe's playing nor identified anyone who has forwarded such a critique. Moreover your 'modern mandolinist' encompasses such a broad and ill defined individual that it could be easily argued that it is impossible to find a definite example. I mean 'Various professionals currently teaching and performing' really brings us no closer to establishing a grounds for comparison with Monroe's technique. 

So, unless someone is willing to 'fess up and bravely admit that they have not only identified Monroe's flaws but also use them to teach their students what not to do, then this really is a dead end debate.

Unless of course you step in to that very breach yourself and start to build some rationale for critically contemplating Monroe's playing.

If you nominate someone whose playing you see as an example of this 'modern mandolinist' it would help.

Failing this, how about you close the grounds for comparison to a genre of mandolin playing, contemporary Bluegrass seems the obvious choice.

Or even if you compile a list of good techniques that you think the 'modern mandolin' player should sport that might get us nearer an actual reasonable area of debate.

Or even something as blatantly honest and straightforward as what elements of Monroe's playing would you not want to adopt for your own?

As things stand there is a distinct impression that maybe you spent more time relishing the nettling thread title than considering the threads actual contents... which is a pity is it an interesting subject for exploration.

----------


## JonZ

> You have provided no clear and quoted examples of reasoned critique regarding Monroe's playing nor identified anyone who has forwarded such a critique.


Please look up the word "implied". 




> Moreover your 'modern mandolinist' encompasses such a broad and ill defined individual that it could be easily argued that it is impossible to find a definite example. I mean 'Various professionals currently teaching and performing' really brings us no closer to establishing a grounds for comparison with Monroe's technique


From my question "has bluegrass technique evolved", one could infer that we are talking about professional bluegrass teachers and performers.




> Or even if you compile a list of good techniques that you think the 'modern mandolin' player should sport that might get us nearer an actual reasonable area of debate.
> 
> Or even something as blatantly honest and straightforward as what elements of Monroe's playing would you not want to adopt for your own?.


As I have already said, I have observed the following characteristics that I find questionable.
1. Not playing strict up-down on 8th notes.
2. Scraping in the picking area suggests extreme angle of attack.
3. Scraping in the picking area suggests tight grip on pick.

So now that we have established that you are not so great at analyzing my comments, do you have any analysis to share on Mr. Monroe's technique, as compared to the generally accepted best practices of current professional bluegrass mandolin performers and teachers?

----------


## Mike Bunting

[QUOTE=M.Marmot;857674]Thats still rather a broad and indistinct genre of player.

Well put.

----------


## JonZ

Would anyone care to jump in on my poor grammar and spelling? :Smile:

----------


## hank

I don't know about your grammar and spelling but you sure have an ugly avatar.

----------


## JonZ

Ouch! :Crying:

----------


## billkilpatrick

while i tend to favor iconoclasts in general, i feel you've chosen the wrong icon.  true - he played way too fast, for my taste - melody suffered a bit - but if you consider the razzle-dazzle approach and technical wizardry of some mandolin players today and their gattling-gun approach to the tune (remember the tune?) ... it's a pleasure to hear an old-time musician stretching limits just a little bit ... as opposed to ignoring it all-together in a blitzkrieg flurry of notes.

----------


## hank

Lol!!

----------


## JonZ

Bill--I like listening to Bill Monroe too.

----------


## SincereCorgi

Despite the piling-on, I think you made some good points, Jon, especially about digging up the top of the mandolin. Most modern players would probably say that making a new hole in your instrument indicates, to some degree, an aspect of technique that could... ah... be approached differently. (How's that for walking on eggshells?)

Modern bluegrass virtuosi are held to pretty ruthless standards: they've got to play perfectly in time, with extremely clean execution, and be able to do it just-like-the-recording every time. Developing that level of consistency probably means developing a different, slightly more formalized and cautious technique than Monroe-style playing, which was pretty rambunctious.

----------


## Brad Nicholas

I'll take a stab at points 1-3

1. None of the bluegrass instructional material that I have, nor any picker that I have ever met has suggested that the type of staccato and syncopated blues material that Monroe pioneered would be better played in DUDU style.  It wouldn't sound the same.
2. I can't directly address the angle of attack.  Is there a good way to easily see it?  Anyway, I will say that the stories that have been passed down reflect a musician who viewed the mandolin as a tool and he used and abused it for 50 years or so on a daily basis.  That wear didn't happen overnight and a lot of it was not playing wear.  He scraped the finish off, gouged the inlay out, used it for a clipboard to sign autographs.  If you're fishing for some Monroe criticism, I can offer that I recommend against doing those things to your mandolin.  Actually, I take that back.  Don't do that to my mandolin.  Your mandolin belongs to you and you can use it to play ping pong or or as a fancy wood block in your percussion ensenble.  I don't really care.
3. The videos of Monroe that I have and the ones I've seen online do not show a death grip on the pick.  Loose wrist, lightly closed fist, relaxed and powerful.

Someone might come up with something, but I don't think you're going to find as much as you'd hoped for.  A lot of modern players and teachers do not go for Monroe style playing.  I don't think that's because they view his technique as poor so much as they have a different goal in mind.  To get the results that he achieved musically, I don't think there's a lot to look for in the way of improving on the way he went about it.  Now if your goal is to sound completely different, you would want to employ different techniques.

----------


## Jim Broyles

What do you think of the technique here? I think it's exactly the way I would teach a beginner; from where to pick, how to hold the pick, pickstroke direction and sequence - everything.

----------


## JonZ

No fishing, no hoping, just wondering.

----------


## Rob Fowler

> As I have already said, I have observed the following characteristics that I find questionable.
> 1. Not playing strict up-down on 8th notes.
> 2. Scraping in the picking area suggests extreme angle of attack.
> 3. Scraping in the picking area suggests tight grip on pick.


So I guess this brings it down to that nowhere did any instructional material infer that Monroe's technique had flaws or "not to do's" but is more something that YOU are inferring as Monroe's playing "faults." Why not just come out with that in the first place instead of making it seem like some instructor or instructional material taught you this? Hmmm......

So really, instead of picking on Monroe and inferring that his playing is maybe faulty because he did the 3 things you mention then you really have to be more broad and apply that idea to others and not just Monroe. 

Now in terms of the finish being worn off the top of a mandolin:
What about Mike Marshall and his worn Loar? What does that infer about his playing technique? What about Thile's Dude and his broken headstock and marked-up top infer? Sam Bush and Hoss? Andy Statman and his snakehead?

It basically comes down to the fact that there is NO STANDARD for how the masters play their mandolins and just because they have beat up mandolins means NOTHING as to how there might be faults in their technique leading to their instruments getting that way. Countless threads have already beat the horse to where it has imploded and vanished into thin air.

These guys play their instruments a lot and any tool used a lot is going to get worn. 

Also, in any genre of music that keeps on and doesn't die out (like ragtime or 80's pop) it's very natural for others that come after the originators and evolve the technique, many times making it better, depending on what what you define as "evolving a technique."

The questions you ask I think are really meaningless as it takes away what all these master pickers have accomplished in their life: GREAT TONE, GREAT TECHNIQUE, and an ability for them to move many with their music.  

I for one and stepping away from this thread and doing something productive like..... picking up my mandolin and picking it a bit.

----------


## Cheryl Watson

Bill Monroe was an original and talented artist who has often come under attack for his "sloppy" playing.  He is so misunderstood by many.  People who think he was "sloppy" and had improper form and such just don't get it.  It is not a clean, notey style of playing such as Butch Baldassari, Adam Steffey, Chris Thile.  It is a dirty, bluesy sound with a lot of complex accents, downstrokes and slides.  It is a completely different technique.  I "try" to play both styles, and I "get" both styles.  I hear it said all the time: Why don't you slow that tune down and maybe you could hit all of the notes cleaner.  With Monroe style, you don't hit all of the notes cleanly and evenly.  It often slurs and has accents with downstrokes instead of playing standard up-down-up-down etc.  It is a language in and of itself that sounds so completely different than playing a guitar and that is one reason why I love Monroe style so much.  It really adds a nice contrast to clean guitar breaks.

----------


## JonZ

> What do you think of the technique here? I think it's exactly the way I would teach a beginner; from where to pick, how to hold the pick, pickstroke direction and sequence - everything.


Nice clip.

You're right. That's some pretty solid picking technique on display.

You ought to post this one in the "Bluegrass Hair" thread. There's some great bluegrass hair technique on display too.

----------


## Cheryl Watson

> For the sake of moving the thread forward, let's just assume I am wrong about it.
> 
> Now how about the question as to whether there are things that BM did while playing that are now either discouraged by teachers or avoided by professionals. Or, as I previously put it, has bluegrass technique evolved? And by evolved, I don't just mean changed. Do professionals now use different techniques that have been found to be more effective?


That is an interesting question, actually.  There are many who are influenced by Bill Monroe but play a cleaner style i.e. the late, great Butch Baldassari played Monroe "pretty" IMHO, and many players are influenced by his style.  I myself do this weird thing where I will play some thing clean and midstream, add a Bill Monroe influence in the later part of the solo.  I do this on "Lady Be Good" and also on "Beaumont Rag" to name a few but there must be many players who do this. It must contrast but also "work" together and it is a challenge to make it work, no doubt.

----------


## JonZ

> So I guess this brings it down to that nowhere did any instructional material infer that Monroe's technique had flaws or "not to do's" but is more something that YOU are inferring as Monroe's playing "faults." Why not just come out with that in the first place instead of making it seem like some instructor or instructional material taught you this? Hmmm......
> 
> The questions you ask I think are really meaningless as it takes away what all these master pickers have accomplished in their life: GREAT TONE, GREAT TECHNIQUE, and an ability for them to move many with their music.


I don't like the sound of that "Hmmm...." I feel guilty, but I'm not sure about what.

I find the "Thou shalt not question the Masters" approach to life kind of scary actually.

----------


## Mike Bunting

Are you in a position to "question the masters" when you don't even understand the basics of playing? You posted another thread asking about the fact that you caused your mando to "jiggle" when you tried to temolo and seemed unaware of the idea of playing from the wrist.

----------


## JonZ

Dang, exposed! :Redface: 

However, the credentials of the questioner are irrelevant to the validity of a question.

I did not realize how protective some people are of BM, to the point where questioning aspects of his technique is taken as an affront. I suppose there is a history of similar threads with some people putting him down and others saying "how dare you!". I assume this history fuels a lot of speculation about my intentions. But really, I have no hidden agenda. This was just something I was curious about.

I like the playing of Bill Monroe, and appreciate his contribution to music. The thread title was meant to be ironic (meaning I said the opposite of what I believe to be true for comic effect). 

To those who have given interesting, informed answers to my questions, from a variety of perspectives--thank you.

Now Mike, you have made four posts here without saying anything about Bill Monroe's playing. So, I am going to have to forbid you from further questioning my questions. :Wink:

----------


## jim simpson

Jonz,
I guess the title of your thread seems to state a negative, I can understand why many might get defensive on Bill's behalf. I have listened to all periods of Bill Monroe's recordings and do hear an artist who's style evolved. His playing at times might have reflected his state of health or just plain fatigue. I've never observed an artist who was willing to give more to his audience and fans. I enjoy listing to all of the variances and still feel that I learn new things upon relistening.
An ealier response mentioned Roland White not caring to hear his early work because of his own style evolved or improved. I still like hearing the early live playing where you hear improvisation and risk taking. I believe Roland still plays in a rather organic style. He certainly displayed that style in a workshop that I attended.
No harm in questioning our masters, it's often the way we question or communicate that sends an unintended message.

----------


## Ken_P

I'm not a Monroe fan by any means, and I've leveled the "sloppy" accusation against him many times. That being said, it's always been a matter of personal taste for me, and I can fully understand why others enjoy it more than I do. Technique wise, I'm not aware of anything he did that would be considered "wrong". Good technique, to me, will allow you to achieve exactly the sound you want with the least possible amount of effort. Monroe certainly had that down - he sounded like he wanted to sound with technique to spare.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*JimB* - That's where i learned "Southern Flavour" from. I know the OP posted his question in a provocative manner to gain our response,which he's certainly done - good for him !.
  Regarding Bill Monroe's remark saying that folk heard notes that he wasn't playing ( or words to that effect),i think Bill was adding a little 'mystique' regarding his style,i think that he was mischeivous in that way.
   Bill Monroe's technique was based on what he heard in his head & required himself to play,good or bad as that may seem to 'purists'. I personally wish my technique was as 'poor' & you could never say that _his_ style was sterile,full of energy & tailor made for everything he did,_YES_ - _'awesome'_ doesn't even come close,
                                                                                               Ivan :Disbelief:  :Chicken:

----------


## swampstomper

JimB -- thanks for posting that video, it makes my point more eloquently than any words. First, to address the actual technique of mandolin playing. JonZ, go back and look at that left hand -- the fingers barely move off the fingerboard (except for that cool part where he just moves the whole hand to the mando body while stroking on the E note -- a master's bit of showmanship). Look at the economy of motion. Then look at the right hand: wrist motion, hand position, angle of attack. Just what is wrong with that technique? I defy you to find a teacher or instructional material that would say otherwise.

But more importantly, listen to the music. The M-U-S-I-C. As Emory Lester says (and he's about as "modern" as you can get) "this isn't a contest -- it's music". After the statements in the first two breaks (the second subtly different from the first) Marty rips down a wonderful guitar solo that perfectly complements the tune -- not a showoff break (and he can play as machine gun as you want, if he choses to), no a musically-perfect complement. Monroe then just gets inspired for the third break, reaches another level of musicianship -- listen to the dynamics, that is impossible without excellent technique. No, I don't worship Monroe, but he is the TECHNICAL standard by which all others are judged. When he burst on the scene with Charlie it was like a thunderbolt from the blue -- there were other good mandolinists back then but no one could play as fast, as clean (yes), as melodically as Bill Monroe. When he formed his own band and brought the blues into his playing, it required a whole other approach. As Tim O'Brien has said (also a "modern master"), when he was young he followed Monroe from show to show just to see what he might do on a given night (like Deadheads, says O'Brien). 

I am happy to question Monroe or anyone else's music -- but the more I listen to Monroe -- and really LISTEN closely -- the more the genius comes out. Just listen to the famous Chop behind Richard Greene on Grey Eagle. Tell me that doesn't just make the tune -- and believe me, getting a chop to sound like that takes... wait for it... TECHNIQUE.

----------


## Mandolin Mick

You know, I never ever put a mark on my mandolins when I pick. But, if hacking up my mandolin made me play like Mr. Bill ... it's a good idea!  :Wink:

----------


## M.Marmot

> Please look up the word "implied". 
> 
> So now that we have established that you are not so great at analyzing my comments, do you have any analysis to share on Mr. Monroe's technique, as compared to the generally accepted best practices of current professional bluegrass mandolin performers and teachers?


Why no sir, i do not have anything to share with you, but i would like to suggest that players such as Mike Compton have offered some good analysis of Monore technique in interviews, including one here on the cafe, and that the style of play that he has developed from Monroe's playing is a different strain from those of the more lean and clean variety.... so i still question the existence of this general modern mandolin player you are posing. 

have a nice day now

----------


## Fred Keller

JonZ:  I hazard a guess that what rankles most is you haven't fully defined the word technique.  Therefore, people are left to their own devices to figure out what part of Monroe's playing you'd like more information on.  

You mentioned the following:  


> As I have already said, I have observed the following characteristics that I find questionable.
> 1. Not playing strict up-down on 8th notes.
> 2. Scraping in the picking area suggests extreme angle of attack.
> 3. Scraping in the picking area suggests tight grip on pick.


#1 is not, by my personal definition (see my post waaaaay back at the beginning), a technique issue.  #2 and #3 can be largely disproven by watching Monroe pick.  There are a fair amount of videos on youtube as well as the Homespun instructional DVD.  I've seen a lot--if not most--of them.  I don't see a tight pick grip nor do I see him finishing a pickstroke into the top of the mandolin.  In addition, I've had discussions with people like Skip Gorman, Mike Compton, Roland White, Richie Brown, and Bobby Osborne:  people who learned directly from Bill.  To a man, these folks said Bill had exceptionally good technique, held the pick loosely, and picked perpendicularly to the plane of the strings.

So how does one explain the wear?  I can't.  But I can surmise any number of things.  He had the thing for 50 years and used it constantly.  He wore rings IIRC.  Those could've scraped on the finish.  He may have dragged some of his fingers across the area.  Even if done lightly, this could cause a wear pattern over constant use for 50 years.  

I don't hear anyone here defending Monroe's playing *just because it's Monroe*.  He is, in my opinion, one of America's true genius musicians (I'd be happy to expound on this if you like ad nauseum) but he's not infallible nor is he sacred.  I do read a fair amount of confusion about what it is you really want to know.  Can you clarify?  Is there more to talk about here or has this thread degenerated into a series of posts that stick the beak in just to make the meat twitch?

----------


## John Ritchhart

I have attended many instructional camps in the past few years and got to see world class players/teachers back to back. I sat in a class taught by John Reischman immediately followed by a class taught by Emory Lester. There aren't two more different techniques in the world. And Alan Bibey is different and Don Stiernberg, etc. Would I like to sound like John Reischman? Would you? Heck Yea. Emory Lester? I would kill for it. Don Stiernberg? Fuggit aboud it. What I've learned is there is no right way. There is only your way. Just make it clean and tasteful.

----------


## M.Marmot

> JonZ:  I hazard a guess that what rankles most is you haven't fully defined the word technique.  Therefore, people are left to their own devices to figure out what part of Monroe's playing you'd like more information on.  
> 
> I don't hear anyone here defending Monroe's playing *just because it's Monroe*.  He is, in my opinion, one of America's true genius musicians (I'd be happy to expound on this if you like ad nauseum) but he's not infallible nor is he sacred.  I do read a fair amount of confusion about what it is you really want to know.  Can you clarify?  Is there more to talk about here or has this thread degenerated into a series of posts that stick the beak in just to make the meat twitch?


Well, first off, what you say at the start there, thats the case with me, i can see that there maybe a worthwhile discussion at the heart of all this but its hard to work only with things implied and generalised. 

Personally speaking, i have never worshipped at the church of Monroe and have spent a lot of time and energy exploring mandolin playing that exists beyond his legacy. It was not until i read inteviews with Mike Compton, who really seems to have put some good thought in on the subject, that i became intrigued by Monroe's playing and went back to listen to it again and to give it a fair ear. 

So, i'm not defending Monroe's playing either, and i would really like to see someone do a reasoned critique of some elements of his playing, we could only learn from that sort of discussion. Monroe's influence shadows a lot of contemporary mandolin playing and for that reason alone it should be examined to see its possibilities and limitations.

BUT, The only way for that to happen is to define some of the parameters, move beyond implied or imagined second-hand critique and circumstantial evidence such as scratches and dents. 

For instance, I'll return to M.Compton interviews again, 

Compton, has studied and is deeply influenced by Monroe's playing, yet, he is sound enough to acknowledge that not all that Monroe played was sterling, but, in terms of general technique he has only commended Monroe's playing. 

(though, i may be wrong in this, he might have insisted that there was no need to have your action as high as Bill set his? Someone here might be able to confirm that or not)

Anyhow, the point i'm going to go for is this, 

Compton, who seems to have put some effort into this, identifies, at least three, different stages of Monroe's playing, each with their own stylistic identity and each representing a development in Monroe's technique and playing. 

Now, right there, not only are we presented with a more complex understanding of Monroe's playing, because lets face it a players technique will develop throughout their career, but also if we were to take just one of these stages of Monroes development we might already be on better grounds for examination.

Would it be fair on Monroe to pick one stage in his career and say thats representative of his career as a whole?

Probably not, but it would be a steady place to start a comparison.

The other side of that comparison, this general modern bluegrass mandolist is also a bit unclear for me.

For me there is no real uniformity in style to modern bluegrass mandolin playing, there seem to be different trends that move from Monroe, some emphasize quick picking, some rhythm, focus more on the tremolo, as such i just find it disingenious to lump all these trends into one imagined homogenous generalized modern bluegrass mandolinist. 

Perhaps if we took this years 'Best Bluegrass Mandolin' player as voted for by folks here on the cafe or by folks on some comitee somewhere it might provide a workable example for comparison? Then again, maybe not.

----------


## JonZ

I think I have provided enough definition and clarification for anyone who wants to discuss Mr. Monroe's playing to do so. If you review the thread, you will find many interesting replies actually dealing with the topic of Mr. Monroe's technique and how bluegrass has or has not evolved.

As an interesting side trip, taking us into the world of banjo (always and interesting place). There is a book called "Earl Scruggs and the Five String Banjo" that is a Bible for many banjo players. In that book is a picture of Earl Scruggs' right hand, with his pinky and ring finger _splayed_ on the head of the banjo. Now the funny thing is that, apparently, Scruggs didn't really splay out his fingers like that when he played, but did so to accommodate the angle of the photograph.  Placing your hand in this way causes a lot of tension and can really make it hard to play.  Yet many players tried to emulate it, because it was Scruggs.

----------


## Fred Keller

Ok, then, I'll take a stand if you won't.

Monroe's technique remains excellent in my esteem and DID NOT evolve.  I've seen too much evidence of his picking technique through the years to notice much--if any--change in his basic technique.  He holds the pick the same basic way, he attacks the strings the same basic way and he frets the same basic way.

His style evolved...multiple times and due to numerous factors including age.  His various styles of picking (from faster and notier with his brother to spare and stripped down in his older years) do not show to me any change in technique.  Maybe you intend to focus this discussion on style now?

----------


## M.Marmot

> Ok, then, I'll take a stand if you won't.
> 
> Monroe's technique remains excellent in my esteem and DID NOT evolve.  I've seen too much evidence of his picking technique through the years to notice much--if any--change in his basic technique.  He holds the pick the same basic way, he attacks the strings the same basic way and he frets the same basic way.
> 
> His style evolved...multiple times and due to numerous factors including age.  His various styles of picking (from faster and notier with his brother to spare and stripped down in his older years) do not show to me any change in technique.  Maybe you intend to focus this discussion on style now?


Me?

Well, the general consensus (apart from the implied critique from anonymous sources) seems to be that, apart from a rather cavalier approach to mandolin maintenance, Monroe's playing technique is all kinds of good... and, not knowing any better, i'd go along with that.

Re-reading though the thread, as Jon-Z suggested i should, it seems that if people have quibbles with Monroe then on the whole they were mainly questions on playing style not playing technique. Which brings us back to the original question of whether there are elements of Monroe's technique which should be avoided?

Well given that no one on the thread has identified any particular technical fault in his playing and that the best evidence that such criticism may exist is only by implication in some anonymous tutorial i'd imagine that we are drawing pretty near a resounding NO, there are no obvious defects in Monroe's technique that should be avoided by the budding mandolin player.

On that note, apart from listening to recorded Monroe, is there any recomended teaching material that gets into a meaty discussion on Monroes technique?

----------


## Mike Bunting

> On that note, apart from listening to recorded Monroe, is there any recomended teaching material that gets into a meaty discussion on Monroes technique?


The only one I am familiar with is the two DVD Homespun set with Sam Bush. The first DVD consists of Hartford interviewing Monroe between tunes illustrating the different eras of his Music and the second disc has Bush analyzing the style with the video cutting back to the playing on the first disc for the examples.
 Again, I can only agree with your and Minnesota Fred's posts on the matter (looking at your avatar Fred, the Minnesota soubriquet comes to my mind  :Smile:   )
 Aside from the obvious great technique exhibited, I am inspired by the depth of vision and passion that is manifest in Monroe's music.

----------


## Rodney Riley

Wonder what an instructor would say to the lady that played my Weber left handed, strung up for me a right handed player. Is her technique wrong?  :Whistling:  (and I will never be able to play as fast as she did)

----------


## Glassweb

is it just my imagination or has this thread gotten way off base... and rather testy as well? i looked at the original post and i don't see anything obviously infuriating... the guy just posed a question, no? all the greatest BG mandolinists consider Monroe a genius blessed with amazing technique and imagination. bingo! don't believe me? just ask Mike C, Mike M, David, Frank, Sam, Ronnie, Adam, Herchell, Andy, Chris, Doyle etc...

----------


## mandocrucian

> So now that we have established that you are not so great at analyzing my comments,......
> 
> You ought to post this one in the "Bluegrass Hair" thread. There's some great bluegrass hair technique on display too. 
> 
> 
> 
> However, the credentials of the questioner are irrelevant to the validity of a question.
> 
> I think I have provided enough definition and clarification for anyone who wants to discuss Mr. Monroe's playing to do so


.

"Oh........, 
Yakking on the Polar Express,  
Yakking on the Polar Express...... 
Blah blah blah blah, Blah blah blah, 
annoying Know-It-All-Boy."




> Scott--Irony, like a martini, is best served dry.

----------


## journeybear

> ... all the greatest BG mandolinists consider Monroe a genius blessed with amazing technique and imagination...


As do a lot of us lesser and/or non-BG mandolinists.

I am reminded of the old saw (sorry, no citation), which goes something like:

Why does so-and-so do such-and-such thataway?
Because he can.

I would add: and wants to.

----------


## Glassweb

[QUOTE - journeybear;857942]As do a lot of us lesser and/or non-BG mandolinists.]

yep... i'm in that group myself - yet i always listen to Monroe and DREAM of having the right hand he has!

----------


## JonZ

Hey, I have a stalker!

----------


## Charlieshafer

> is it just my imagination or has this thread gotten way off base... and rather testy as well? i looked at the original post and i don't see anything obviously infuriating...


No fooling! My take on it is this: unlike violin "pedagogy" the fancy word for teaching techniques, there doesn't seem to have been any in mandolin studies until recently (the last 20 years or so.) Violin methods go back 300 years, so it's easy to say who has "proper" or "improper" technique. I'm not sure if anyone on the forum is old enough to know this first-hand (snicker snicker), but how was the mandolin taught during the heyday of the mandolin orchestras? I'm sure someone out there has some access to some printed methods, but does anyone know if there was the equivalent of the Suzuki method for mandolin? If there is the lack of a teaching standard, then Monroe was acting in a sort of vacuum, so the question of actual technique becomes moot, as there really wasn't a single "technique" to learn, just the basics, with a lot of trial and error to go on. 

Then geography enters into it: was Kentucky a hotbed of classicaly-oriented mandolin education? Was he ever taught what the proper technique, if it existed, was?  All too nebulous for those who follow the evolution of technique, it seems he was in his own orbit then, so what we consider proper technique now wasn't really a standard  then.

----------


## JonZ

From looking at the clip earlier, nothing jumped out at me that I would say looks like something that a teacher would tell you not to do. However, I am puzzled by the pick scraping on the front. Though I didn't see it in the clip, it is obvious from the look of his mandolin he does it sometimes. At first I thought it might have something to do with being heard above the rest of the band without modern amplification, but then someone said that some of the current pros have scraped up the front of their instruments too.

I find it almost impossible to play at an angle that makes my pick hit the wood. Does anyone know what benefit these pros are obtaining by playing with that kind of attack?

----------


## Dan Johnson

if you want to know something about the technique, just listen to the music with a mandolin in your hand. You'll figure it out.

----------


## Rob Fowler

> However, I am puzzled by the pick scraping on the front. Though I didn't see it in the clip, it is obvious from the look of his mandolin he does it sometimes. At first I thought it might have something to do with being heard above the rest of the band without modern amplification, but then someone said that some of the current pros have scraped up the front of their instruments too.
> 
> I find it almost impossible to play at an angle that makes my pick hit the wood. Does anyone know what benefit these pros are obtaining by playing with that kind of attack?


I have actually heard that one of the reasons Monroe's top was scraped up so much was possibly due to his cuff links on his jackets coming in contact. They might of actually been partly responsible. I could be wrong, though, so somebody please correct me if needed.

Then again I would maybe just quit wondering about it so much and just accept that that happens to instruments that have been played A LOT over many years. I think somebody else suggested that already.

Also, I must apologize to the group for being somewhat testy in my last reply. It wasn't fully necessary. Thanks. 

I do know that sometimes when I play with my band at a party and I've had a couple of (maybe more than a couple?...) of drinks that my picking has come across the wood sometimes...... :Wink:  Don't think Monroe really drank much though...nor does Mike Marshall..?...

----------


## Don Grieser

I'm guessing he wore that spot from spending more time playing his mandolin than posting on the internet.  :Wink: 

P.S. Follow Dan Johnson's advice.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

I just re-visited one of my favourite Monroe YouTube clips,of him playing _"Goldrush"_ along with Byron Berline,etc.,& his right hand pinky seems to brush the top of his Mandolin in much the same way as Sam Bush's does,hence a similar pattern of wear on both Mandolins & you could never accuse SB of wearing cufflinks (i could be wrong on that !). I honestly can't figure that any Mandolin player would hit the strings then 'pick-dive' to hit the top of the instrument. That would be a strange technique indeed (IMHO),
                                                                                                                                                                        Ivan

----------


## JonZ

Having you other fingers rub against the mandolin, rather than the pick, does make more sense.

Any players out there rubbing off your finish? How do you accomplish this?

----------


## JEStanek

Pinky Planting can rub off your finish.  Other notably scraped up mandolins below the e strings, Tim O'Brien's Nugget, Andy Statman's A2Z, Thile's Dude (some of that is attributed to bumping against the mic.  I guess instruments have pick guard/finger rests for a reason sometimes.  I'm not saying I know how it happens, just that there are other examples.  I'll speculate that as you whip it like a mule a'la WSM or emulate his style as Statman can, this can happen.

Jamie

----------


## pickloser

If Bill Monroe was aware of any "technique rules" when he taught himself to play mandolin, I believe accepted technique of the time would have favored downstrokes, when possible.  For a while, I took lessons that were "in the style of" lessons given in the early 20th Century.  I took from Jeff Foxall, who was taught by Walter Kaye Bauer (who studied with Sam Siegel), using the Bickford Method.  I'm not motivated to find the page(s) in the Bickford method that discuss it (a search will get you a link to the books), but I was taught that only the "fastest" notes that regularly occur in a piece should be DUDU (leaving aside 6/8 time and triplets). 

The rest should be downstrokes. My teacher, citing Mr. Bauer and Mr. Bickford said, if you can't play the second fastest notes in the piece with downstrokes, then you are going too fast and the fastest notes (the 16ths or 8ths) will be sloppy.  Moreover, if all notes could be played with down strokes, then all notes should be played with down strokes.  My teacher, again referencing his teacher and Bickford, pointed out that the down stroke is stronger, is more easily controlled, and is more likely to yield good tone.  It always strikes both strings in the course; often on an upstroke, one string only is hit.  So, if one is _able_ to play the fastest notes in a piece with all down strokes, one should do so.  

I cannot claim as much familiarity with Bill Monroe as I would like, but it seems to me his quick and powerful downstrokes were not "bad technique" then or now.  His disinclination to usd DUDU for all eight notes was, rather, a more advanced approach to eighth notes than most mere mortals can manage.  I can only guess whether WSM "knew" his downstrokes conformed to the accepted technique of the time.  I suspect that ol' Bill used them to get the sound he wanted and used DUDU when he wanted that sound.

----------


## Glassweb

Bill Monroe was from Kentucky and played blues-influenced string band music. Howard Armstrong, aka "Louie Bluie", was from Tennessee and played blues-influenced string band music during the same era as Monroe in the American south. Get a copy of the DVD Louie Bluie (or check out YouTube) and see how Armstrong picked a mandolin... a fascinating study in comparisons!

----------


## JeffD

> In all seriousness though, judging by a lot of players, folks seem intent on turning all mandolin solos into a perfectly smooth stream of single notes at breakneck speed with no rests.  It's really popular so someone must like it.  That someone isn't me though.


I saw it somewhere, I forget which thread:

"Perfection is the enemy of awesome."

----------


## Mike Bunting

> In all seriousness though, judging by a lot of players, folks seem intent on turning all mandolin solos into a perfectly smooth stream of single notes at breakneck speed with no rests.  It's really popular so someone must like it.  That someone isn't me though.


 I suspect that in this era's propensity to be impressed with the glitzy superficial aspects of everything, most people are likely to be wowed by fancy technique as opposed to real musical content.

----------


## Nelson Peddycoart

Mr. Monroe took up the mandolin because his siblings had grabbed up all the other instruments.  I believe I have read that he would liked to have been a fiddler.

He learned from fiddlers because fiddle players were who was available and fiddle music was such a large part of his world.

I wouldn't care if he played with a sharped nail on his big toe, holding the mandolin under his chin and standing upside down on his head.

The man's musical passion speaks to me in a very large way when I listen to his work.  That is really what matters.

Hasn't this thread gone on too long already?

----------


## Mandolin Mick

Jesse McReynolds told me that mandolin players were basically frustrated fiddlers. He said that he himself had always wanted to play the fiddle really bad ... and that's how he played the fiddle ... really bad!!!  :Laughing:

----------


## bobby bill

I may be naive but I am amazed by the animosity towards what seems to me to be a legitimate question.  I think the quirkiness in techniques and styles among the genius is an interesting topic.  Think Glenn Gould all hunched over a keyboard and humming away.  Is it blasphemous to wonder whether this technique should be taught to beginning pianists?

Now the answer (or your answer) may be that Bill Monroe is God and as such had perfect technique that should be emulated and taught to all mandolinists everwhere.  And I am probably not knowledgeable enough to argue otherwise.  But I don't think that answer diminishes the legitimacy of the question.

----------


## Mandolin Mick

The issue isn't the question of whether Bill Monroe had any flaws. The issue is that some people feel that the OP was trolling to get a rise out of the Monroe devotees here at the Cafe. The title of this thread was obviously meant to get peoples' attention and he basically admitted as much.  :Mad:

----------


## Ken_P

> My teacher, again referencing his teacher and Bickford, pointed out that the down stroke is stronger, is more easily controlled, and is more likely to yield good tone.  It always strikes both strings in the course; often on an upstroke, one string only is hit.  So, if one is _able_ to play the fastest notes in a piece with all down strokes, one should do so.


I disagree with this assessment. I think that if your down strokes are so much better than your upstrokes, you should work to make your up strokes stronger. Ideally, in a DUDU passage, every note should ring out clear and strong, regardless of pick direction.

Now, there are certainly valid artistic reasons to prefer all down strokes, as it does yield a different sound, but there is no one solution.

----------


## Charlieshafer

> If Bill Monroe was aware of any "technique rules" when he taught himself to play mandolin, I believe accepted technique of the time would have favored downstrokes, when possible.  For a while, I took lessons that were "in the style of" lessons given in the early 20th Century.  I took from Jeff Foxall, who was taught by Walter Kaye Bauer (who studied with Sam Siegel), using the Bickford Method.  I'm not motivated to find the page(s) in the Bickford method that discuss it (a search will get you a link to the books), but I was taught that only the "fastest" notes that regularly occur in a piece should be DUDU (leaving aside 6/8 time and triplets). 
> 
> The rest should be downstrokes. My teacher, citing Mr. Bauer and Mr. Bickford said, if you can't play the second fastest notes in the piece with downstrokes, then you are going too fast and the fastest notes (the 16ths or 8ths) will be sloppy.  Moreover, if all notes could be played with down strokes, then all notes should be played with down strokes.  My teacher, again referencing his teacher and Bickford, pointed out that the down stroke is stronger, is more easily controlled, and is more likely to yield good tone.  It always strikes both strings in the course; often on an upstroke, one string only is hit.  So, if one is _able_ to play the fastest notes in a piece with all down strokes, one should do so.  
> 
> I cannot claim as much familiarity with Bill Monroe as I would like, but it seems to me his quick and powerful downstrokes were not "bad technique" then or now.  His disinclination to usd DUDU for all eight notes was, rather, a more advanced approach to eighth notes than most mere mortals can manage.  I can only guess whether WSM "knew" his downstrokes conformed to the accepted technique of the time.  I suspect that ol' Bill used them to get the sound he wanted and used DUDU when he wanted that sound.


That's fascinating stuff. Thanks for the insight. It's always best, in my mind anyway, to get back as close as possible to the original sources.

Glass's recommendation on the Louie Bluie is equally interesting. There are a few DVd's out there featuring the evolution in old-time music in other instruments, a mandolin one, if it doesn't already exist, would be solid gold.

----------


## Earl Gamage

The op was trolling but I listened to a couple of Big Mon videos so I don't mind :Smile:

----------


## Mike Bunting

> The op was trolling but I listened to a couple of Big Mon videos so I don't mind


Glad to see that you made lemonade.  :Smile:

----------


## JonZ

Well, I suppose you could say I was "trolling" in that I wanted to get a lot of people to look at the topic. I often give my posts humorous, ironic, or mysterious titles to get people to take a look at them (see my other recent thread topic: "Stop the Jiggling"). No, I wasn't trying to get people riled up, but I guess I wasn't patient with people who kept challenging the question and my intent. 

I realize now that there have been a lot of threads that have been of the "Chris Thile could mop the floor with Big Mon" type, and some people are sensitive about it. That really is not what I was after. These last few pages have been very interesting to me. Pickloser's comments about the old mandolin teaching methods were fascinating (Ken-P--I don't think she was saying everyone should play that way today, but that it was the accepted method of a certain time and style.). And, I really want to take a look a Johnny Young now. I have listened to him a lot, but I will have to check out some video.

Anyway, I am glad the thread didn't die out due to some of the negativity (including some of my own), because there is some pretty interesting stuff here.

----------


## swampstomper

Go back and read the original post. Many of use were objecting to the **unsubstantiated** claims made there. If JonZ had said "I was watching Mr X's video, and he said, don't do it like Monroe" or had any other evidence that the "modern" mandolin players were advising against some of Monroe's techniques, it would have been a legitimate question. An "I suspect" that several (unnamed) teacher "imply" is the worst form of hearsay. I particularly objected because either he hasn't listened closely to Monroe's technique (I gave some examples in my first post, and the Southern Flavour video is a great example, with video as well as audio evidence) or he doesn't realize how technique relates to style.

Bill Monroe was by no means God, but he is to the blue grass mandolin (and all modern offshoots of it) the starting point. In terms of influence on instrumental style you have to compare him to Charlie Christian -- taking an obscure instrument and putting it front and centre. In the same way every significant electric guitarist from 1941 on specifically said they were inspired by and were trying to imitate (and then go beyond) Charlie Christian, every significant country mandolinist from 1936 on was inspired by Monroe -- many did not try to imitate him, rather preferring to develop their own style (McReynolds, Sizemore, Osborne, Busby) but all realized that Monroe had unlocked the key to putting the mandolin central in country music. And that requires technique -- without technique it is impossible for an artist to get the sound of the instrument they want.

It's more legitimate to ask "what aspects of Monroe's **style** are not followed" by "modern" mandolinists. For example, Bobby Osborne preferred to play all the notes in a fiddle tune rather than imply some of them (a well-known Monroe stylistic innovation). But that does not relate to Monroe's technique.

----------


## Mike Bunting

That sums it up quite well.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*Nelson* - I agree with your comment that Bill Monroe was a Fiddle player at heart. He adored that instrument & it's no great wonder that his Uncle Pen had such a massive influence on him musically. Regarding BM's 'style' - IMHO, the music that he 'heard in his head' & wanted to get out onto the Mandolin created his style. His Uncle Pen's Fiddle style & the Blues Guitar style of Arnold Schultz,were simply absorbed into the_ sound_ that he wanted create with his Mandolin,
                                                                                                                           Ivan

----------


## M.Marmot

> *Nelson* - I agree with your comment that Bill Monroe was a Fiddle player at heart. He adored that instrument & it's no great wonder that his Uncle Pen had such a massive influence on him musically. Regarding BM's 'style' - IMHO, the music that he 'heard in his head' & wanted to get out onto the Mandolin created his style. His Uncle Pen's Fiddle style & the Blues Guitar style of Arnold Schultz,were simply absorbed into the_ sound_ that he wanted create with his Mandolin,
>                                                                                                                            Ivan


One of the main keys for me learning to appreciate Monroe's playing was when i started listening to old time fiddlers, especially when the use open tunings. Gaining a better understanding and familiarity of that music meant that when i returned to Monroe's playing it began to reveal to me a range of dynamics i had been oblivious to. 

I can see how when he was younger the quick picking was one way of rattling out a fiddle tune but personaly speaking i think that when his playing becomes more impressionistic it is then that he finds a voice for the mandolin the comes closest to the fiddle, yet without it becoming a second fiddle so to speak.

I would like to ask, Monroe's debt to Uncle Pen is well documented, but what about his longstanding relation with Kenny Baker? How, if it all did Baker's playing influence Monroe's?

Apologies if that seems to bring it beyond the original question, but in my mind one of the essential differences between Monroes playing and that of a lot of todays mandolin players may be in their respective depth of relation of mandolin to fiddle.

Monroe's playing, while having some guitar influence, is deeply rooted in the fiddle tradition but, it seems to me, that a lot of todays mandolin players are developing a more guitar orientated sound, that of the first, quick clean picking model, over that of the second more impressionistic sound. 

I dont really find that too surprising, i reckon today's players are more influenced through overexposure to different guitar styles than they may be by fiddle and maybe that explains the attraction to the quick pick model of playing... then again maybe thats all in my head.

----------


## ralph johansson

I would believe that the scratched area on Monroe's mando comes from his fingertips touching the top. And I'm astonished that anyone can think of his downstrokes on  certain passages as a technical issue. I see no fault with his right hand technique, but it seems his left hand was a bit limited, probably the result of very high action.

Monroe was no God to me in my BG days. I took up the mandolin because I had transcribed several tunes form Howdy Forrester's Cub LP and was frustrated by all the awkward string crossings on guitar. I shaped my vocabulary form these songs, hence my respect for melodic detail. I transcribed a few of Monroe's tunes, e.g., Gold Rush. I took the first 4 bars o BG Pt. 1 and based my blues language on these and from Dusty Miller I learned the idea of superimposing the Dorian and Mixolydian over major chords. I also deciphered Rawhide and was shocked later by his lack of refinement in live versions. Oh. maybe I heard notes that weren't there , but I needed them.

If there's anything sloppy about Monroe's playing it's more about  taste and phrasing. Especially in  later years there's no snap to his phrasing, he just drifts along with the beat. I don't think I learned much from *any* mandolin player, instead I tried to adapt stuff from fiddlers and country guitarists like Harold Bradley and Zeke Turner. Today I would watch Chris Thile very closely because of his skillful development and contrasting of motives in his solos. He has very fast ears.

----------


## AlanN

Bill in his later years: I saw the BG Boys at Arnold Banker's Peaceful Valley festival a few times, this was in the late 80's, early 90's when he was 76 or so. Of course, he had slowed, wasn't as precise or intricate in his picking. I vividly remember him playing Rawhide, for a request, and he pretty much stayed within chord shapes, mostly rhythm breaks. I was still enthralled.

----------


## pickloser

> I disagree with this assessment.


  Okay.   :Smile:   I wasn't suggesting everyone do this or that they are wrong if they don't.  (I do think it's logical to use DUDU for the fastest notes and down strokes for the second fastest, though.)  I was only noting that one of the few formal mandolin teaching methods available at the time taught this, and a reputable professional mandolinist (Bauer was a contemporary and acquaintance of Mr. Loar) apparently accepted this as correct, and taught this to others in his later years.  

My teach also introduced me to some even older Italian mandolin methods, and Mr. Bickford seemed to borrow quite liberally from them.  My point being that Bickford had access to earlier methods, and I doubt he made that downstroke business up himself.  If the playing of WSM that I have heard (I heard him "live" only once) is any indication, he seemed to think downstrokes were particularly "pawhful."  

(Jeff Foxall is an excellent teacher and does not only teach "classically."  If you want straight up BG or OT or ITM, he won't bring out the Bickford.)

----------


## JonZ

Swampstomper--You make some good points. But I also said that we all want to sound like Monroe, and said several times after that that I was just interested in how the style has evolved. Still, some people kept going back to whatever may have been poorly stated in the OP. 

Also, suggesting, implying and so on may be hearsay, but I wasn't accusing the man of a crime, which some of the replies would lead one to believe.

There were plenty of people, right off the bat, who were able to go ahead and answer the question in regard to technique, and another batch who seemed to focus in on my intent. When two groups react so differently to the same post, it says something about the post, and also about the people responding.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*Marmot* - I think that all musicians worth their salt must learn from one another,even if it's subconciously. You hear what the other players are doing & pick up on something that you like, & maybe next time around on that tune / song,it'll be in there with all your other licks.
   I'm sure that Bill Monroe & all his Fiddle players learned something from each other. Bill Monroe was such a stickler for the things he believed were_ 'right for HIS music'_,that he'd go through tunes over & over with all his band members.Unless you're completely dim musically,it's hard _not_ to pick up something along the way, & with musicians such as Kenny Baker, Bobby Hicks etc,i'm sure that Bill Monroe picked up as much from them as they did from him,
                                                                                          Ivan

----------


## grassrootphilosopher

> Swampstomper--... we all want to sound like Monroe...
> I was just interested in how the style has evolved.


Now that you rephrased your question or rather clarified your intend with regards to your initial post let me jump on the thread once more.

Swampstomper pretty much focused on style and technique. If you´ll browse the threads you´ll find that he recently had a healthy dose of Bill Monroe schooling, and it shows (in a good way).

So I´ll try to stay out of swampstomper´s way trying to give my understanding of the evolution of Bill Monroe´s technique and style over the years giving examples that I strongly sugjest listening to. This can only broadbrush the topic understandably.

Bill Monroe started out as an oldtime related artist who had to cover melody arrangements that had to focus on the mere melody as the rythm was supplied by his brother Charlie who sometimes used heavily syncopated guitar bass runns. Bill Monroe therefore played single strings, double strings with very few blue notes with mostly a "running" feeling (listen to Rabbit In A Log from the Blueridge recordings). This keeps on going though the blues is more evident in his early Blue Grass Boys recordings (listen to Tennessee Blues). In the classic Bluegrass Boys lineup of 1946-´47 Monroe´s rythm swings a lot. He uses syncopated runs that are yet sweet and fluent. I suspect him to play rythm near the scroll of the mandolin (you can see this rythm technique in many youtube videos over the years; check out Uncle Pen for example) while playing the solo part over the fretboard extention (listen to Heavy Traffic Ahead [first Scruggs banjo solo if I´m not mistaken] or It´s Mighty Dark For Me To Travel). Fast forward to the time after the Flatt & Scruggs breakup with Monroe the music takes on a rougher note, it takes up a more raw pose, pain and the blues take over the picture. Monroe picks his solos closer to the bridge, the solos are heavily syncopated, the band provides the foundation on which the Monroe mandolin sails (an extremely powerful example is both the intro and the solo to Brand New Shoes).  It allmost seems that the band and Monroe disintegrate. While you may get this feeling it is important to also notice how well each instrument blends into each other and how well the overall sound is put together (despite the often quickly put together recording sessions and the sometimes less than optimal recorded sound). Go to the citybilly sound of the 60ies. Here Monroe blends into the band again and complements the musical powers of his fellow musicians (I can advise to listen to the whole Blue Grass Time and Bill Monroe´s Country Music Hall Of Fame record). In this time he still played heavily syncopated but less strident than in the 50ies. The 70ies saw a "slicker" band sound that came from the smooth fiddling of Kenny Baker (rather than the wild fiddle sound of let´s say Richard Greene [check out Blue Night - no mando solo there I guess]). If you listen to Monroe here you´ll find that Monroe falls back on more single string lines, less double stops, you´ll hear that he sometimes uses doubble notes (A string 7th fret and E string open) for effects, he still uses syncopation yet he does it to underline a prhase not to compose his solo with syncopated runs (listen to Jenny Lynn, Mulenburg Joy, Tall Pines). A good comparison between the 50ies and the 70ies is the different recording of Rocky Road Blues. In the 80ies Monroe dropped more and more notes from his soloes "hanging on the DUDU bluegrass motorboat motion". He shifted the musical lines thus creating interesting effects (listen to Sweet Blue Eyed Darling). Monroe played rythm and his solos mostly over the fretboard extention, holding the mandolin low (rock star like) while in the early days he wore it pretty high (40ies to late 60ies). This caused him to attack the strings differntly, causing a different sound.

Check the different styles through different recordings:
Very early vs. very late: Tennessee Blues (early Bluegrass Boys [40ies and Homespun video 1991)
It´s Mighty Dark For Me To Travel (See the different versions over the years on the Bear Family sets)
Rocky Road Blues (I refer you to the Bear Family sets with the 50ies and 70ies recordings)

I find it interesting to hear that while the band may be imperfect, Bill Monroe pulls it all together thus having created a powerful tune that nowadays is called a classic (for example Wheel Hoss or Tennesse Blues; the initial recording of Wheel Hoss shows a band that has not yet grasped the idea of the tune to its end - the outcome is an additional beat that makes the tune interesting; same with Tennessee Blues where the measures are divided most unorthodox in the first recording - extremely difficult to copy yet very pleasing to the ear if you manage it).

By the way, it may be that not everybody likes to sound like Bill Monroe, yet we are all indepted to him for creating music that makes us discuss different tastes and aproaches to mandolin music.

----------


## chris scott

When I was young I was told,"There is no such thing as dumb question"but I think that this comes pretty close. Just my 2 cents.

----------


## Alex Orr

> When I was young I was told,"There is no such thing as dumb question"but I think that this comes pretty close. Just my 2 cents.


I just think it was poorly phrased.  In the end, this thread has produced a lot of well-thought out posts looking in-depth at Monroe's playing...and a lot of insults to the OP.

----------


## allenhopkins

Yes, and a backhanded compliment to JonZ for evoking some very interesting responses, intentionally or unintentionally, by using a thread title that teetered on the edge of "trolling" -- which doesn't seem to have been his intent.  Again, I would have put quotation marks around "poor," but after five pages and 120+ posts, the useful discussion seems to have overpowered the questions about "OP intent."  Which is good, IMHO.

----------


## M.Marmot

> *Marmot* - I think that all musicians worth their salt must learn from one another,even if it's subconciously. You hear what the other players are doing & pick up on something that you like, & maybe next time around on that tune / song,it'll be in there with all your other licks.
>    I'm sure that Bill Monroe & all his Fiddle players learned something from each other. Bill Monroe was such a stickler for the things he believed were_ 'right for HIS music'_,that he'd go through tunes over & over with all his band members.Unless you're completely dim musically,it's hard _not_ to pick up something along the way, & with musicians such as Kenny Baker, Bobby Hicks etc,i'm sure that Bill Monroe picked up as much from them as they did from him,
>                                                                                           Ivan


Well, thats what i figure, Monroe and Baker played music together for near on half a century of so there must have been some give and take with each others sounds. Granted Monroe's Uncle Penn probably would have had a stronger influence as Monroe was younger when Penn was playing, but, i mean twenty five odd years with Baker surely thats got leave some traces and influence even in someone as stubborn as Monroe.

----------


## M.Marmot

Thanks for that last post, GrassrootsPhilo,thats some fine thought for considering.

----------


## Dan Johnson

It may be that, instead of "poor technique," what instructors may be guiding their students away from is "difficult/impossible" technique. 

As a guitar teacher (and elementary school teacher), I often have to make decisions about what the students are ready for in terms of their experiences and their growing repertoire of techniques. Many times I encourage students to adopt simpler approaches to a given end because I know that the more difficult techniques exceed their current ability, and would only serve to frustrate them. So, in response to your opening question, if it seems like instructional materials are encouraging beginners to avoid doing things like Monroe did them, it's probably because many advanced players can't hope to emulate the technical mastery that the man achieved. Much less is there hope of a beginner doing so.

If you are curious about the details of Monroe's technique, Lou Martin is a good resource, and he's on the internet. I would also like to thank some of the posts above: Olaf's post is an excellent response.

----------


## Tbone

Who's Bill Monroe?

----------


## JonZ

Pickloser--

I stumbled across the following description here:

_eBook: The Bickford Mandolin Method

I stumbled across this book while doing research on the right hand picking styles of pre-war guitarists, banjo players, and mandolinists. I had always suspected that the Gypsy Picking technique was employed by most plectrum players before WWII. Bickfords instruction clearly describes the same picking technique that Django and most other Gypsies use on the guitar. The use of predominately down strokes, all played as rest strokes, was the preferred technique of early 20th century mandolin virtuosos. And judging by the incredible playing of Dave Apollon, who I assumed used this same technique, its just as effective on mandolin as it is on guitar. 

Although the book covers numerous topics, he consistently returns to the importance of right hand technique. Most of the examples have pick stroke indications included. He also explains numerous special picking techniques. 

Bickfords book is also an excellent way to improve all around musicianship. He takes you from the basics of reading music to some very advanced mandolin duets and solo pieces. Youll also learn numerous scales and chords. For those of you without an accompanist, he has some very nice chord-melody solos written out. And finally, he provides information about the history of the instrument and its greatest players. 

I think mandolinists of any skill level will find this book beneficial. For mandolinists attempting to play Gypsy jazz, this is the closest thing you'll get to Gypsy Picking for mandolin. Learning the Gypsy picking technique as described by Bickford will help you get the right tone and attack for this music. 89 Pages._

Sounds like what you were describing.

----------


## Salty Dog

Perhaps the "teacher" aspect is the basis for this discussion.  The problem I have had with live teachers is that they seem to insist on teaching you to play stylistically as they do (with the implication that other ways are less desirable).  What I really wanted was instruction to help me play the way I wanted to play BETTER!  I guess that's why I have only paid for two lessons by different instructors.  I feel that part of the problem is the desire to imitate the ("scale notes per nanosecond") style of playing with only one break per key regardless of the melody, as opposed to a more emotional melodic approach with appropriate variations on tempo and force.  The latter often requires a lot of work (and individuality) to get the emotion the player feels into the music.  I feel WSM also spent more time on the latter and his speed was the result of practice and proficiency, but he did not let speed diminish the emotion of the melody.  Listening to the Columbia historical recordings of the classsic band with F&S (1945-1947), you can hear the forceful and aggressive mandolin of WSM develop as Scruggs evolved from the background to the foreground.  With Lester singing more and WSM singing less, he began to focus more on the mandolin as an instrumental competitor to the banjo, each trying to outdo the other on successive breaks.  This appears to be when the mandolin "chop" started to compete with the banjo "vamp" which probably came first.  It is when the "chops and vamps" moved slightly ahead of the beat to create an urgency to the music.  Its there for anyone to hear and analyze.   I do not believe you can critique the WSM mandolin style from an academic (musical or style of playing) point of view away from an analysis of the development of the "classic" bluegrass sound.  I think he, as well as Duffey, did what felt and sounded right to them with the music, without regard to playing style or technique.

----------


## swampstomper

For those who are interested, the Bickford book is available for free dowload from Archive.org, it was scanned from the NY Public Library. It is not in copyright.

I doubt Bill Monroe used this method! #1 he could not read music #2 his eyesight in his youth was very poor.

Look at page 44 "Fundamental Rules for Picking" for the logic behind using downstrokes. But as Bickford says, all rules have exceptions.

----------


## JonZ

Oh, and another thing that Bill Monroe did is sling his strap over one shoulder. Apparently to avoid having to remove his hat on stage, if he needed to take his instrument off. Hat hair was not considered good stage presence.

I don't think this is the way that most teachers, or chiropractors, would recommend holding your instrument these days.

----------


## AlanN

Was surprised to see this added to, then I looked and now I'm not surprised.

This has been talked and talked. Many do it this way, many do it that way. Right? Wrong? Who really cares?

----------


## JonZ

I added another example to this thread because some people were shocked--SHOCKED I tell you--that I would suggest that current instructional materials would recommend against doing some of the things that Monroe did. 

I think there is a continuum of thought on this. Some people gravitate more toward the "Do what feels right to you" camp and others to the "What is the best way?" camp. There is no right or wrong about where an individual exists on this spectrum. If you are going to be judgmental about people who are interested in discussing "correct" technique, you might as well tell all of the pros to stop producing instructional materials, and all of the teachers to get real jobs.

What surprises me is people who add to threads that they say have gone on for too long, and are on topics they claim not to care about. 

Is someone forcing you to read this thread?

----------


## JonZ

> This has been talked and talked.


By the way, did you know that you have submitted over 6000 posts? All of them completely necessary and utterly compelling, I suppose.

----------


## Scott Tichenor

This is a good time to end this compelling discussion. From this point forward use the PM feature to entertain each other. 

Here's my rule of thumb: any thread where the common member response is that the OP is trolling reflects a poorly crafted opening post. We're all human though so we'll chalk this up as a lesson learned and will expect to not see that in the future.

----------

