# Music by Genre > Bluegrass, Newgrass, Country, Gospel Variants >  Bluegrass or not?

## Willie Poole

While sitting here working on a friends mandolin I have been listening to "Bluegrass" on Sirrius radio and in my eys 99% of the songs they played weren`t bluegrass, true they have banjos, mandolins, fiddles dobros and such but its the way the songs are presented and the music seems to be louder than the vocals and a person can`t hear or understand the words of the song, I always figured bluegrass songs told a story, and the instruments taking their breaks aren`t playing a thing that sounds like the melody....Is this what is supposed to be bluegrass of the future?   

    I played a show last night and one lady came up to me and said that it was a treat for her to be able to understand every word that I sang and to hear the melody when I picked the breaks....I know this has been brought up before on here but why can`t someone come up with a new name for this kind of music because it surely isn`t bluegrass...Bring back the true sounds of Flatt and Scruggs and Jimmy Martin, and big Mon...As good as some of the new pickers are they are still letting the promoters run the way they play their misic and promote their CD`s and such....

   I don`t expect evryone to agree with me but for the ones that do, we need to take a stand and get bluegrass back into bluegrass....Like Bill Andersons song, "I was told it was too country", meaning the general public would not accept it or buy the recordings of it....Can a song be too bluegrassy, is that like too blue, too red or what....You see where "country" music has evolved to by allowing the boys with all of the money to promote things...I understand that musicians want to make as much money as they can but please don`t allow a true old time style of music go by the wayside.....I like to think that enough people out there still love the old bluegrass sound and will continue to buy recordings and come to the shows....I know my band has been busier than ever this year so they are out there....

     I`m done so you can pick me apart now.....Willie :Crying:

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*Willie* - I began a thread a couple of years back maybe, regarding what i termed the _"Country & Westernising of Bluegrass"_. I listen to (& use) Bluegrass radio stations as part of my 'pick-along' practicing every day & i hear the sort of stuff that you seem to be referring to. It seems that as long as you have the requisite Bluegrass instrumentation,than any c**p can be termed Bluegrass & there's some dire stuff being labeled Bluegrass. Merle Haggard's 'Bluegrass Sessions' leave me cold, & he's a singer who's output of his 'normal' stuff over the years i've pretty much liked.
   There is one factor however that we do need to take account of, & that's the desire by many of the 'newer' bands to explore music that falls a tad outside mainstream Bluegrass - ''The Infamous Stringdusters'' come to mind.I couldn't say that all their stuff is what i'd term Bluegrass 'proper' ie.trad style,but they do use the instrumentation as it's supposed to be used & they're pretty darned good at it too !.
   On the other hand we have non-Bluegrass artistes making recordings with Bluegrass instrumentation,of music that in the proper use of the word,could never in a million years be Bluegrass music as we know & love it. We also have bands like AKUS,who began as a Bluegrass outfit,but who no longer apply the term 'Bluegrass' to themselves,which is why i stopped buying their records. If i want pretty female voices,there are better ones (IMHO) than Alison Krauss who are still in Bluegrass,but who do ''explore the boundaries'' as it were - Carrie Hassler & her band springs to mind here.
   As you say,the bands have to make a living & by trying to appeal to all of the people,some bands fall by the wayside i'm afraid. But we have a choice whether to buy their recordings or not,
                                                                                 Ivan

----------


## M.Marmot

> I`m done so you can pick me apart now.....Willie


Not to be a picking, but, i was wondering, you say that your band is currently more busy than they ever have been, the case could be made, with no slight intended to the good graces of your group, that your increased popularity might, in part, be unwittingly benefitting from the very marketing ploys that you are bewailing?

I'm not arguing with your point as such, but, it seems to me that for most newcomers Bluegrass, like most distinctive non-mainstream musics, will be difficult to become accustomed to. 

The only advantage i can see in the market dilution of the identity of Bluegrass is that it can serve as an easy introduction to the music, after all, not everyone likes their whiskey neat at first only to wean themselves from the water and learn to appreciate the distinctive bite of a wee nip.

The key is to spark the interest, whet the whistle, in the first place, and if the debasing of the name, if not the discipline, of bluegrass serves any good then perhaps this is its only good?

Its not inconcievable that folks that first tasted their bluegrass smothered with the syrup and sweetner would on discovering on savouring a taste of the rare drop, the sound of the classic line ups, decide that they could do without the syrup supplement and now prefer their dram straight and no fussin'.

So, maybe, just maybe, some of this swell you experience in your audiences might just be very folks who still sugar their sup but may yet learn to appreciate the classic blend?

----------


## Mandolin Mick

I heard this complaint at Bean Blossom this summer, and I was one of those grumbling.  :Mad: 

Some of the singers have that Nashville sound, too deep instead of high & lonesome, which is the sound of the fathers, Mr. Bill, Flatt & Scruggs, Jim & Jesse, Carl Story, etc.

In all honesty, I guess this is another one for the Bluegrass Police ... but *I* don't care for that style at all. In *my* book that doesn't sound like Bluegrass ... but I don't like Newgrass either ... to each his own ...  :Wink:

----------


## swampy

I gave up on this one a long time ago. Bluegrass on satellite radio is anything but. I agree, we need a new name or we need to start using the term "Traditional Bluegrass" more often. I feel your pain.

----------


## Ron Hale

> While sitting here working on a friends mandolin I have been listening to "Bluegrass" on Sirrius radio and in my eys 99% of the songs they played weren`t bluegrass, true they have banjos, mandolins, fiddles dobros and such but its the way the songs are presented 
> --snip--
> 
> ...I know this has been brought up before on here but why can`t someone come up with a new name for this kind of music because it surely isn`t bluegrass...
> --snip--
> 
>      I`m done so you can pick me apart now.....Willie


Willie, 

I read an article awhile ago, and George Jones was complaining about the same thing happening with "Country Music".  He said, as you do, "Why don't they call it something besides Country Music?"

I, like you, am a long time fan of Bluegrass Music.  It's hard not to notice that there is a genre afloat that is billing itself as Bluegrass.  It seems that group, much like the current Country group are both leaning toward a "Pop music" style.  I personally don't find much of interest in country music anymore.  And some of the current bluegrass stuff makes me think that the band playing should have listened to some bluegrass music before they started billing themselves as  "bluegrass".  

Perhaps our age has something to do with it.  I'm 67, and "I like what I like"  :Smile:  For years I've  felt we've had a name for the style we like:  Traditional Bluegrass.

Ronnie

----------


## SincereCorgi

I sympathize, but there's a couple way to see this. I've recently been enjoying the 'Can't You Hear Me Callin': 80 Years of Bluegrass' boxed set from Sony, which is a roughly chronological sampler and gives an interesting perspective on the musical distance between the Skillet Lickers that kick off disc one and, say, the Dixie Chicks on disc four.

Personally, like you guys, I don't care much for the last disc, which is mostly contemporary 'bluegrass' that is dressed up with lots of slick studio production and '80s pop song structures. Having said that, there's something to be said for the fact that bluegrass isn't yet a 'museum' genre that's stopped evolving and can only be recreated, like the music version of a Civil War re-enactment.

Most genres only have about thirty years in them before they mutate into something completely different- ragtime in 1900 is pretty far from early big band swing in the '30s, and that goes for bluegrass too. You can't really reproduce the Skillet Lickers sound or early Monroe brothers sound  that world's gone  but for every Punch Brothers (which, to me, is basically prog rock - sometimes very good prog rock - with banjos) there's stuff like Danny Knicely and Tatiana Hargreaves that, to me, is just as true as Bill Monroe to the music's mountain/rural roots, albeit a little different sounding.

----------


## devilsbox

I suppose, as has been stated, "Traditional Bluegrass" should be the word. Say it with pride.

----------


## jim simpson

"Classic Country" seems to be the chosen description for the older style (like George Jones, Lorretta Lynn, Ernest Tubb, etc.)   Modern or current country often sounds like southern rock or just plain pop/rock. I really like to hear a good (or even average) pedal steel player. That's what I heard growing up (in the shadow of WWVA) here in Wheeling.
I guess one might call traditional or old school bluegrass "Classic Bluegrass".

----------


## Willie Poole

WE do have one station here where I live that plays "classic country" but every now and then they slip in a song from the "New Country" sound and they usually get phone calls about it..BUT in order to get and keep sponsors they think they have to reach out to all age groups and the younger folk want to hear the new stuff, so they say...

    I am not knocking what people play or listen to, I`m just sounding off on what they call "Bluegrass"...Classic or Traditional Bluegrass would be one way of labeling it.....MarMont, I don`t know what you mean when you say that my bands popularity could be from the things that I am harping about...We play 90% of older traditional bluegrass songs and the rest are original songs written by the band memebrs and they have the traditional sound, we also play mostly to audiences that are of the older generation ..AND.. we don`t go out looking for gigs, just about all of our shows are from people calling me and saying that they saw us at another show place and liked what they heard, some come from people that have bought our CD`s and let other people listen to them...Most of our gigs are private functions and we don`t get all of the publicity that some other bands do, Maybe if we did we would end up in Nashville someday but that doesn`t interest me right now plus I am getting too old to keep up with the pace of traveling and playing every night a some place different, I`m happy doing it just the way we are going about it now...

   Thanks for all of the favorable comments   You guys are the greatest....Willie

----------


## farmerjones

Thank goodness we have what we do recorded for all the ages. Time moves forward.  I hate it too. My knee joints say it the loudest.  :Smile:  
Thank goodness for Rhonda Vincent and a few others.  
Making money playing & singing any kind of music is tuff right now. I think that's why Alison Krause goes in all the directions she does. She's needs to put bread on the table. 
Maybe the pendulum will swing back the other way? There's a big Old Timey movement, as you may know. That stuff doesn't have a well defined example for every tune like Bluegrass does. Two old fiddlers never play the same tune the same twice. But strangely, there's OT police too. 
Similar but different, Kenny Baker was Bill's fiddler for the longest stretch. Best one too IMHO. Kenny says, when he started he was a swang fiddler. Most of Kenny's stuff is over the head of the common jammer. So are we talking festival/jamming  Bluegrass or "hard" Bluegrass, or Baltimore bar room, or pre-Flatt & Scugggs , or, or what?

----------


## AlanN

> So are we talking festival/jamming  Bluegrass or "hard" Bluegrass, or Baltimore bar room, or pre-Flatt & Scugggs , or, or what?


You've got to be kidding. If it has a banjer, it *all* sounds alike, just ask John and Jane Q. Public...but we, the cognoscenti know better, don't we   :Whistling:

----------


## Martian

Willie ,I tend to agree with you and I also find ourselves listing ourselves as traditional, also think my big stumbling block on new country, is the word country in it. Today Bon Jovie is  big in country circles as is Kid rock, Yuck and others. I watched a recent Cma show only to catch the B'52's, (whom I liked) but why not throw in a polka band.  It is my opinion that this is as confused as "country" has ever been, so my concern is BG will go the same way, and disappear or show up only on small A:M formats, (where I already have a bluegrass show we do once a month) Also ,although respected, I generally go somewhere else on my sirius during their de-railed show. I assume sooner or later strats, horns and flashpots will be in the bluegrass show. Oh please dear God , I am awaiting the brand new Lady gaga,gag me CD. I have to be careful on this subject, it is one of the few areas I can tend to be abrasive and not care. Maybe M C Hammer can get in his baloon pants and teach us how to buck dance. As I said, I would really would not hope to offend, and I really love music in general, including Bon Jovie, Zep, and plenty others. I tend to believe music is universal, but it is not a mix and match game, catsup does not go on cereal even if you like both. Ted Nugent in a recent interview, was asked if he knew where most of his old musician buddy's went, and he responded "if they are working, they are in Nashville"  Please keep this music pure to itself

----------


## Martian

OH, something else I left out of my book,sorry, I am proud to say that here in Detroit, and in Flint, I am told that there is a huge re-birth of real country music being done in some of the local bars by young players who while looking for something new, found something old. I think all musics move and stretch, and even grow a little, I just don't want BG to grow into something else to where the money people in  the music buis., now control the direction of the music. I just met a long haired kid, (I was one), in my local Guitar Center. It was funny, because he held the accoustic door open for me, and we both took 2 steps inside, turned, and looked at banjos, and then looked at each other. Hee told me he was in a country band but then said, you know,  Lefty Frizzel, Hank Sr. George, I told hime I picked banjo and I helped him pick one out. He was $20 short and told the clerk he would be back in 2 days after this gig on the weekend. Talk about your dejavu. I gave him the extra $, $22 to be exact, and he was near tears greatful. It felt good

----------


## farmerjones

> we, the cognoscenti know better, don't we


We? I wouldn't be in a club that would have me as a member

----------


## Rex Hart

Willie, I hear what you are saying, and being a fan of both traditional and progressive bluegrass, I think there is room under the "bluegrass" tent for all. I agree with previous posters that maybe we call it traditional bluegrass. But this brings up another question...does 0044 J.D. Crowe and New South qualify as "traditional"? Everything is relative. At my age.(51) I consider J.D. traditonal.  I guess I am in the generation behind Ivan. Mr Monroe's "Last Days On Earth"...is that traditional? I like AKUS but am currently working on Monroe's instrumental "Come Hither To Go Yonder"..for lack of a better term...It's all bluegrass to me!

----------


## AlanN

> does 0044 J.D. Crowe and New South qualify as "traditional"?


Good question. At the time, it was 'new'. I *almost* heard drums (glad I didn't, JD was smart to not have them)




> Mr Monroe's "Last Days On Earth"...is that traditional? currently working on Monroe's instrumental "Come Hither To Go Yonder"


Another good question, that whole LP was different, too. He even spelled mandoline (with an 'e') on the jacket.

----------


## M.Marmot

> MarMont, I don`t know what you mean when you say that my bands popularity could be from the things that I am harping about...


Again let me assure you, I mean no badness or slight to your band your discipline or your music... and to qualify my question i asked if the increased audience numbers might in part, only in part, be an unexpected side effect of a possible increased interest in Bluegrass in general?

Let me try and be clearer...

I just figured that an unexpected benefit to the over-commercialization and mainstream pillage of Bluegrass is that it might allow some people, who otherwise may have remained oblivious, a way to appreciate the classic line-ups and those contemporary acts that still practice a 'traditional bluegrass' sound. 

For instance, I have said in other threads that i think the Steve Earle's album 'The Mountain' is a great album for easing people into appreciating Bluegrass. Now thats an album which, in the McCoury's, can boast a classic Bluegrass pedigree but can also attract a larger audience from Mr. Earle's country/rock fan base. If i remember in the liner notes Mr. Earle makes specific reference to Mr. Monroe and makes blatant that 'The Mountain' is a tribute of sorts... but Mr. Earle's voice and musical influences surely do place it at least one step shy of pure 'traditional' bluegrass. 

Now, some one approaching that album from outside the Bluegrass cognescenti might not have heard of Bill Monroe (it does happen) but if they like the music on The Mountain they may be tempted to go and buy an album by Mr. Monroe or The McCourys and then find themselves learning to better appreciate Bluegrass as a whole.

If that can happen with that album, and i have seen it happen, then why not also through other modern acts who do not or cannot produce the classic bluegrass sound?

If these albums play a part in broadening the appeal, appreciation, and audience base of Bluegrass as a whole then surely they prove an asset and not a liability?

Thats the the possibility i was trying to point out, that at least one person who now listens to and enjoys classic bluegrass or listens to contemporary bands like your own who carry on the classic discipline, may just have started out listening to one of these mainstream acts... and so maybe the commercialization of bluegrass does have its benefits?

----------


## Martian

Awsome points about JD & the new south. Back in  " The hall of fame aint my home," drums everywhere, and pedal steel. A long step from High and lonesome or the stanley sound, or Jimmy, whom J D had been developed by, but good stuff. I was always told a story that the traditionalists of that day pretty much had said that J D, Tonny, Jerry, were no longer able to play real bluegrass music any longer. I was also told that their response to this was The Bluegrass Album vol.1 . I think one of the top five projects ever. I don't know for sure but a good story, and I have heard it a number of times, and the time frame is about right. Some of the new stuff even sounds ole . Junior Sisk has as traditional a sound for me to come along. Steel Drivers , pretty unusual in a cool way. I'll quit ramblin.

----------


## thejamdolinplayer

I had this conversation with some locals not to long ago.. And this my feeling on the subject:

In Northwest Oh, where I am located most of the crowd is in the older range from ages 50-90 or so. Therefore all they want to hear is traditional bluegrass and that's it. Being around bluegrass all my life, it wasnt until 3 years ago or so that I really started getting into it. I was always a rocker(big skynyrd fan) and didnt really give bluegrass a chance, well that was until I started hearing artist like Grisman, Cadillac Sky, Tony Rice, Hot Rize and others that dont sound so "old" but still contain that "traditional" influence......

I explained to them that if the traditional crowd doesnt stop being so close-minded and allow some of these younger kids into the scene there will be no bluegrass crowd left after their generation has passed away. Not everyone starts off as a traditional bluegrass fan but eventually they will do the research behind the music they are listening to to see where the original music came from.... If they get into "bluegrass" because they heard The I.S. Dusters, or YMSB on satellite radio then so be it eventually they will look up Bill Monroe and people like Mac Wiseman, the Osbourne Bros. and Reno and Smiley. Will they like the old stuff, ? hmm. maybe not but at least they will have a respect for where this music form originated. There is more than just one type of bluegrass out there and I happen to be one of those people who can appreciate The Steeldrivers just as much as Bill Monroe, people need to quit drawing boundary lines all it does is stop the flow of creativity in music.

I had a guy at a show tell me one time, that I was a great mandolin picker but he just didnt like my style because it didnt sound traditional, which is fine because to each is his own. I will leave you guys with my quote that just might very well be a T-Shirt here one day...

"Respect your roots, but don't stay stuck in the rut"... Rob Lawson.......

----------


## Lachlan

> You've got to be kidding. If it has a banjer, it *all* sounds alike, just ask John and Jane Q. Public...but we, the cognoscenti know better, don't we


Of course you do:  if it has a mandolin it's got to be Italian music.   :Mandosmiley:

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

I suppose in a way,i was lucky (like many others) that ALL the Bluegrass around in 1963 was TRAD.That's all i could hear & it's the style that got me hooked & it still has me. I do like some of the progressive Bluegrass (Newgrass)  that i've heard over the years,because all the instruments were used as they were used in Trad. Bluegrass. 'Newgrass Revival' were spectacular (IMHO) & currently i love 'The Infamous Stringduster's' stuff & bands like 'Carrie Hassler & Hard Rain' who have really very fine young pickers who can cut it with anybody.OK,some of their songs fall outside 'Trad.' Bluegrass,but they're in the minority on their recordings. Most of the songs are done in a good Bluegrass style,
                                                                          Ivan

----------


## mandolirius

> I had this conversation with some locals not to long ago.. And this my feeling on the subject:
> 
> In Northwest Oh, where I am located most of the crowd is in the older range from ages 50-90 or so. Therefore all they want to hear is traditional bluegrass and that's it. Being around bluegrass all my life, it wasnt until 3 years ago or so that I really started getting into it. I was always a rocker(big skynyrd fan) and didnt really give bluegrass a chance, well that was until I started hearing artist like Grisman, Cadillac Sky, Tony Rice, Hot Rize and others that dont sound so "old" but still contain that "traditional" influence......
> 
> I explained to them that if the traditional crowd doesnt stop being so close-minded and allow some of these younger kids into the scene there will be no bluegrass crowd left after their generation has passed away. Not everyone starts off as a traditional bluegrass fan but eventually they will do the research behind the music they are listening to to see where the original music came from.... If they get into "bluegrass" because they heard The I.S. Dusters, or YMSB on satellite radio then so be it eventually they will look up Bill Monroe and people like Mac Wiseman, the Osbourne Bros. and Reno and Smiley. Will they like the old stuff, ? hmm. maybe not but at least they will have a respect for where this music form originated. There is more than just one type of bluegrass out there and I happen to be one of those people who can appreciate The Steeldrivers just as much as Bill Monroe, people need to quit drawing boundary lines all it does is stop the flow of creativity in music.
> 
> I had a guy at a show tell me one time, that I was a great mandolin picker but he just didnt like my style because it didnt sound traditional, which is fine because to each is his own. I will leave you guys with my quote that just might very well be a T-Shirt here one day...
> 
> "Respect your roots, but don't stay stuck in the rut"... Rob Lawson.......


It's not often I'll post just to say "ditto" but really, I can't add anything. Well said and right on the money, ihmo of course.

----------


## AlanN

Agree about Junior Sisk, he stays true to his roots and plays it the only way he knows how. But face it, he will hence have limited widespread appeal beyond the grass scene. Which is probably ok with him.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Good question. At the time, it was 'new'. I *almost* heard drums (glad I didn't, JD was smart to not have them)
> 
> 
> 
> Another good question, that whole LP was different, too. He even spelled mandoline (with an 'e') on the jacket.


Well, I'm sure Monroe considered that number to be wholly outside the genre he (along with Scruggs, Wise etc.) originated.
And I like to remind people that Big Mon recorded a Dixieland tune in 1976 and a rockabilly number in 1957 and that Earl Scruggs recorded tunes like  Farewell Blues and You Can't Stop Me from Dreaming.

Anyway I have great trouble understanding this discussion. Do you people expect musicians to just reproduce what's been done before, and is "traditional Bluegrass" the *only* music you care for? Of course, I'm only 66 so I still expect the unexpected.

----------


## mandopete

Nom, nom, nom.

 :Popcorn:

----------


## ChrisStewart

My feeling is that bluegrass is a big tent and everyone is welcome. Do we really need to distinguish between bluegrass, newgrass, rockgrass, etc...? (I suppose those sorts of labels do help distinguish one group from another but there is a lot of grey area there) 

I personally do prefer songs that tell a story and where the words can be understood and the instrumentation is traditional, (mandocasters are not currently my thing)

----------


## Willie Poole

Let me say this...I like other forms of music and I do listen to them, occasionly, ...What I am trying to say is "Lets call it something else besides bluegrass"...Listen to what ever you like but to put in on the radio and say, "This is a bluegrass show" and they play some of that trash they play just doesn`t sit right with me and a lot of others....Here in the DC area WAMU had certain D J `s that seemed to rather play the contemporay stuff than the traditional but when the requests came in they were mostly for the traditional sound....These bands that play for a living and have families to feed should play a mixture of "Bluegrass" because they can sell their CD`s to all listeners...I went to a festival and J D Crow `s band came out with all of the instruments electrified and he was just about booed off of the stage, he explained that they play to a lot of college kids and they didn`t really know what the interest would be at this festival, the next time he came back on they were unplugged and sound traditional, remember he does this for a living and needs to be able to adjust so everyone will buy CD`s....I also believe Dell and his boys are doing the same thing, playing colleges and to a younger crowd...I sat in with Dell many years ago at a festival and believe me we did nothing but traditional bluegrass, since his sons are now with him I believe they influence him somewhat also...

     I don`t look for anything to change soon or because of this post but I also believe there should be a group to let the stations know what we want....After all we do support the radio stations, maybe that is the problem, the younger people don`t seem to buy recordings a much as the older generation so maybe they should do some research in that area....Thanks for all of your comments, it makes good reading if nothing else....

     Willie

----------


## Mike Bunting

I'm listening to the Front Porch Blue Grass radio station on my iPad and it plays straight traditional style 'grass, only an occasional Alison Krause tune thrown in. One thing I noticed this summer at a local festival was that Vincent and Daily's sound man cranked the volume up to quite oppressive levels which didn't impress a lot of folks.

----------


## wamjr52

I would have to say that I am with Willie, This is America, listen to what every in the world that floats your boat, it is fine with me, and I will be very happy for you, but don't call it bluegrass just because it is all acoustic.  I listen to the satellite often and I would venture to say that only about one third is was "I" would call taditional bluegrass.  That's strictly me speaking.  I also agree with some of the other comments about not having a firm definition, makes it hard to put a finger on.  Until everyone aggrees to what "bluegrass" is then I think we will be having this dicussion a long long time.  I will open another can of worms right here and say that "I" think that is a big big mistake for the IBMA to be in Nashville TN,  "I" think it should be in Kentucky and Kentucky only. :Mandosmiley:

----------


## Rush Burkhardt

As a "bluegrasser" of 40+ years, a performing band member for 25+ of those years, I've struggled with the concepts voiced in this thread. I grew up, pre-BG, with R&R and R&B, and was hooked by BG because of the driving nature of the music. (I think it was Alan Lomax who said "Bluegrass is folk music in overdrive.") I was fortunate to experience, live, most of the 1st generation of Bluegrassers, and even got to know some of them personally. 

The music didn't stand still. As has been mentioned, some of those 1st gen. adopted other musical forms (a drum here-and-there, a pedal steel, even venturing to electrifying the holy grails of BG instruments) in many cases to supplement the marketability of their music and make money. 

The country-rockers drifted a little to the right and adopted bluegrass instrumentation. Some BG-ers morphed to the left to include electronics, beyond just the bass, and groups like the New Grass Revival were born. 

As was mentioned, it might have been too much to expect that every new band was a cover band of the 1st gen. Everyone plays the Foggy Mountain Breakdown, but better have an instrumental or two of their own. New musicians had to stretch the boundaries of BG to make a place for themselves. Sometimes they could do that and still maintain a musical form I could relate to the "drive" that attracted me early-on. Some of them couldn't find drive if they fell under a bus! 

I still search for "drive", and find it, often, in the diverse musical forms that whirl around the central theme...Bluegrass. It's really hard to say what the boundaries are. For me the boundaries are set with an aggressive attitude (expressed in the music) and a basic respect for the 1st gen. Would they listen to this music and tap their feet?

----------


## Mike Bunting

I favor the more traditional sounds, but that being said, I understand that evolution is always happening whether I like the results or not. Professional musicians and bands are always searching for something to give them a leg up in the commercial market. In a conversation with Frank Wakefield and Bobby Osborne, Frank mentioned that he thought that Mississippi John Hurt had been a strong influence on Merle Travis. I was a little surprised that Hurt would have been a part of these guys musical world and asked Bobby if they listened to people like John Hurt and he replied they they listened to every thing they could in the quest to add something new to their music. I also believe that the label game is somewhat irrelevant and inaccurate, i.e., some modern music is more bluegrass influenced rock than a form or branch of Blue Grass itself. Me, I just like music that moves me and feels honest whether it's Monroe or the Steeldrivers, Miles Davis or Guy Clark.

----------


## ChrisStewart

I do find it interesting that bluegrass is often not even a category. I put my band on reverbnation and had to pick the folk category. I also like the rock I grew up with versus the stuff they play now -(this may tell us something about human nature)

----------


## M.Marmot

*Youre featured on Dierks Bentleys Up on the Ridge, Emmylou Harris Live at the Ryman and many other country albums. Is it good for bluegrass when mainstream country artists experiment with the genre?*It can be very good. Dierks has an appeal to a wide country audience, and hopefully theyll hear it and like it and get into this music. 

*Today, we hear music based on the Monroe model thats called bluegrass, and we also hear very expansive, non-traditional things called bluegrass. Do you still like the term?*

I dont know if (genre elders) Flatt & Scruggs ever called their music bluegrass. (Flatt & Scruggs manager and booking agent) Louise Scruggs once told my wife, Lynn, Sam and Earl (Scruggs) dont play bluegrass: Thats a very limiting word. And I went for years saying, No, I dont play bluegrass. Well, I dont just play bluegrass, but I certainly come from there. If its a label, I can live with that label, because its a (highly technical) kind of music. If you can play bluegrass you can play almost anything.

Interview with Sam Bush linked on cafe front page

----------


## Mandolin Mick

I think there's a difference between semantics and a style of music. 

Flatt & Scruggs said they played "country music in overdrive" and Ralph Stanley calls his music "mountain music". They want to disassociate themselves from Bill Monroe.

However, Flatt called his band the Nashville Grass and Ralph Stanley still uses the term Bluegrass and says it's the only music he likes. Earl Scruggs acknowledges he played Bluegrass. 

I wish people called the Bluegrass we're talking about Classic Bluegrass like rock musicians call The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, etc. Classic Rock.

----------


## mingusb1

Ah a topic that has legs...!

To the original poster's comment I contend that a lot of modern/progressive bluegrass players don't play the melodies much because it is more difficult to work out melodic intros and breaks than hot, improvised licks over chord changes.  When I have posted this in the past there have always been responses that these players "could" or "can" play the melodies, but choose not to.  Maybe, but I think some of that is hogwash.  The best (technique, timing, tone, etc.) bluegrass players I have played with over the years have also consistently been the ones able to play the most melody.  This is also typified but the apparent lack of bluegrass instrumental repertoire from a lot of the bluegrass bands, jams, and individuals I have heard at the contest festival scene over the past 5 or so years.  Again, I'd say it's easier (faster) to work out improvised versions of Salt Creek and Cherokee Shuffle (and I like these tunes) than solid renditions of tunes like Dusty Miller or Old Dangerfield.

My 3 cents!
Z

----------


## AlanN

It really depends.

Re: Dusty Miller. Ronnie McCoury picks it on Young Mando Monsters, Ray Legere picks it on his Common Denominator. No mistaking what tune these guys are playing, the melody is there, in spades, but...each plays it their way. Both great, very different.

I like an embellished melody line, for the most part. Now, Bury Me Beneath The Willow is such a pretty tune, the melody is pretty much all you need. But a tune like Road To Columbus can benefit from some tasteful straying (or a well-placed Moon Walk...)

----------


## ralph johansson

> *Youre featured on Dierks Bentleys Up on the Ridge, Emmylou Harris Live at the Ryman and many other country albums. Is it good for bluegrass when mainstream country artists experiment with the genre?*It can be very good. Dierks has an appeal to a wide country audience, and hopefully theyll hear it and like it and get into this music. 
> 
> *Today, we hear music based on the Monroe model thats called bluegrass, and we also hear very expansive, non-traditional things called bluegrass. Do you still like the term?*
> 
> I dont know if (genre elders) Flatt & Scruggs ever called their music bluegrass. (Flatt & Scruggs manager and booking agent) Louise Scruggs once told my wife, Lynn, Sam and Earl (Scruggs) dont play bluegrass: Thats a very limiting word. And I went for years saying, No, I dont play bluegrass. Well, I dont just play bluegrass, but I certainly come from there. If its a label, I can live with that label, because its a (highly technical) kind of music. If you can play bluegrass you can play almost anything.
> 
> Interview with Sam Bush linked on cafe front page


I liked the interview. What Louise S said, effectively, was: the hell with labels.
Indeed, why not just listen?


Incidentally, there's a factual error. Bush says that no one had recorded With Body and Soul in 1971, and that Monroe wrote it.
Monroe recorded it in 1969,
and it was writtedn by his girlfriend Virginia Stauffer.

----------


## ralph johansson

> I think there's a difference between semantics and a style of music. 
> 
> Flatt & Scruggs said they played "country music in overdrive" and Ralph Stanley calls his music "mountain music". They want to disassociate themselves from Bill Monroe.
> 
> However, Flatt called his band the Nashville Grass and Ralph Stanley still uses the term Bluegrass and says it's the only music he likes. Earl Scruggs acknowledges he played Bluegrass. 
> 
> I wish people called the Bluegrass we're talking about Classic Bluegrass like rock musicians call The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, etc. Classic Rock.



The phrase is "Folk music with overdrive", not "country music", and it was coined by Alan Lomax in an article (a woefully inaccurate one) on Bluegrass in Esquire, in 1959. 
In the days of the "folk music revival", in the early 60's, Louise S was quick to adopt it and use it in the marketing of the group.  For instance, it was printed on the cover of a F&S song book published around that time.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Ah a topic that has legs...!
> 
>  The best  bluegrass players I have played with over the years have also consistently been the ones able to play the most melody.  This is also typified but the apparent lack of bluegrass instrumental repertoire from a lot of the bluegrass bands, jams, and individuals I have heard at the contest festival scene over the past 5 or so years.  Again, I'd say it's easier (faster) to work out improvised versions of Salt Creek and Cherokee Shuffle (and I like these tunes) than solid renditions of tunes like Dusty Miller or Old Dangerfield.
> 
> My 3 cents!
> Z



They were the "best" *because* they conformed to your preconceptions. And it's easy to understand why so many younger players resist being labeled Bluegrass.

----------


## AlanN

You bet. My Best ain't your Best.

In another thread, mention was made of the Johnson Mtn. Boys and The BG Album band, with the thrust being that these were *the* two pre-eminent bg bands of the 80's. No argument there, but they were like night and day, in my opinion. One was smooth and clean, the other rough and ready. The fiddle playing was world's apart, the vocals too.

----------


## mandopete

> Ah a topic that has legs...!


Yeah, I wish it would run away.

 :Wink:

----------


## 250sc

"I contend that a lot of modern/progressive bluegrass players don't play the melodies much because it is more difficult to work out melodic intros and breaks than hot, improvised licks over chord changes."

Let me add to the nay sayers.

I don't think all the hot players who go away from the melody feel it's "more difficult" to play melody. They're capable of playing what ever they want. They just hear something else in their head and are playing it. The idea that it's too difficult to play melody is ridiculous.

----------


## CES

Count me among those who backtracked from "Newgrass" to trad BG...I remember hearing Nickel Creek's Ode to a Butterfly played as background music for a country radio segment and thinking, "Now that's cool...wish they'd play more of it."  I definitely knew who Bill Monroe and Flatt and Scruggs were, but my parents really didn't like BG (Mom remembers hating it when they had to watch F and S on the Lawrence Welch show and cringed when I bought my banjo).  My iPod now has more trad BG than anything on it, but it took me a while to get there.

Also note that I can get my wife/kids to listen to Tone Poems, some Punch Bros stuff,  and lighter AKUS type music, but they all groan when they hear a banjo or mando break kick off a trad song...They're wearing down, though, as I made it about 3/4 of the way through a Skaggs/Kentucky Thunder album last weekend before the complaining started.

In reality I don't think the labels matter...good music is good music (I tend to like everything if it's done well), but I do agree there's a huge difference in the music Willy's referring to and what passes for BG...

Also, I hear one of my son's 10 year old friends say recently, "I don't like that junk they call country nowadays.  Now, gimme some Hank Jr...that's REAL country!"  I may be getting him Hank Sr's 40 Greatest Hits for Christmas  :Grin:

----------


## thejamdolinplayer

I am a melody player when needed, but more of an improviser at heart..... melody players sometimes have trouble improvising because they play what can be heard which is the songs melody... For some of us improvisers we play what you cant hear in the song, but what is circling in our heads...    I prefer the term creative melodic playing.....

However if you are kicking off a song, I believe the melody should be somewhat introduced, sorry this is a little off subject but a few of you were stressing this subject so I thought give my 2 1/2 cents....

----------


## re simmers

I don't think the JMB and Album Band sounded anything alike, but they were traditional bluegrass at it's finest, both of them.

I love the traditional drive and the mournful sound of good grass.   I also like good musicians and singers who define their own type of grass.   Doc Watson (Frets article) was once told, "Doc, this album ain't bluegrass!!!"  Doc replied, "I ain't bluegrass.  I'm DOC!"     There are 'pro-traditionalists' who consider Jim & Jesse good traditional bluegrass - steel guitar, electric guitar, drums, piano?   How about the Osbornes?   

OK, how about the Country Gents and their 'folk and country' records?  

 Someone wrote about the Country Gents:  


> they were the glue that has made this area the bluegrass capital of the the US..........To my way of thinking they were the best bluegrass band since the original Flatt and Scruggs, true Duffey did change the way a lot of us looked at mandolin playing but it didn`t take long to see that his style would be accepted in bluegrass


I agree with that.    But I doubt that same statement was made in '65.  Maybe when we're 90 we'll accept Chris Thile like we have Duffey?  

A few things to ponder:  Were the early Gents considered too 'contemporary' to be on the air with ol Bill?   Did you think Jim & Jesse were turncoats when they added drums, steel and piano to their recordings?

In the 80's, how about Hot Rize, Spectrum, Country Store, The Scene with steel and electric bass, New South, etc?    Do we need to keep JD's epic Albums off the air because of that drum and steel?   

Who's definition does a "bluegrass" station follow?   Is the definition relative to the time?    Maybe once we get old and used to Jim & Jesse doing Johnny B Goode, and Country Store doing Nightline Fever the definition changes? 

I love the old traditional stuff........I think.   But, where's the line?

Bob

----------


## AlanN

> ..but they were traditional bluegrass at it's finest, both of them.


For you  :Smile: 

Oh, and it's White Line Fever.

----------


## Mattg

> (I think it was Alan Lomax who said "Bluegrass is folk music in overdrive.")


So true. I lying in my tent 3 am at RockyGrass this summer listening to a great jam at a neighboring camp and was trying to figure out what it was about their music that I really liked. It was the drive. Everyone was on a strong constant rhythm. It was like an engine that was more powerful than it's individual parts. 

It is what sets BG apart from country. While I'm not a huge advocate of this, but we occasionally see harminicas, concertinas and even (gasp), accordians playing in local bluegrass jams. It works and fits if they play with the drive. Some of these guys get bluegrass better than most regardless of the instrument they are playing.

----------


## re simmers

I knew Nightline Fever didn't sound right.  I guess that was from watching Ted Koppel when I was sick. :Smile: 

Bob

----------


## Nelson Peddycoart

I don't guess it matters too much if what other people call Bluegrass is what I call Blue Grass.  I know what I like and that's what I listen to.  I reckon those folks have as much right to call their stuff Bluegrass as I do to say it isn't.

Think about the "phases" or subgenres of country music.  There's everything from the Carter Family to Honky Tonk to that awful Countrypolitan ####.  What passes for country today is not pleasing to me, so when I want some country music I pull out the Hank Williams or Merle Haggard or Dwight Yoakam.

In terms of Blue Grass, I listen to very traditional stuff (mainly Monroe) because I like it.  I also like alot of fiddle music and old time stuff.

Call it what you want.  Who cares?  I'll just listen to what I like and be careful about buying anything unheard based on someone else's categorization of it.

----------


## bobby bill

> I don't guess it matters too much if what other people call Bluegrass is what I call Blue Grass. I know what I like and that's what I listen to. I reckon those folks have as much right to call their stuff Bluegrass as I do to say it isn't.


I agree.  There is a difference between saying what kind of music you like and giving it a label.  Labels are generally clumsy tools of convenience.

----------


## Willie Poole

Yeah, some of the bands did record with drums and even a piano and an electric steel guitar, ..BUT...I never seen one of them use those devises on the stage except maybe at the Opry...and if John Duffey wanted to he could have played everything traditional but as I said he was doing it to make a living, his wife owned the music store so he played, sold and repaired instruments to get his money....If you have ever been to The Birchmere when The Gents or Seldom Scene played you would have seen real bluegrass, they did allow any talking while the bands were playing, at the Red Fox in Bethsda Bill Emerson stopped playing in the middle of a song because a couple got up to dance and Bill said, "People don`t dance to bluegrass, if you dance, I don`t play, if I play you don`t dance"
Monroe didn`t like the new grass sound and I bet he didn`t approve of drums in bluegrass either, he didn`t even like a dobro either...And I can`t say I blame him, there are some dobro players out there that have a good style that I can accept though....
   I agree that people can listen to what they want and call it what they want, my post was that I don`t consider it bluegrass, I`m not trying to convince any of you to change your minds, just asking you to understand where I am coming from...It`s just my opinion and you know what opinions are worth....Thanks....Willie

----------


## J.Albert

Regarding the changes in "Country" music, wasn't it Larry Cordle who said it all in "Murder on Music Row?"

I would call a lot of what's coming out of Nashville these days "Nashville Rock" rather than "Country" per se.

Same with some of the "gal bands" on the bluegrass side of things. That is to say, the ladies who don't play themselves, but sing with a backup band of acoustic players. I think of this as "NashGal Grass".

There are the younger acoustic bands with bluegrass instruments who don't play the traditional way, and do few (or no) "traditional" bluegrass songs as a part of their repertoire. Just _how far away_ they play indicates to me whether they are still "in the bluegrass realm", or moving towards something else.

I keep the few CDs I have from these bands in a box with the label "NAM" for "New Acoustic Music", for lack of a better term. It ain't "folk". It ain't "rock". It ain't "jazz". And it ain't "bluegrass". It's something else, hence "N.A.M."

I haven't been going to as many festivals as I'd like recently, but at those I do get to, it's obvious that a large part of the audience is "aging". I'm wondering just how long there's going to remain folks who want to listen to "the originals" like Monroe, the Stanleys, Jimmy Martin, etc. Yes, some of the youngun's will still be listening, and playing. But I sense that the "longing for the ancient tones" may be slipping away in many areas.

I hope those tones last longer than me!

----------


## re simmers

I notice the same thing at festivals.   Ricky Skaggs seems to still pack in everyone with his traditional stuff.  But that's about it.

Bob

----------


## AlanN

> even a piano..BUT...I never seen one of them use those devises on the stage except maybe at the Opry...


And then there's the time I saw Buck White lug a piano on stage at the old Berkshire festival....gone are the days...

----------


## re simmers

I met Buck White at Gettysburg a few years ago and he told me they took a piano on the road for about 20 years.   He told me that he took one on stage at Indian Springs many years ago.
Bluegrass or not, Buck can really play the piano!

Bob

----------


## Willie Poole

You are just confirming what I have been saying...The Whites aren`t bluegrass but they get booked on "Bluegrass" festivals just as Nickle Creek did a few years ago, as much as I like to listen to AKUS that band isn`t really bluegrass but not far from it on some songs....Have any bands ever lugged drums onto the stage at a "Bluegrass" festival?  I don`t know of any but I have seen Cliff Waldron use them at a nightclub, actually just one snare drum, I guess he needed to keep Ed Ferris in time....WE`ve beat this horse to death...I`m gone....Willie

----------


## mingusb1

"I don't think all the hot players who go away from the melody feel it's "more difficult" to play melody. They're capable of playing what ever they want. They just hear something else in their head and are playing it. The idea that it's too difficult to play melody is ridiculous."

"Ridiculous"?!  My apologies for being crazy.  

Nevertheless (and in keeping with your theme), I'm capable of, say, running a 10k in whatever time I want, too.  But if I want to break 40 minutes it will take practice and effort, and won't simply be a matter of what I feel I want to do at the moment.

Z

----------


## ralph johansson

Are you seriously suggesting that it takes no training or skill to improvise?

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*Quote from Mike Bunting* - _" I'm listening to the Front Porch Blue Grass"_ That's one of the 2 stations that i listen to Mike,the other is "The Bluegrass Mix". Of the 2,'Front Porch...' plays more Trad.stuff & a few old timers as well.
  If anybody asks me what style of music i play,i tell 'em _Bluegrass_ -* thats what it is !*. Anything else, call it what you will Newgrass / Progressive etc. Let them choose their own name for it & not steal ours - we've been around longer anyway, :Grin:  
                                                                                                                                                                Ivan :Chicken:

----------


## Josh Nelson

> Yeah, some of the bands did record with drums and even a piano and an electric steel guitar, ..BUT...I never seen one of them use those devises on the stage except maybe at the Opry...and if John Duffey wanted to he could have played everything traditional but as I said he was doing it to make a living, his wife owned the music store so he played, sold and repaired instruments to get his money....If you have ever been to The Birchmere when The Gents or Seldom Scene played you would have seen real bluegrass, they did allow any talking while the bands were playing, at the Red Fox in Bethsda Bill Emerson stopped playing in the middle of a song because a couple got up to dance and Bill said, "People don`t dance to bluegrass, if you dance, I don`t play, if I play you don`t dance"
> Monroe didn`t like the new grass sound and I bet he didn`t approve of drums in bluegrass either, he didn`t even like a dobro either...And I can`t say I blame him, there are some dobro players out there that have a good style that I can accept though....
>    I agree that people can listen to what they want and call it what they want, my post was that I don`t consider it bluegrass, I`m not trying to convince any of you to change your minds, just asking you to understand where I am coming from...It`s just my opinion and you know what opinions are worth....Thanks....Willie


It seems a bit short sighted to argue that much of what you hear today isn't bluegrass because it doesn't meet some sort of strict guidelines of what Bill Monroe or Flatt and Scruggs laid down. 

It's already been mentioned that Bill's music changed with time. Listen to the Walls of Time and then compare that with the New Muleskinner Blues. Heck, I can still remember the shock I had when I first heard Six White Horses or any of the early stuff with Clyde Moody. And remember that bluegrass was a mish-mash of styles that existed at the time. Monroe took a lot of cues from blues and Appalachian folk. He even had an accordion for a short time in his band.

I've also heard stories from Sam Bush and others about how Monroe seemed to tolerate or even joy the turns the music took over the years. Someone on this forum relayed a story about Monroe encouraging the Stanley Bros. to record their doo-wop version of Blue Moon of Kentucky after Elvis did his. That's a pretty big leap from the trad sound. 

Several people have mentioned the Country Gentlemen. To me, Charlie Waller borrowed a lot from Hank Snow and the Texas country singers. Waller himself was a Texas boy. Their big hit, Fox on the Run, is an adapted country song. Matterhorn was written by Mel Tillis, another country guy. Sam Bush said in an interview that he believed John Duffey was the father of newgrass, not Bush. So it's just a way of the music changing with the times. There's still a lot that's rooted in the traditional stuff. I prefer that classic sound as opposed to some of the stuff you'd hear out at the Telluride festival or in some hippie jam band. But I think it's unreasonable to argue that if it doesn't sound like just Flatt and Scruggs, it ain't bluegrass.

----------


## allenhopkins

Willie -- sorry you're "gone."  Came late to an interesting thread.  It won't be a surprise to you that people have been arguing about this for as long as I've been interested in bluegrass, which is getting close to 50 years.  There were people objecting to the Dillards and the New Deal String Band around 1970, because they played Bob Dylan songs.  The Country Gentlemen's Folkways albums had lots of non-traditional material on them, from Clarence "Frogman" Henry to Les Paul & Mary Ford.  When Columbia got Flatt & Scruggs to record albums like _Nashville Airplane_ bluegrass traditionalists were very upset.  And there have been bands -- Jimmy Martin comes to mind -- using snare drum at bluegrass festivals; I just saw a DVD of a '60's festival and he had a drummer.

Remember the fights about electric bass?  And when the Bluegrass Alliance and later the New Grass Revival came out, there were endless arguments about "bluegrass" vs. "newgrass."  Some didn't like Keith-style "melodic" banjo playing (even though Monroe had Keith in his band); it was Scruggs style or nothing.  Others objected to women singing bluegrass, even though Wilma Lee Cooper, Molly O'Day and Rose Maddox had made records that were right in the bluegrass mainstream (didn't Monroe play mandolin on O'Day's record?).

_Fox On the Run,_ by the way, is even more un-bluegrass than an "adapted country song"; it was written/recorded by Manfred Mann, the British rock band (_She's About a Mover, et. al._).  Honestly, bluegrass bands have been borrowing repertoire and stylings from other country, folk and rock sources for, well, a half-century.  Bands like the Osborne Brothers and Jim & Jesse that toured in country package shows, electrified their sound and competed with the country bands they worked with.  Bluegrass icons like Earl Scruggs went "progressive," to the horror of many fans.

You can like, or not like, any new manifestation of bluegrass or the quasi-bluegrass style, from AKUS to the Whites to Bela Fleck or the Dixie Chicks.  I think one of the signs of a style's vitality, is that its practitioners keep working at its fringes.  What would we think of jazz if everyone played like Bennie Goodman or Louis Armstrong?  How would we feel about rock'n'roll if all you could hear were clones of Bill Haley or Chuck Berry?  Not that we shouldn't enjoy these wonderful talents, and respect and perpetuate their music, but "the times they are a-changing," in music as in everything else.

Just because there's Ornette Coleman, doesn't mean you can't play in a successful Dixieland band.  The existence of the White Stripes doesn't mean no one wants to hear Beatles songs.  Jeez, I go out three times a week and play songs Stephen Foster wrote 165 years ago.  Keep the old styles alive and strong, and appreciate what's good -- and reject what's bad -- in the newer music.

And my final argument -- black grass music (Bad Bascomb, 1972):

----------


## Willie Poole

Allen, although I haven`t posted any more on this thread doesn`t mean I haven`t been reading what has been written on here....I was a regular fan and friend of Cliff Waldron and a lot of his music is songs that were taken from other forms of music ..BUT...He kept the bluegrass sound, thats all I am trying to get across, Monroe did record with an accordian but that was before the name "Bluegrass" was given to his music, when that fellow heard the music he said now that is bluegrass, period, so in order to be called bluegrass it should still have that original sound, in my opinion....I learned all of my colors at an early age and red was red, blue was blue, any variation of those colors has a different namd like "Sky Blue", "Navy Blue"....Cliff Waldron called his band "New Shades Of Grass" which is exactly what it was, a different shade and I must admit I loved it all and Cliff became a good friend of mine...All I am trying to point out is that we should find a name for any music that is different from it`s original roots, no matter if it is close to Jazz, rock, or bluegrass, I believe some refer to one style as "Country Rock" because it is rock and roll with a country flavor, like "New Shades Of Grass"...Is that too hard to see and too much to ask for?  I don`t mind drums, I have played with them many times, also a saxaphone and coronet but what we played wasn`t bluegrass...Bluegrass is more the way the music is presented as well as the story it tells...

    Now maybe I can stop on this subject.. You are right Allen, it has been argued for many years, you have 50 years in bluegrass well you are just a youngster compared to me....I`m 75 and started playing mandolin when I was 16...Like the song says, "I`ve seen a lot in my time", I`ve played bluegrass with some big names and even though my name has never made the headlines, I have been there ....

   Thanks to all of you for your support and views on this subject, I don`t expect everyone to feel the way I do about bluegrass but it is one thing that I have fought hard to get the general public to understand what it really is and not just a lot of noise being made by drunks and pot heads, which is the bad name that bluegrass had at one time, and still has in some parts of the country....Remember I grew up around Scotty Stoneman and Buzz Busby...I won`t go there though...Both were fine pickers and even better friends...

    I`m done....

----------


## Salty Dog

My view is that it is a "truth in advertising" issue.  I look at "Rock and Roll" - when I see a band advertised as any kind of rock, I have no idea of what to expect because the description has been so diluted.  I grew up with Rock and Roll in the 50's so I know what "Classic Rock" is but the other day I heard a radio station advertising "classic rock - Elton John".  Elton John wasn't even peeing in his diapers yet when real classic rock was happening but that's how much the meaning of rock and roll has been distorted by the "me too, wannabee" crowd.  As a result the description "rock and roll" has become meaningless.  Today the term "bluegrass" has become an attraction because young people are looking for music to identify with and the pickings are scarce (where are the Beatles or the Elvis' of this generation?) and the fact that bluegrass is the ONLY segment of the music market that is still growing, even though it is a small segment of the total market.  This attracts the savvy country singers who hire prominent bluegrass musicians to produce a country album played with bluegrass instruments and then identify themselves as "bluegrass".  There is even a "Bluegrass Mass" being done these days which is essentially classical music done with bluegrass instruments.  It also causes promoters to use the term to sell a few more tickets.  I remember a few years ago when "Nickel Creek" appeared here (upstate NY), they were advertised as bluegrass.  They were an excellent band but to advertise them as "bluegrass" was simply not truthful and did considerable disservice to people like myself who have worked hard and long to bring bluegrass music to the North Country.  Young people leave those concerts thinking that they have seen and heard bluegrass and they have not seen bluegrass.  I am a fan of and play traditional bluegrass but I am not a purist.  I enjoy variations and exploration - without them, we would not have had the "Seldom Scene".  My band does songs (I am not the band leader) that wander from traditional.  I think the real problem is when the title "Bluegrass" is used because someone is not comfortable enough to accurately describe their music, so they grab the description to sell a few more tickets or Cds.

----------


## Salty Dog

This is a personal (but public) note to Willie - good to see you back with the same old spunk and extensive knowledge of the great re-emergence of Bluegrass music in the DC area.  Just to jog your memory, I still have clear memories of Donna Stoneman prancing around in her short cowgirl skirt playing hot licks on her mandolin ... or was she dancing hot licks in her cowgirl skirt ... I guess my clear memory is really of how well she played the mandolin.  She really was an attention grabber for a young man like myself.  I also remember Pop Stoneman who was still living but not very lively, sitting in the back playing the autoharp on his lap.  Scotty was probably there but I don't have specific memories of him (I guess he wasn't pretty) as this was downtown DC;  vintage 1962-1963 at a place that I think was the "Alamo".  I do also remember Ronnie playing the "not so cute" sister and playing a hot banjo.  Do you think this was Bluegrass?  Were you there?

----------


## AlanN

_and not just a lot of noise being made by drunks and pot heads,_ 


That's it, I'm switching to rap...

----------


## stratman62

"Monroe didn`t like the new grass sound and I bet he didn`t approve of drums in bluegrass either, he didn`t even like a dobro either...And I can`t say I blame him, there are some dobro players out there that have a good style that I can accept though....

It is my understanding That Mr. Monroe didn't use a dobro to set himself apart from Roy Acuff. As far as him not liking the instrument, I believe Tut Taylor would set you straight on this, they jammed together often and a lot, I've heard some of the the tapes. That being said, I personally have no use for the Bluegrass Police. L. W. Lambert who was a recording artist and has won several world championships on banjo told me that back in the 60's they would throw out Long Distance Information Give Me Memphis Tenn. just to break up the steady stream of drive and see what kind of feedback they got from the audience. No limits, pick it if you can.

----------


## Flyboy

> Elton John wasn't even peeing in his diapers yet when real classic rock was happening but that's how much the meaning of rock and roll has been distorted by the "me too, wannabee" crowd


Hmmm ...  Elton John was born in 1947, so let's hope (for his parents sake,) that he wasn't STILL peeing in his diapers when real classic rock was happening!   :Wink: 

What the hell IS "Classic Rock"?  Titles like that are just convenient labels - they don't mean anything. Let's face it: Elvis was ripping off & distorting "authentic" black music for the "me too, wannabee" crowd. So were the Rolling Stones. But where the Stones went on to create something new out of their influences, Elvis became a grotesque Vegas parody of himself (ultimately the Stones followed suit - they just did a better job of it!). So it goes ...

I love Bill Monroe, I also love the Punch Brothers. I guess all I really require is that music has a genuine quality of (hard-to-define) "authenticity" to it. Without innovation, without stretching boundaries, music would be completely hide-bound.We would never have got "traditional" bluegrass to start with!

----------


## Willie Poole

Salty Dog....The Stonemans had two bands...One was called "The Stonemans" and the other was called "Bluegrass Champs" and depending on where they played and what people wanted to hear that is the name they would use, the band members were a little different during the years....I remember the alamo, the one in DC but I can`t remember ever going to see a show there....If I go into DC now I wear a bullet proof vest and carry a legal weapon.....

   Dwight, just because a "Bluegrass Band" plays songs lke Memphis don`t mean that song is bluegrass, Jim and Jesse recorded it on one of their albums but they didn`t always play traditional bluegrass either, in fact very seldom but I love their music, just call it what it is........come on now folks ....Let this thread die and go away, I see I am in a minority anyway....

----------


## Mike Bunting

> Salty Dog....The Stonemans had two bands...One was called "The Stonemans" and the other was called "Bluegrass Champs" and depending on where they played and what people wanted to hear that is the name they would use, the band members were a little different during the years....I remember the alamo, the one in DC but I can`t remember ever going to see a show there....If I go into DC now I wear a bullet proof vest and carry a legal weapon.....
> 
>    Dwight, just because a "Bluegrass Band" plays songs lke Memphis don`t mean that song is bluegrass, Jim and Jesse recorded it on one of their albums but they didn`t always play traditional bluegrass either, in fact very seldom but I love their music, just call it what it is........come on now folks ....Let this thread die and go away, I see I am in a minority anyway....


 Well. in general, I agree with you and it is good to be in the minority. Play it pretty, dude.

----------


## Salty Dog

In my opinion, the saddest moment in bluegrass history was when the Stanley Brothers did "Blue Moon of Kentucky" - I can barely listen to it even now.  Bill Monroe mimicked the Elvis arrangement and did OK but he had a vested interest as he was getting author's royalties on the records Elvis sold.

----------


## John Ritchhart

Bush: "Hello, Mr. Monroe I'm Sam Bush.
Monroe: Yea, what do you call that stuff you play?
Bush: We call it Newgrass, sir.
Monroe: Yea, I hate that.

----------


## ralph johansson

> You are just confirming what I have been saying...The Whites aren`t bluegrass but they get booked on "Bluegrass" festivals just as Nickle Creek did a few years ago, as much as I like to listen to AKUS that band isn`t really bluegrass but not far from it on some songs....Have any bands ever lugged drums onto the stage at a "Bluegrass" festival?  I don`t know of any but I have seen Cliff Waldron use them at a nightclub, actually just one snare drum, I guess he needed to keep Ed Ferris in time....WE`ve beat this horse to death...I`m gone....Willie


BG festivals have always included non-BG acts, for variety. My first festival, in Culpeper, VA featured Grandpa Jones. At Bean Blossom the same year Monroe duetted with a blind guitarist from North Carolina. And at Berryville there was a cajun band, and Maybelle Carter, alone or in duet with Monroe. Who could sit through a whole evening of *only* "traditional" BG?

----------


## Willie Poole

I could and have...If I pay for a bluegrass festival I want it to be bluegrass....I made some/most of those festivals at Culpepper and Berryville and some were not booked as bluegrass, listed as bluegrass & country, probably promoted by Carlton Haney....I jammed while Grandpa Jones was on stage and we had more people listening to us than were listening to Grandpa....Could that blind guitar player have been Doc Watson?....

----------


## Michael Ramsey

Please read my entire post before responding in haste.

As far as "traditional bluegrass" goes (and I DO have all the respect for the original forms of bluegrass), I'd like to meet the person that whipped Monroe into shape and told HIM what he could and couldn't play.  You know he had to be "parfull."   :Grin: 

WE all talk about "traditional bluegrass."  I understand what people are talking about, but Monroe stumbled upon this very form of music when he had Scruggs join his band and then brought Earl to the world on the stage of the Ryman Auditorium.

Monroe TOOK A CHANCE with his music (first established as a duet with Charlie and then recognized for his own efforts once he gained membership on the Opry), when he brought Scruggs into the mix to TRY a NEW form of music  :Wink:  which had included clawhammer banjo, prior to Scruggs joining in 1945.

In doing so, he pis__d a bunch of musicians that we now call or classify as "old-time" off, since he stole their thunder with this new banjo man who played out FRONT instead of the customary "rhythm" to the fiddle that the "old-time" folks were so fond of.  :Crying:   The same thing happened to anyone playing any kind of music about 10 years later when Elvis stepped onto the scene, after being influenced by Bill Monroe to "try something new."

In the late 50's to early 60's, Ralph and Carter Stanley recorded "Finger Poppin' Time" and used some black musicians (who happened to be in the studio at about the same time) to pull off the finger poppin'.  I'm sure that was traditional for SOME form of music.

We all have our likes and dislikes when it comes to everything in life.  That's why they sell more than one brand of car these days.  That's why there are varying forms of what some folks call "bluegrass."  If we all wanted to stay tradinional, does that mean that Junior Sisk would have to be restricted to riding crooked, unpaved country backroads to get back and forth to his gigs, in a late 30's airport limo?  He surely wouldn't want to take 1-81 down to where it merges with 1-40 west to head to The Station Inn in Nashville, especially since the interstate highways weren't there in Monroe's or The Stanley's earlier days, would he?

I'm sure if we'd ask Junior (and I do have his number) he'd be the first to say that what he plays pales in comparison with what Ralph and Carter or Monroe, Flatt & Scruggs pulled off in the mid-to-late 40's.  It's BLUEGRASS but Jun probably wouldn't say it's traditional bluegrass (and I do love me some Junior Sisk music, he's my favorite singer).

I promise I'm not trying to convince anyone to like or dislike anything regarding music, according to what I have stated here.  My way of viewing everything in life is to gather info, study and come up with MY conclusions OBJECTIVELY, by studing the evidence.

I respect Monroe and all of his music, even the stuff from the mid-50's with vibes on it.  But I also respect any group of musicians who are TRYING something new, much like Monroe did in the mid-40's.  Some of it I will like and some of it I won't.  But if folks are trying something new, they may come up with something new that may appeal to someone who wouldn't give any form of bluegrass a chance at all.

Kudos to the inventors, who were creators, who were inspirers, to the new creators, which, somewhere along the way, will appeal to the listeners.  :Smile:

----------


## allenhopkins

> We all have our likes and dislikes when it comes to everything in life....My way of viewing everything in life is to gather info, study and come up with MY conclusions OBJECTIVELY, by studing the evidence.


Well, nothing _objective_ about "likes and dislikes"; by definition, those are _subjective._  You "like and respect" musicians who are playing music that differs from the traditional bluegrass sound.  Willie thinks that music "isn't bluegrass," and disagrees with those who call it "bluegrass."  Difference of (subjective) opinion.

This disagreement will probably persist as long as there's bluegrass music, and fans who listen to it.  I think it's pretty futile to criticize musicians for experimenting and changing the music they play.  That's been going on since prehistoric times, probably.  Whether you like the product or not depends on your (subjective) taste.  You may agree or disagree whether the result of this experimentation is "bluegrass," "jazz," "classical," or whatever.  We each have our own definitions, which often come down to, "If I like it, it's bluegrass/jazz/classical/whatever; if I don't, it isn't."

Labels are necessary, but arguing about them can lead us down some definitional blind alleys.  Really, there are only two kinds of music: good music (which is what _I_ like), and bad music (everything else).

----------


## JeffD

Bluegrass or not?

----------


## AlanN

Sure

----------


## Michael Ramsey

> Sure


I agree wholeheartedly, Alan, just like JD Crowe's version of Paul Simon's classic, The Leaves That Are Green.  Or, the BG Album Band's version of Jim Croce's, Age.  Or Charlie Waller covering Crying in the Chapel.  Or The Country Gents covering Gordon Lightfoot's Redwood Hill.

Lots of these songs are by modern writers, so can they be classified as truly "traditional?"  When bluegrass came on the scene in the mid 1940's, they were anything but "traditional."  In fact, they were progressive, if you compare the mid-40's bluegrass to old-time or string band music, which is where lots of the songs or material came from.

BTW, if Monroe wrote lots of his own material (which he did), could it be considered "traditional?"

I understand what kind of bluegrass someone is talking about when they call it "traditional."  I do like that kind of bluegrass, it's just the terminology used to describe it.  Maybe "original" bluegrass might be a closer term in describing the first generation bands and their material, or music performed in that same style as those forefathers.

----------


## Mandoviol

It's 'grass, Jim, but not as Bill knew it.

I see it all as the natural evolution of musical styles; just as classical music evolved.  We only create delineations for what _kind_ of music it is within the genre (Beethoven most likely wasn't calling his music "Classical" or "proto-Romantic")--it's all just music within the genre.  Each new artist/songwriter/composer brings their own ideas to the genre based on their influences, just as Monroe, the Stanley Brothers, and others brought their own ideas and influences to the mix.  So really, it's all bluegrass in my book; sure, one artist might take it in a direction that I don't necessarily like, but it still is part of the over-all style.  And to me, there's nothing wrong with that.

----------


## AlanN

> just like JD Crowe's version of Paul Simon's classic, The Leaves That Are Green.  Or, the BG Album Band's version of Jim Croce's, Age.  Or Charlie Waller covering Crying in the Chapel.  Or The Country Gents covering Gordon Lightfoot's Redwood Hill.


or Spectrum's 'Red Rubber Ball', BG 45's 'Bridge Over Troubled Water', that hippie band with Frank Greathouse 'Love Potion #9', Newgrass Boys 'I'm Down'....and On and On, I'll Follow My Darlin....no no, wrong song...got carried away  :Laughing:

----------


## MikeEdgerton

This all reminds me of the quotation we have on our band website:

"…I guess you could consider them a Bluegrass band… they are going to do a lot of real neat songs in the Bluegrass style…"

Randy Bailey
WBJB FM 90.5 Radio Personality
and Albert Hall Host

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*AlanN* - I won the LP of the Charles River Valley Boys "Beatle Country" by winning a Banjo comp.at a BG festival years back      ( big prizes weren't they !). I now have the CD. I totally love "Yeller Submarine" complete with the gunfire - completely crackers & great fun. :Grin: 
*Michael* - i agree with your questioning of the term. "Trad." in a way. Maybe the music  should be termed 'original',but also, maybe the_ performing style_ 'could' be termed Trad. Most of us seem to know what we mean whichever terms we use,
                                                                                                              Ivan :Chicken:

----------


## M.Marmot

I was reminded of this thread yeaterday when someone mentioned Lewis Carroll's Alice Trhough The Looking Glass.

_`My name is Alice, but --' 

`It's a stupid name enough!' Humpty Dumpty interrupted impatiently. `What does it mean?' 

`Must a name mean something?' Alice asked doubtfully. 

`Of course it must,' Humpty Dumpty said with a short laugh: `my name means the shape I am -- and a good handsome shape it is, too. With a name like yours, you might be any shape, almost.'_ 

Then theres also this exchange

_`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.' 

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.' 

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. `They've a temper, some of them -- particularly verbs: they're the proudest -- adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs -- however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!' 

`Would you tell me please,' said Alice, `what that means?' 

`Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. `I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life.'_ 

All of which makes me wonder if Mr. Monroe was ever partial to reading Mr. Carroll, theres something almost Neverland about classic Monroe phrasing like 'that aint no part of nothing', and the classic 'what do you call that kinda music you play?...Yeah, i hate that'.

----------


## M.Marmot

> *Michael* - i agree with your questioning of the term. "Trad." in a way. Maybe the music  should be termed 'original',but also, maybe the_ performing style_ 'could' be termed Trad. Most of us seem to know what we mean whichever terms we use,
> Ivan


I was thinking about that last week, the use of the word traditional with regards Bluegrass, which was more or less invented about the same time as the microwave, and i thought soemthing that relatively recent could not possibly be 'traditional', but looking up the word i found that it can actually suit 

Tradition - 4: characteristic manner, method, or style.

Not as venerable as i thought the word meant, ara, but you learn something new everyday, now i'm off to research navel gazing, which i assume is to boats as train watching is to locomotives

----------

