# Music by Genre > Bluegrass, Newgrass, Country, Gospel Variants >  Out-of-tune & Sloppy Recordings?

## sarai

WHy does so much bluegrass - especially the old classic stuff sound out of tune?  I almost can't tolerate that.  I think that's why I'm drawn to "newgrass".  Cleaner playing, and usually precise and in tune.

Now I have been trying to familiarize myself with classics.  I downloaded "Red Haired Boy", a version by the "The Ball Sisters Band" and I don't know much about this group but the fiddle was so flat and the guitar picking sounded sloppy (ha like something I play coz I'm not that good)...

And it occurred to me that a lot of the older stuff sounds sloppy and out of tune.  

How much of this is stylistic and desired in bluegrass? Me, I prefer the groups who play cleanly.

----------

Steve-o

----------


## MikeEdgerton

Let's take a trip back in time before there were electronic tuners. Ever listen to the "modern" group Poco? Ever tried to play along with any of their records? People used to tune to each other. 

As for the fiddle, I'm always amazed at how good a fiddle can sound live and then when I listen to the recording of the same show how often they are flat or sharp. Never noticed it in person, always pick it up in the recording. Seems to be the nature of the beast. Some fiddle players are right on some aren't. No frets. 

As for the old stuff, it isn't always perfect but then again they didn't get to do 30 takes on each song. Keep in mind all of those newgrass guys learned it from the oldgrass guys. If you need superclean perfection don't go to any live shows.

----------


## Jim Garber

I don't know about bluegrass, but i do believe that there is a difference in intonation in some other folk forms. Certainly blues is very different and prob sound out of tune to a classically trained person. I do recall Matt Glaser commenting may years ago that he listened to some old time fiddlers and realized that there was a different scale from std classical music played on the violin. Some notes in the scale would be slightly flat or sharp but there would be some consistency to that. They may have just heard that differently.

----------


## Steve Lavelle

Some out of tune recordings may be an artifact of the technology. It was not unusual during the tape era to change the speed of the tape, and that changes the tuning. Speeding it up so the tuning changed by more than a half step is obvious (the chipmunks)
but there was a time when radio stations wouldn't play songs over 3 minutes and the recording was adjusted to accommodate that if the band played for a little more than that.

----------


## AlanN

I don't think many of the early, classic bands tolerated out of tune instruments. They were the pros of the day. Sure, some was rough and grainy, but that was then, this is now. Different era.

----------


## sarai

> Let's take a trip back in time before there were electronic tuners.


 Ha that thought did run through my mind that we all use these electronics to tune.



> Keep in mind all of those newgrass guys learned it from the oldgrass guys.


 Yes - humbled by this, and I do try to learn from these, but it doesn't mean that these are the recordings I have a preference to listen to for pleasure.  But I study them as homework I suppose.



> If you need superclean perfection don't go to any live shows.


 Don't know why but for some reason it doesn't bother me as much live, unless it's just horrible.  You know what I mean.



> It was not unusual during the tape era to change the speed of the tape, and that changes the tuning


 Possibly but what I meant was one particular instrument more out of tune than the others on the same recording.


*Jim Garber* - what's the story behind your picture?

----------


## Willie Poole

Modern equipment can make any band sound in tune if the tech knows what he is doing...I have heard recordings where a fellow and a lady were singing together and sounded like they were right on pitch when in fact the original recordings were no where near in the same key...

   Also after many years of playing tapes the tape stretches and always sounds out of tune when being re mastered and sold as CD`s...I find this when I am re doing my cassettes onto CD`s.....And like Mike said in the old days bands tuned by ear usually to where ever the guitar was tuned and then if and when they capoed up to another key not all of them were right on as far as intonation was concerned....I have some recordings where the fiddle sounds way off but when we did the actual recording it sounded spot on, can`t explain it but it must have something to do with the tones of a treble instrument because I have heard it with mandolins also.....

    Willie

----------


## Michael H Geimer

> ... but it doesn't mean that these are the recordings I have a preference to listen to for pleasure.


Listen to them as study. Things other than the out-of-tune instruments will become more clear with repeated listening.

e.g. I can only listen to The Carter Family by myself, as no one else I know will tolerate hearing those old recordings.

----------


## Jim Garber

> *Jim Garber* - what's the story behind your picture?


That is what Jethro Burns (of Home and Jethro) called  the demented chord, really a joke. I took a weeklong workshop with him many years ago and we all posed with that chord in the class photo which has since vanished form the face of the earth.

----------


## sunburst

I once heard this statement from some "expert", speaking on the radio about recording orchestras and the associated difficulties. "First of all, you have to understand that recording is a _business_." He then went on to talk about how nice it would be to move mics around, improve the signal, do extra takes etc., but they need to get it done and get those expensive musicians out of there! Playing music may be an art, but when it comes to _commercial_ recording, (the source of those out-of-tune recordings), that is a business.

----------


## JeffD

> And it occurred to me that a lot of the older stuff sounds sloppy and out of tune.  ... Me, I prefer the groups who play cleanly.


That will limit yer jamming opportunities.  :Laughing:

----------


## Jim Garber

I think there is a difference between playing out of tune -- certain variance from what is, to our ears as standard tuning on some notes -- and the tuning changes from older recording technologies. I know that early recording technologies would certainly change the pitch with possibly inconsistent speeds of the original recordings -- not necessarily the overall speed but the inability to maintain a constant speed. 

OTOH I am not sure that is what Sarai is talking about. I highly doubt she is listening to early 1930s/40s recordings. It may just be her sensibility to the intonation of folk music. it is possibly that the "high lonesome, sound" does not appeal. Perhaps Sarai can let us know her listening background and experience.

----------

Marty Henrickson

----------


## Marty Henrickson

Right.  I can't say I'm familiar with the "Ball Sisters Band", but if I was trying to learn "Red Haired Boy", that's probably not where I'd start.  I'm sure there are probably dozens of versions on youtube.

----------


## Jean Fugal

Bill Monroe and Lester Flatt along with Old Fiddlers Melvin Wine and Tommy Jarrell Knew exactly how and where to play the "old tones"

----------


## sarai

> not necessarily the overall speed but the inability to maintain a constant speed.


 I think this may be the very issue I am having.




> I highly doubt she is listening to early 1930s/40s recordings.


 Yes I think Bill Monroe & Carter Family recorded in this time or into the 50's right?

So I think largely I am mistaking out of tune-ness with the problems in recording technology from the time.

Ok but another thing, is the clean-ness of the playing.  Now I think modern pickers tend to be cleaner, have more note separation. Genius that he was, Bill Monroe's playing however is less-clean.  So I have been continually interested in the general topic of how the music evolved in that way.

I hadn't heard much of this old style until I heard something similar on this "The Ball Sisters Band" recording which is more modern.  So ...

*if I had to rephrase my entire question it would be this ....*

Why is this group of musicians playing sloppy and out of tune? Is it because A.) IS it stylistic (to sound like the old timers kinda do) or B.) Lack of ability to play better

----------


## mingusb1

For me most of the "clean" bluegrass goes too far all the way to sterile.  The players have honed technique so much that often I don't hear any real life or excitement in the tune/song.  Add to this the fact that most or all modern recordings are multi track.  So if the mandolin player misses a note he goes back and fixes it.  And every instrument in the ensemble is sort of compelled to do the same, so by the end there really aren't any irregularities or mistakes in the cut.  

The old recordings were live, so mistakes are captured but so is the energy that comes from live band playing.  Like where the fiddle kick-off is so hot that the singer comes in with all the emotion they have, and then later the banjo player aims to show the fiddler how it's done!  You see what I'm saying.

Now it's true that there are many cleaner players than Monroe, but if you sit down and listen to his Bluegrass Breakdown you might convince yourself that "sloppy" can be perfect!

Z

----------

Marty Henrickson

----------


## Mike Bunting

> For me most of the "clean" bluegrass goes too far all the way to sterile.  The players have honed technique so much that often I don't hear any real life or excitement in the tune/song.  Add to this the fact that most or all modern recordings are multi track.  So if the mandolin player misses a note he goes back and fixes it.  And every instrument in the ensemble is sort of compelled to do the same, so by the end there really aren't any irregularities or mistakes in the cut.  
> 
> The old recordings were live, so mistakes are captured but so is the energy that comes from live band playing.  Like where the fiddle kick-off is so hot that the singer comes in with all the emotion they have, and then later the banjo player aims to show the fiddler how it's done!  You see what I'm saying.
> 
> Now it's true that there are many cleaner players than Monroe, but if you sit down and listen to his Bluegrass Breakdown you might convince yourself that "sloppy" can be perfect!
> 
> Z


You nailed it. Modern society goes way too far out of it's way to eliminate the grit and funk out of life on general.

----------

Marty Henrickson

----------


## allenhopkins

If you go back to the 1920's and '30's, recordings were made in one take, and no overdubbing or recording different parts in different channels.  Musicians played just the way they played on stage, into recording equipment that just reproduced what it "heard."  If a take wasn't acceptable, it was thrown out and they tried again.

Plus, recording companies took their equipment where the musicians were, setting up in music stores, hotel rooms, small-town auditoriums, wherever.  The idea of a "recording studio" with a multiplicity of microphones, a "board" where "tracks" could be "mixed," and the capability to "fix" or "sweeten" particular parts, was well in the future.

Also, many of the musicians recorded were part-timers, fruit-tree salesmen (A P Carter) or farmers, unschooled and improvisational.  Their performances could be inspired, beautiful musical train wrecks:



Jeez, I _love_ Carter Brothers & Son!  But whothehell could record and sell something like that now?  It's not "clean," "precise," all the things that the record producer and the studio engineer would demand now.

Did I mention I love it?

Don't go to a bull looking for milk, and don't go to older recordings looking for the same qualities you'll find in the latest Nashville recording project.  You'll find incredible energy, dazzling virtuosity, stylistic pioneering, and real "roots music," but you'll also find technological and technique limitations, and sometimes the triumph of aspiration and inspiration over skill and precision.  And, "so what?"

----------


## mandolirius

I think it would be interesting to have a couple of examples of these "out of tune" recordings.

----------


## John Duncan

Sarai, the classic groups like Monroe from 45-46, Stanley Brothers, Flatt and Scruggs, The Country Gents, etc are absolutely imperative listening for your ear training for bluegrass, IMHO. 

The "smooth/clean" groups I used to love don't hold up now that my ear is MUCH better. The more you listen, the better musician you become.

----------


## barney 59

> That is what Jethro Burns (of Home and Jethro) called  the demented chord, really a joke. I took a weeklong workshop with him many years ago and we all posed with that chord in the class photo which has since vanished form the face of the earth.


John Rossette thinks he has it ---m a y b e----in a box in his garage that he plans to look for some day -----

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

The pitch of the tunes on the first 'Dillards' recording,"Backporch Bluegrass" is all over the place.Until i bought a record turntable with a variable speed motor,i couldn't practice along to it.When the recording was put onto CD,there was an opportunity to iron out the pitch,but it went onto the CD just as it was. I've heard (& bought) quite a few old Bluegrass recordings where the pitch is off.There's nothing you can do about it,so i just listen.I also hear many tunes on I'net Bluegrass radio stations where the pitch is off. I tried to pick along with a _Vern Williams Band_ tune a couple of days ago,but it was in Bb#. I have the 2 VWB recordings on CD & some of the tunes are fine,but others are 'not quite right' !,
                                                                                           Ivan :Grin:

----------


## Mike Bunting

Bb#?  B maybe?

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> That is what Jethro Burns (of Home and Jethro) called  the demented chord, really a joke. I took a weeklong workshop with him many years ago and we all posed with that chord in the class photo which has since vanished form the face of the earth.


OT: I'm glad someone asked the  question that I've had ever since I saw at avatar!  :Smile:

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> The pitch of the tunes on the first 'Dillards' recording,"Backporch Bluegrass" is all over the place.Until i bought a record turntable with a variable speed motor,i couldn't practice along to it.When the recording was put onto CD,there was an opportunity to iron out the pitch,but it went onto the CD just as it was. I've heard (& bought) quite a few old Bluegrass recordings where the pitch is off.There's nothing you can do about it,so i just listen.I also hear many tunes on I'net Bluegrass radio stations where the pitch is off. I tried to pick along with a _Vern Williams Band_ tune a couple of days ago,but it was in Bb#. I have the 2 VWB recordings on CD & some of the tunes are fine,but others are 'not quite right' !,    Ivan


Actually Ivan there is one good solution. Rip the CD to digital (mp3's) and then play it on something like Amazing Slow Downer where you can vary the pitch and not alter the tempo.  At least one of the old Monroe LP's seems to be a half pitch off (e.g., songs in A are in A#) so I think the band might have intentionally tuned high or Monroe's mandolin was off that day as I'm sure everyone else would have had to tune up to him!  :Smile:    I think they did it intentionally however for effect or to make it hard to copy their stuff?

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Bb#?  B maybe?


I think Ivan could be right.  Afterall Frank Wakefield plays his tune Catnip with "....with all those G's and F's and Kb#'s in it...."

----------


## Charlieshafer

I get to be the contrarian again, and disagree with a few comments. If today's players that you're listening to aren't delivering excitement then it's the fault of those players specifically. I think the technical prowess of today's players (especially noticeable on violin) are far higher just due to the degree and quality of music education. After training, it's back to the individual's ability to play musically and with soul and excitement. Now the problem becomes a number's game: the surviving recordings we have of the old guys represent the best of the best, and the sound is a result of tuning to each other as well as technical limitations. (Don't forget the consistency of the level of current being generated as critical, voltages were all over the place years ago). New recordings? There are so many of them and it's so easy to do that we as a listening group haven't had time to distill them down yet. It'll take a few years to let the dust settle. 

But, technically, there's no doubt that today's players are better trained, and from a technical standpoint, aside from a very few rare exceptions, play better than their predecessors, which is really the heart of the O.P.'s point, I think. As for soul, as always through the years, some got it, some don't. To revere the old recordings and pan all the newer ones is just nostalgia.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Let's take a trip back in time before there were electronic tuners. Ever listen to the "modern" group Poco? Ever tried to play along with any of their records? People used to tune to each other.


In my Bluegrass days, in the late 60's, there were no electronic tuners. But there were tuning forks and we used them. Also, in the studios there were pianos and they were kept in tune.

How could a singer possibly sing in tune if the rest of the band tuned sharp or flat?

----------


## mandolinlee

I agree with Mike Edgerton, electronic tuners have improved music playing and listening. Also, about tuning to each other, how many remember those bluegrass festivals from the early 1970's? Every jam group was tuned a little differently from the last or the next one you tried to play with. Some in tune pretty well, some not quite so good. But they sure were a fun learning experience. Plus it's fun to reminisce with friends who were there.
Lee

----------


## Gary Hedrick

> For me most of the "clean" bluegrass goes too far all the way to sterile.  The players have honed technique so much that often I don't hear any real life or excitement in the tune/song.  Add to this the fact that most or all modern recordings are multi track.  So if the mandolin player misses a note he goes back and fixes it.  And every instrument in the ensemble is sort of compelled to do the same, so by the end there really aren't any irregularities or mistakes in the cut.  
> 
> The old recordings were live, so mistakes are captured but so is the energy that comes from live band playing.  Like where the fiddle kick-off is so hot that the singer comes in with all the emotion they have, and then later the banjo player aims to show the fiddler how it's done!  You see what I'm saying.
> 
> Now it's true that there are many cleaner players than Monroe, but if you sit down and listen to his Bluegrass Breakdown you might convince yourself that "sloppy" can be perfect!
> 
> Z


Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

----------


## Gary Hedrick

As said in a number of the posts....."in tune" was where the guitar player was ......sometimes some smarta** would have a pitch pipe but rarely would it be used. So there was a sort of "floating" standard tuning. A lot of the really top players had perfect pitch and would tell the guitar player to tune up or down. But we still used the guitar's tuning as the base .....

----------


## doc holiday

There was music before the electronic tuner.  Take several e. tuners & they won't be perfectly in agreement.  A guitar tuned to standard e. tuner won't be in tune in every key...the nature of the beast.  Stringed instruments require some degree of 'sweetened tuning.'

----------


## journeybear

Some of the old field recordings of blues musicians were made playing into a Victrola, which recorded directly onto a 78 rpm record. Easy to transport and operate, inexpensive and effective, this was a way to bring the recording capability to the musician. There was a limit to how long a song could be or the end would get cut off. Sometimes the musician would be told to speed it up mid-song in order to get it all in. I remember hearing some with _three_ tempos - the second tempo wasn't fast enough! Sometimes the recording engineer (er, Victrola owner) would put a little pressure on  the turntable with his hand or finger to slow it down and make more time, so then when played back at regular speed the tempo would increase, but this time the pitch as well. Recordings made this way surely included bluegrass, jug band, country, any form of music being played in rural areas.

----------


## Willie Poole

Some of the recodrs from the 60`s were recorded at different times and days so if you even tried to play along with them you almost had to re tune for every song...The bands would take a lunch break and when they came back the guitar player would tune by ear and the rest would tune to him, since time was money they very seldom checked the intonation when capoing up to a higher key such as B so then the banjo and guitar would hardly ever be on the same pitch...I used to ask the guitar player to put his capo on and the rest would tune to his A and then if we had to drop down or go up it usually sounded close enough to each other to get by.....

    Many of the older bluegrass bands all tuned to one note above standard, they claim it sounded better for bluegrass....At festivals I have walked around and got into jams and had to tune to fit each one, about 20 times a day, usually by the time I got in tune they were ready to quit, or maybe it was my playing, I never did figure that out....

   Just listen to the music and then try to play the song your way....

    Willie

----------


## Beanzy

The fiddler may want to pull the tuning off and may prefer that tension it creates. It's something you have to judge. Once they get their ear in for that tuning tension they'll be continually looking to pull against the other instruments so there's a 'strain' as they pull their tuning away from the others. I ve heard a lot of irish fiddlers playing slightly against the fretted instruments. It gives a different sound, as you've heard, but it's an aquired taste to say the least. We can't do it on the mando without doing string bending which sounds different as the tuning is heard to move rather than being just slightly # / b .

----------


## Marty Henrickson

I still think it's ironic that we're talking about all this old stuff, when the OP actually referenced a current band, the Ball Sisters Band.

----------


## journeybear

Not ironic, really, just a lot more fun.  :Wink:

----------


## sunburst

> I still think it's ironic that we're talking about all this old stuff, when the OP actually referenced a current band, the Ball Sisters Band.


Could be because of the first line of the OP; "WHy does so much bluegrass - *especially the old classic stuff* sound out of tune?". (Emphasis added.)

----------


## journeybear

Exactly. She also said, in the OP:




> And it occurred to me that a lot of the older stuff sounds sloppy and out of tune.


Now, she did adjust her question later: 


> if I had to rephrase my entire question it would be this ....
> 
> Why is this group of musicians playing sloppy and out of tune? Is it because A.) IS it stylistic (to sound like the old timers kinda do) or B.) Lack of ability to play better


While I am not familiar with this particular band, I have heard something similar on recordings from a long time ago. That is an interesting subject, touching on music history and the development of recording technology and I suppose a bit of anthropology and geography and other tangential factors. But if this is only about slamming one band for playing and/or recording in a sub-standard manner, there isn't too much to be gained from discussing that. Pop another CD into the player, click on the next file on your iPod, or better yet, pick up your mandolin and pick a few the way you want to hear 'em. Just be sure and tune up first.  :Wink:

----------


## Marty Henrickson

Yes, I have read the entire thread, and I wasn't really trying to slam the OP (or the Ball Sisters for that matter - I think 'family bands' are a great thing).  Just making an observation that I was surprised noone else had made.  Probably too obvious.  :Wink: 

Oh, and irony *can* be fun!

----------


## Don Grieser

You guys have it all wrong. It's Bb natural.

And I'll take raw emotion over NashVegas slick any day.

----------


## JeffD

> The "smooth/clean" groups I used to love don't hold up now that my ear is MUCH better. The more you listen, the better musician you become.



Yes!

Is the goal is to play expressive music espressively with exhuberance, or is the goal to get it exactly right. Its easy to take either side to the extreme, but on balance I error onthe side of exhuberance.

----------


## journeybear

Marty - Didn't mean that for you, but the OP. She seems to keep coming back to The Ball Sisters Band, with whose music I am unfamiliar, so I don't know exactly what set her off. And I don't really want to buy and listen through their catalogue to find out. Perhaps an example or two would help clarify that part of this thread. Usually does.  :Wink:

----------


## Marty Henrickson

Steve, if you're really curious about the Ball Sisters, click the link in my post above, and you can listen on their soundclick page.  Not horrible, but I didn't rush right out and buy their entire catalog, either.  :Wink:  

I hold to my point that if you want to learn the melody to a song or tune (going back to the OP), then you listen to versions of that song or tune performed by the masters, not the first version you find on the internet.  YMMV :D

----------


## mandolirius

> I still think it's ironic that we're talking about all this old stuff, when the OP actually referenced a current band, the Ball Sisters Band.


I listened to a few cuts on their website and think I may have found what the OP was referring to. I didn't hear "out of tune" playing but there is a pretty hard-core rendition of Dusty Miller that has some aspects of oldtime fiddle playing one may think of as out of tune.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

From *Mike Bunting* -_ "Bb#? - B maybe ?"_ . Errr - not quite Mike !, :Grin: 
                                                                                                       Ivan :Wink:

----------


## M.Marmot

I'm a chiming in to add my tuppence...

It seems that this is another instance of one of those perennial debates that occasionally open up here on the cafe boards and (i may be wrong on this) one that seems to plague the Bluegrass section more than others. 

There seems to be a real tension in bluegrass between technical proficiency and the emotional immediacy, and for my money (all tuppence worth) this tension has always been there and is integral to the music's identity. For instance, in my mind this tension between technique and emotion is what lend the excitement to a lot of Mr. Monroe's music.

Today's musicians do have greater technical means than the older generations but they also have a greater awareness of different musical styles, including those older styles, which means that today's musicians also have a greater choice of what they can play, some choose toward technical clarity, others toward emotive impression. Again, I think this tension will always be implicit in Bluegrass and it is those musicians who can play this tension that produce the most interesting material.

However, when it comes to the marketing of Bluegrass albums these days i do think that the bias, among established labels, does tend more toward pushing a technically slick, sophisticated, and most importantly, accessible product over those recordings that may still retain the raw burr of rough immediacy.

For my tastes sometimes this type production values seems almost like an over-compensation, anxious to shake off the stain of the soil and still trade on the roots, they place too much of the burden on the technical and lose the tension and excitement. Unfortunately these are also the type of album which provide a lot of the contemporary audience their introduction to Bluegrass, which may give a taste for the product but not a real taste for the flavor of the music.

Moving from modern recordings to older recordings can be like moving into a whole different sonic-environment for new listeners, the shock of vocals stripped of reverb, instruments tuned by ear, recordings worn by time, can prove too much for some, but for those who persevere they are often led to re-appraise a lot of their own musical tastes and values for the better.

Older recordings are not always better than today's offerings, and of older recordings its not only the best that has endured, i'm convinced that things are a little bit more random than that, but a lot of older recordings are still remarkably relevant to a modern listener and can prove a rich resource for a modern musician.

Of today's musicians - why do some play out of tune or produce sloppy recordings?

Some are doing so on purpose because they find that it suits them and its what they want to do.
Others are doing so because they are not technically proficient as musicians or in recording technology.

The relative ease in recording which we have today allows musicians of all levels to publish their efforts for relatively low expense and it also allows for a greater variety of musical flavors to be aired by-passing the tastes of major labels - but this also means that not every recording will be smooth and polished... rough diamonds and all that. 

Just keep a keen ear open and try not to judge too harshly or too quickly because you might just cut yourself off from something wonderful.

----------

Marty Henrickson

----------


## Charlieshafer

> I'm a chiming in to add my tuppence...
> 
> Just keep a keen ear open and try not to judge too harshly or too quickly because you might just cut yourself off from something wonderful.


And that about wraps it up for me. Great statement, M. I do feel a lot of this is also cyclical. There was that great period where a lot of younger musicians were far more into capturing the spirit of the old music and worried less about the technical aspects, most notably Old and IN The Way, the Correctones (Bruce Molsky's birthplace, musically) or the Highwoods Stringband. That was overtaken by the first new wave of technical virtuosity, like the Newgrass Revival, or the Tony Rice Unit. And from there, it flips back and forth between really-hard-stuff-to-play and great soulfulness. But it's not a generational thing, no way no how. It's just a choice of how the musicians want to play. Dirk Powell is one younger guy who plays with incredible emotion, and that's just a start. The simple fact is you can play with virtuosity and soul at the same time, it's been done before and being done now. 

One sort of neat evolution going on (let's see how it turns out after a few years) is some of the newer young bands intentionally tuning slightly off each other to really go for that "old time" sound. So now, is that "old time" sound they're going after the result of poor recording equipment or poor playing? I don't know, I wasn't there.

----------


## SincereCorgi

> I listened to a few cuts on their website and think I may have found what the OP was referring to. I didn't hear "out of tune" playing but there is a pretty hard-core rendition of Dusty Miller that has some aspects of oldtime fiddle playing one may think of as out of tune.


Yeah, after listening to these people, I don't really get what the OP's point was. It sounds like pretty typical modern family-band bluegrass, and a lot cleaner than a lot of 'golden age' stuff.

----------


## SincereCorgi

> One sort of neat evolution going on (let's see how it turns out after a few years) is some of the newer young bands intentionally tuning slightly off each other to really go for that "old time" sound. So now, is that "old time" sound they're going after the result of poor recording equipment or poor playing? I don't know, I wasn't there.


Oh man, seriously? Historical informed performance for bluegrass? That's awesome. You have any links for that?

----------


## JeffD

> Moving from modern recordings to older recordings can be like moving into a whole different sonic-environment for new listeners, the shock of vocals stripped of reverb, instruments tuned by ear, recordings worn by time, can prove too much for some, but for those who persevere they are often led to re-appraise a lot of their own musical tastes and values for the better.
> 
> Older recordings are not always better than today's offerings, and of older recordings its not only the best that has endured, i'm convinced that things are a little bit more random than that, but a lot of older recordings are still remarkably relevant to a modern listener and can prove a rich resource for a modern musician..


Yes yes yes

----------


## JeffD

I tried "wet" tuning on my mandolin once - like wet tuning on an accordion.

Well OK, if you must know, it wasn't on purpose.

----------


## Charlieshafer

> Oh man, seriously? Historical informed performance for bluegrass? That's awesome. You have any links for that?


Let me try to dig a few out; they're all still "trying it out".

----------


## ralph johansson

> I agree with Mike Edgerton, electronic tuners have improved music playing and listening. Also, about tuning to each other, how many remember those bluegrass festivals from the early 1970's? Every jam group was tuned a little differently from the last or the next one you tried to play with. Some in tune pretty well, some not quite so good. But they sure were a fun learning experience. Plus it's fun to reminisce with friends who were there.
> Lee


It's hard to imagine how a graphical device could possibly improve people's listening ability. What's true is that electronic tunders have made it easier to finetune on stage or in noisy environments. And that's all.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Actually Ivan there is one good solution. Rip the CD to digital (mp3's) and then play it on something like Amazing Slow Downer where you can vary the pitch and not alter the tempo.  At least one of the old Monroe LP's seems to be a half pitch off (e.g., songs in A are in A#) so I think the band might have intentionally tuned high or Monroe's mandolin was off that day as I'm sure everyone else would have had to tune up to him!    I think they did it intentionally however for effect or to make it hard to copy their stuff?


In notation the key of A# would require 10 sharps, 3 doubles and 4 singles. The proper designation is Bb, 2 flats. No Monroe studio LP was recorded in one day and there is, to the best of my knowledge, no recording of Monroe's where the "intended" key is A, and the actual key is Bb. He did, however, record a few songs in Bb, e.g., the Columbia version of Blue Moon of Kentucky, I'm on my Way to the Old Home, Sailor's Hornpipe, and Cheyenne. I know some people believe that they tuned high on these numbers (in mid-session !!) probably because they don't master they key of Bb themselves. 

There are three tunes where the actual key is a half-step higher than the "intended" one. First, there are the two duets with Edd Mayfield, First Whippoorwill and Christmas Time is Coming, which sound like Ab and F but are really in G and F. Maybe the tape speed was doctored with, maybe they tuned high - in the latter caes there's nothing random about it, because there's a vibraphone on one of the songs. The third example is Brown County Breakdown, which sounds like F, but where open strings give it away as E. I've no idea what was going on there, and I forget which other tunes were recorded at the same session.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Some of the recodrs from the 60`s were recorded at different times and days so if you even tried to play along with them you almost had to re tune for every song...The bands would take a lunch break and when they came back the guitar player would tune by ear and the rest would tune to him, since time was money they very seldom checked the intonation when capoing up to a higher key such as B so then the banjo and guitar would hardly ever be on the same pitch...I used to ask the guitar player to put his capo on and the rest would tune to his A and then if we had to drop down or go up it usually sounded close enough to each other to get by.....
> 
>     Many of the older bluegrass bands all tuned to one note above standard, they claim it sounded better for bluegrass....At festivals I have walked around and got into jams and had to tune to fit each one, about 20 times a day, usually by the time I got in tune they were ready to quit, or maybe it was my playing, I never did figure that out....
> 
> 
> 
>     Willie


At festivals there was often a lot of mutual sitting in on stage, excluding the arbitrariness you hint at. But now I'm speaking of professionals. I watched several BG acts at festivals 1969 and never did I witness what you are describing here. When the guitarist 
put a capo on, HE was thrown out of tune, and it was his responsability to adjust. It would be downright silly to have, e.g.,  the mandolin player retune, as guitars (not to mention banjos) are much faster to tune. And did you expect the singer to retune his muscle memory, too?

----------


## ampyjoe

I think that, yes, some of the older players and recordings of them show fluffs, missed notes, and even out of tune instruments. But they always have great rhythm, phrasing, and timing. That's part of the reason there are fluffed notes - the older players played for non-musicians and especially for dancers and so if the tune had a tricky bit in it, the one thing you couldn't do was lose the rhythm and phrasing. If you lost a note or too, what matter, the dancers didn't feel checked, nor did the listeners tapping their feet. 
Newer players sometimes seem to give precedence to nailing the tricky phrase even if the rhythm suffers. (I say sometimes, because there are many current players who play complex stuff with beautiful rhythm and phrasing). 
I think all the above happens in Bluegrass, in Irish, and probably in many other kinds of music but you can really hear it in some of the folk revival fingerpickers vs the original blues guitarists quite a few of whom were not in the best of tune, but the drive was always there.

Kenny

----------


## sarai

> Don't go to a bull looking for milk, and don't go to older recordings looking for the same qualities you'll find in the latest Nashville recording project. You'll find incredible energy, dazzling virtuosity, stylistic pioneering, and real "roots music," but you'll also find technological and technique limitations, and sometimes the triumph of aspiration and inspiration over skill and precision. And, "so what?"


 I'm certainly not trying to change what is, but I am trying to understand it.




> Sarai, the classic groups like Monroe from 45-46, Stanley Brothers, Flatt and Scruggs, The Country Gents, etc are absolutely imperative listening for your ear training for bluegrass, IMHO.


  Stanley Brothers, Flatt and Scruggs, The Country Gentlemen are all growing on me at the moment.  Flatt & Scruggs Foggy Mountain Breakdown is one of my fav. tracks at the moment.  I heard a couple versions of it that they have recorded, but the one I'm listening to right now, I really like the banjo chop he is doing... it's like a chop with a slide.

----------


## Gary Hedrick

> I'm a chiming in to add my tuppence...
> 
> It seems that this is another instance of one of those perennial debates that occasionally open up here on the cafe boards and (i may be wrong on this) one that seems to plague the Bluegrass section more than others. 
> 
> There seems to be a real tension in bluegrass between technical proficiency and the emotional immediacy, and for my money (all tuppence worth) this tension has always been there and is integral to the music's identity. For instance, in my mind this tension between technique and emotion is what lend the excitement to a lot of Mr. Monroe's music.
> 
> Today's musicians do have greater technical means than the older generations but they also have a greater awareness of different musical styles, including those older styles, which means that today's musicians also have a greater choice of what they can play, some choose toward technical clarity, others toward emotive impression. Again, I think this tension will always be implicit in Bluegrass and it is those musicians who can play this tension that produce the most interesting material.
> 
> However, when it comes to the marketing of Bluegrass albums these days i do think that the bias, among established labels, does tend more toward pushing a technically slick, sophisticated, and most importantly, accessible product over those recordings that may still retain the raw burr of rough immediacy.
> ...


As nicely and accurately stated a summary as I have ever read on the Cafe.  You, my friend are spot on with all of your comments.  I am a hard, core....Monroe worshipping....61 year old Bluegrass idiot ...... (just for a reference point about my liking this)

----------


## sarai

> Just keep a keen ear open and try not to judge too harshly or too quickly because you might just cut yourself off from something wonderful.


I'm sorry if I came off like I was judging this guys coz I didn't mean to.  I really was more interested in finding out if this is a stylistic element that I should be learning about.  What I have taken from this is that in listening to these styles, I'll learn something and if it rubs off in my playing then so-be-it.

----------


## allenhopkins

> I'm sorry if I came off like I was judging this guys coz I didn't mean to...


While I accept and respect good intentions, using words like "out-of-tune and sloppy" inevitably sounds like criticism.  One could mention "variance in pitch" or "loose/less structured rhythms" or "an open, improvisational approach, rather than disciplined, precise playing," and make the same point.

Doubt you could find many musicians who would take "out-of-tune and sloppy" as a compliment, or even just as an observation.

Having said that, yes, there are recordings that are "out-of-tune and sloppy," but given the immense volume of recorded music over the past century, that's hardly surprising.  What I'd be careful about, is drawing the conclusion that older musicians, in bluegrass or any other genre, were less talented, adept, or conscientious than modern musicians.  They may well have been less _schooled,_ especially in rural styles like old-time and bluegrass, but they were the people who created and developed the music we play today.  Current musicians are in a sense "standing on their shoulders," and the best current musicians recognize this and give their predecessors the admiration and respect they surely deserve.

----------


## catmandu2

There does seem to exist some general "qualitative" differences between urbane and rural musics.  And, it seems there is some amount of "gentrification" occurring in rural forms--resulting in some trends of greater "sophistication" (for example, "jazz" approaches--originally and perhaps primarily still an urbane aesthetic--adopted in folk forms; historically, jazz players and the jazz idioms have drawn more from "classical" methods concerning technical and theoretical aspects than they owe to folk styles--save for the element of "blues" aesthetics)

----------


## MikeEdgerton

I really have no problem standing by my electronic tuner statement. I've been playing long enough (about 50 years) to know about tuning forks, pitch pipes and pianos that are supposed to be in tune (many really weren't). They really have made a difference no matter what anyone says.

----------


## Charlieshafer

I'm addicted to e-tuners, so I'm on Mike's side. Most of the people I know who don't like them really should... Anyway, Sarai, I certainly don't take it as though you were insulting anyone, that's a very legitimate comment and many first-timers to old-time, especially, have the same first response. We had a few hard-core classical players at the jam a few weeks back, and neither really had done any fiddling before. After the jam, I pulled them aside for a few minutes with the laptop, and played them a few standards done by the old folks just so they could hear what the "source" sounded like. After listening to Tommy Jarrell for a few minutes, one asked, openly and without any negative judgement in her voice, "Did people think he was good?"

----------


## allenhopkins

Nice story, Charlie.  The standards for what's "good" can indeed vary widely between classical and "folk" (bluegrass, old-time, whatever) musicians.  Every now and then there's recognition by classical virtuosi of the strengths of some "vernacular" players -- I have a foggy memory that some well-known violinist expressed admiration for Mark O'Connor's tone -- but honestly, a trained classical violinist might well concentrate on Tommy Jarrell's lack of precision, rather than appreciating his energy and mastery of rural fiddle stylings.

Multi years ago, I jammed in my little apartment with Matt Glaser, who was studying at the Eastman School at the time, and heard him discuss his need to choose between "violin and fiddle" -- whether to continue conservatory training, or play the bluegrass, swing and old-time he really liked.  Matt was playing in a student BG group, Gray Eagle, with Ken Finkel and a couple others.  Interesting that he took the non-classical path...

I'd say fiddle is the instrument where this dichotomy is most often found, since classical mandolin remains a fairly small (though totally enjoyable) genre, and classical five-string banjo and steel-string guitar don't really exist.  Maybe bass fiddle is another instrument where you could go "classical" or "folk/jazz/bluegrass," though not too many non-classical bassists play _arco_ all that much.

----------


## catmandu2

> ... not too many non-classical bassists play _arco_ all that much.


Just a quick correction:  arco playing is common in jazz, and is a standard recommendation at least for exercises--as it helps to refine intonation

----------


## Earthwood

Daytripper by the Beatles always sounded off to me

----------


## AlanN

> Just a quick correction:  arco playing is common in jazz,


Yep, Slam Stewart and Paul Chambers easily come to mind.

----------


## Willie Poole

Last night (early this morning) on Songs Of The Mountain (PBS station)there was two young ladies that have won many awards in country folk music, they go by the name of "Alacia"...They do something that I haven`t been able to do in over fifty years...THEY SING  OUT  OF  TIME  WITH  THE BEAT...One girl even pulled out a 5 gallon water jig and beat it like a drum....Theses gals travel all over the world, or so they say, and do this for a living, so they say,  they are from east Tennessee living in a cabin in the mountains....

   What made me sit up and really take notice of them was the one girl played multiple instruments and when she played her Ovation mandolin it was so far out of tune that I almost threw up (Just a fugure of speech), these girl were absolutly the worse I have ever heard and to be put on TV is a disgrace as far as I am concerned....BUT....The audience loved them...Go figure?

   If any one else watched the show I hope you agree with me but I know some of you won`t...

   The second band that was on the show wasn`t much better, called "The Woodshedders", singing was horrible and a guitar that didn`t have any tone what so ever, the mandolin player did sound OK though and oddly enough he has the same last name as mine, no kin that I know of though....They also had a good fiddle player...I might have to contact them and see about getting my band on there....I`m serious....

     Willie

----------


## journeybear

Sounds like you might have to brush up on playing badly if you hope to pass the audition.  :Grin:  Just hope it doesn't stick for when you have to play regular gigs.  :Wink:  Personally, I am kind of a fan of out-of-tune and sloppy recordings. If it weren't for them, there wouldn't be any of me at all!  :Whistling:

----------


## Willie Poole

J.B.  Oh yeah I have a lot of myself when I mess up a song, in fact just last week I kicked off a song that wasn`t what I announced and the rest of the band was playing chords that fit the announced song, when we finished I just said "You guys don`t know that song do you?" and it brought a laugh from most people, I`m not sure the audience even knew the difference, most of them were country fans and not really bluegrass fans....

   I don`t really like to make fun at people that just don`t have it but when putting them on TV the promoter should know what is acceptable and what isn`t....We all try our best but there is a limit....

     Willie

----------


## Mandolin Mick

Some of the real old recordings like things by JE Mainer' Mountaineers and Carl Story & his Rambling Mountaineers are out of tune in vocal and instrumental work (fiddle in particular) and I actually find it appealing!!!  :Smile:

----------


## sarai

> in fact just last week I kicked off a song that wasn`t what I announced and the rest of the band was playing chords that fit the announced song


 LOL




> arco playing is common in jazz,


 All this talk about arco.... I don't even know what it is.  I'll read further back in the posts maybe it will come to me.




> I tried "wet" tuning on my mandolin once


 wet tuning? that went over my head too. (doesn't take much)




> Anyway, Sarai, I certainly don't take it as though you were insulting anyone, that's a very legitimate comment and many first-timers to old-time, especially, have the same first response


  THANK YOU  :Smile: 

This thread is sort of taking a life of its own.... still going.

----------


## Charlieshafer

"Arco" is the term used when using the bow on the bass, specifically, and sometimes the cello, but the cello is almost always used with the bow, so it's sort of implied there. As far as chipping in with jazz players going arco, can't leave out the master (usually always doubling on cello) Oscar Pettiford.

----------


## catmandu2

Some arco bass




something nice and wet

----------


## allenhopkins

> ...wet tuning? that went over my head too. (doesn't take much)...


"Wet" tuning is usually applied to free reed instruments such as the accordion or harmonica.  When selecting a note (by pushing a key, blowing in a hole, etc.) activates two or more reeds, which are technically the same note and therefore the same pitch, one of the reeds can be tuned slightly flat or sharp from "concert pitch."  This means that the two reeds vibrate slightly "out of phase," producing a vibrato effect as the sound waves alternately coincide and differ.

If you listen to a Hohner Echo Harp harmonica, or another brand of "echo harmonica," you will hear "wet" tuning:



Not so great musically, but you get the idea.

Tuning a mandolin "wet" would mean not tuning the two strings of a course in exact unison pitch, but tuning one slightly sharp or flat.  Few find this enjoyable, but hey! you're welcome to try it.

----------


## Marcelyn

Hi, just saw the thread, and because I directed you to the classic recordings, I thought I'd jump in and give you my take on it, since like you, I sure didn't grow up with this music. 
It may help to look at it a different way and take listening out of it all together. Everyone here has offered the explanation of why the older recordings sound different from modern day CDs, but unless you immerse yourself in the genre, you're still hearing "sloppy." 
So, think of it from a visual perspective. When we lived in Nashville, my husband, a teacher, was helping deliver kids to parents in the car rider line. He came back after one car and another teacher said, "Hey, do you know who that mom was?" Jeff didn't. I won't drop the name for her sake, but it was a superstar country singer. Now, Jeff knew what that star looked like, but the lady in the car rider line looked nothing like that. He was so used to seeing the completely made up version of the singer, that when the real person with regular clothes and no makeup crossed his path, she was unrecognizable--which by comparison looked frumpy.
Today's music is pretty much all we know, and it's so done up that when we hear the real stuff--real people playing their tunes--our minds hear sloppy or lack of talent. But when you look at it in the right way, you hear it as more of the "real thing" And just like I'd much rather hang out with a real person than a done up super star, the old recordings of people like Doc Watson, the Carters, and the Stanley Brothers give me the feel of people who I could sit down with and get to know. To put it another way, a crazy fast, and technically brilliant bluegrass track impresses me a ton, but  it's those old and authentic recordings that inspire me to pick up my mandolin and try out a tune. They let me hear the music as a living tradition and the players as real people.
For example, check out the Stanley Brothers recording "Long Ago and Far Away." It's a totally authentic, one-take recording at a little radio station at midnight after an entire day of shows. Instead of playing their standards, they sat down and picked a set of tunes they'd grown up with. Rather than giving the feel that listeners should sit back in awe, the Stanley Brothers give me the impression of inviting listeners to learn the tunes and jam along. They were tired, and not completely polished, but it's a treasure and I'm so glad it was captured on tape.

----------

jackmalonis

----------


## Mandolin Mick

Marcelyn,

I like your take on it.  :Smile:

----------


## Willie Poole

About four months ago I recorded a live performance of my band and burned it onto CD`s and was planning on selling them but after listening to it for a few times and trying to "tweak" it to sound sort of professional I gave up on the idea, I know some people that listened to it said it was a pure honest sound and they liked it that way so I gave away about 10 CD`s but never sold any because I didn`t like the way it sounded to me....I understand where you are coming from Marcelyn as far as hearing recordings the way they are played but when trying to make some ready cash from them I feel that they should be made as best they can be....

   I do hear a lot of recordings that say "Recorded live" and then I guess we have to expect them to be a little less than perfect....I plan on giving this another try  during this month at a nice show that we have coming up....

      Willie

----------


## mandolirius

> But when you look at it in the right way, you hear it as more of the "real thing" And just like I'd much rather hang out with a real person than a done up super star, the old recordings of people like Doc Watson, the Carters, and the Stanley Brothers give me the feel of people who I could sit down with and get to know. To put it another way, a crazy fast, and technically brilliant bluegrass track impresses me a ton, but  it's those old and authentic recordings that inspire me to pick up my mandolin and try out a tune. They let me hear the music as a living tradition and the players as real people.


Such an insightful way to put it. The only thing I would add is the old saw "you can lead a horse to water...". The people that are liable to gravitate to your way of thinking will always be few and far between.

----------


## Paul Kotapish

Nice perspective, Marcelyn.

I attribute the edgy (what some might call sloppy and out-of-tune) sound of a lot of early recordings to (at least) five things.

1) Traditional mountain music was not based on tempered tuning and incorporated many more microtones on the fiddle, vocal, and fretless banjo traditions than what we more commonly hear today. Fixed-fret instruments were _relatively_ new to mountain music when those early bands first recorded, and there was some interesting juxtapositions between the tempered and traditional ways of hearing--and playing--the scales. Over the years, as the music has edged toward Nashville and away from Round Peak, the sense of pitch and intonation has become much more tempered, homogenized, consistent, and--to modern ears--more in tune. The diminishment of traditional microtonal mountain music has been dissected in the pages of _The Old-Time Herold_ and similar journals, but in those early years, there were many more subtle shades of intonation at work.

2) Those early recording sessions were frequently catch-as-catch-can opportunities in less-than-optimal conditions with time constraints that would be unimaginable today. Funky equipment and funkier environments were the norm. We all know how hard it is to get a band in tune when the temperatures are soaring or dipping, and a lot of those sessions were over before all the instruments had settled into a consistent spot.

3) Many of those early bands comprised players who were not _professional_ musicians in the same sense that many bluegrass and country players are today, and would not have the luxury of refining technique and obsessing over gear in the same way that full-time musicians often do today. Punching out an emotive performance trumped fine detail.

4) In an era before ubiquitous and sophisticated P.A. systems, performance standards were often geared toward delivering the notes acoustically to the back of the tent or community hall without mic, and we all know how hard it is to maintain a consistent sound--and intonation--when you are playing and singing at full throttle and can't hear yourself or your bandmates as well as you'd like. Pitch wanders, tempos drift, and ham-fisted playing designed to reach the back rows necessarily sacrifices some subtlety. 

5) The wonders of modern luthiery and fine accessories were not necessarily available as readily as they are today. String choices were limited, and the fine adjustments afforded by strobe-measured compensated bridges, fine tuners on fiddles, Waverly gears on guitars, precise planetaries on banjos, sophisticated capos that don't bend the strings out of tune, and so forth were still a thing of the future, as were the vastly more sophisticated level of luthier skills widely available today. These days, if a guitar doesn't play quite in tune, you can take it any number of shops for a electronic analysis of the intonation and get a precision neck reset, refretted fingerboard, finely adjusted saddle, and so forth. Fifty years ago, you proably just lived with it.

----------


## MikeEdgerton

I'm sure alot of this also has to do with what we as human beings have become used to hearing. The sound systems in our homes and cars are a heck of a lot better than they were 50 years ago. The recordings are better now than they were 50 years ago. Once your golden ears have become accustomed to things as they are now you expect everything to sound like it would if it was recorded now. I agree with Paul that the golden age of electronically enhanced luthery probably has contributed some as well. I remember spending a small fortune on phonograph cartidges to try and get rid of some unwanted distortion on the last track of a Joni Mitchell record. Amazingly enough it was still there in the first version of the re-released CD that I bought. What I thought was a limitation on the playback had been introduced during the recording.

----------


## jackmalonis

So much great insight on this thread. It's awesome.

----------


## sarai

> Tuning a mandolin "wet" would mean not tuning the two strings of a course in exact unison pitch, but tuning one slightly sharp or flat. Few find this enjoyable, but hey! you're welcome to try it.


 Wow thanks for the explanation.  I'm thinking for now this isn't my cup of tea - haha.  I agonize when my strings are not in unison.  But now I need to go back and read about the wet tuning conversation in the thread.




> "Hey, do you know who that mom was?"


  Well - I enjoyed the anecdote but I can't stop wondering who she was now! ha

----------


## Mandolin Mick

This is a great thread! Yeah, I'm one of those guys who likes one of the courses of strings, usually the A, to be slighty off sometimes when using drone techniques on the mandolin. Bagpipes sound good this way too.  :Mandosmiley:

----------

