Mixed Feelings...

[Mike Bunting]

That kickoff on Roanoke just slays me. Bill's rhythmic sense and his powerful right hand are amazing. Those vids are from at time when he was at his physical best. I love the instrumentals he wrote in the later years of his career as his physical skills began to wane. These tunes had a great musical sense to them and it didn't sound as if they were just vehicles to show off technical skills.

[Shelagh Moore]

Hi Tom,

I certainly appreciate Bill Monroe's massive contribution to music but like one or two others, his particular style of playing and that of one or two other much admired mandolin notables isn't especially to my personal taste. But, there again, I'm not a bluegrass player like many others here so tend to listen more to other players anyway.

[DataNick]

That kickoff on Roanoke just slays me...

Mike,

I'm still tryin' to figure that deal out; yeah, just blows me away!

And he plays it in such an off-hand way; you know the dude had serious mando-game!

[allenhopkins]

I'm going to take a step back from critiquing Monroe's music, and/or OP's take on it --

There are probably as many people on the Cafe who, while recognizing Monroe's importance in the "mandolin universe," find his playing not particularly to their taste, as there are Monroe-o-philes. Realize that we have classical players, Irish/Celtic players, old-timey players, players from a variety of ethnic and national backgrounds -- and to them Bill Monroe and bluegrass mandolin aren't central concerns.

Second, de gustibus non disputandum est. What you like, what I like, what anyone else likes, is a matter of personal preference. Playing style, repertoire, mandolin sound, color of case lining, it's personal preference. You think some of Monroe's playing is crude, over-aggressive, sloppy; others find it "real," vital, exciting. So?

What motivates me to post at all, is someone starting out by saying, "I'm going to say something with which I know others won't agree, but so many of you have been rude, with 'trolling, bickering, and personal attacks,' that I need to preclude that by asking you to withhold your 'strong opinions.'" That's really not needed. This site is basically well-mannered, accepting, and supportive, by anyone's standards. The number of threads that get locked down for intemperate language is minuscule as compared to other types of forums (fora?). The responses you've received reveal a lively discussion, with differing points of view, which is very much the norm.

The only way to avoid even the slim possibility of being vigorously opposed -- whether you call that "bickering and personal attacks" or not -- is to never say anything with which another Cafe-er would disagree. No one wants that. Most of us stay well within the boundaries almost all the time. One of the reasons this is a useful place for mandolin lovers to gather.

[MikeEdgerton]

Which isn't to say it ain't dangerous.

Well yeah, the last three folks that posted this disappeared and ain't been seen since but that ain't no part of nuthin' if you get my drift.

[Mike Bunting]

Mike,

I'm still tryin' to figure that deal out; yeah, just blows me away!

And he plays it in such an off-hand way; you know the dude had serious mando-game!

A lot of panache.

[jaycat]

Point of curiousity: did Monroe really "invent" bluegrass music? Were there no precursors to the genre?

[belbein]

Point of curiousity: did Monroe really "invent" bluegrass music? Were there no precursors to the genre?

I'm not a musicologist, but my understanding is this: Monroe and the Bluegrass Mountain Boys invented the specific sound they played, and therefore in a very narrow sense, they invented "bluegrass." But the basic music they were playing is variously known as Old Time, or String Band, or Scots-Irish, or Appalachian folk, or American roots, or maybe as all of them in various combinations. Now all of this stuff is classified by the ignorati and even by knowledgeable people as "bluegrass" because people know what you're talking about when you say it (like "classical music" is inaccurate, but it transmits a specific meaning and is therefore inaccurately used by nearly everyone). But anyway, to answer your question, in cultural things, there are always precursors.

[sgarrity]

Tom, I have to disagree. There is plenty of fake, soulless music out there. Just turn on your radio. As an amateur musician I'm much more critical of music than the general public. And I think there's plenty of junk music out there, a lot of which people are getting insanely wealthy on! Who would you rather hear play The Thrill Is Gone......BB King or Yngwie Malmsteen? I'd pick BB every time!

Stevedenver got my point about playing it. Trying to learn some of it yourself will help show you the music's depth and intricacies. Some of it is quite mysterious and won't reveal itself for some time. For the last 8 years a group of 50 Monroe-heads gathers in Owensboro, KY for a weekend of in-depth study of The Mon's music. This year will be my 4th and I feel I'm barely scratching the surface. You have to keep in mind that Monroe had a LONG career. His music, tone, and ability changed over the years. He turned 70 y/o in 1981! But was still writing tunes and performing pretty much until the end. I'm glad that clip of Roanoke got posted. He was 44 y/o in that clip. If that's not clean and fast, I don't know what is. And that Kentucky Mandolin video.......is that not excellent bluegrass mandolin playing? That's what I mean by listen harder. Monroe could play any way he wanted to play. He was a notorious control freak over "his music." What you hear is exactly how he wanted you to hear it, with the obvious exception of declining ability when he got up there in years. So that's why I take exception when people call his playing sloppy and limited in scope. We all have limitations, just like Monroe did. And that's what helps define our own personal playing style.

Now think of all the tunes he wrote.......from the relatively easy Bluegrass Stomp to the very deep, ethereal My Last Days On Earth. The bluegrass standards like Wheel Hoss, The Gold Rush, Lonesome Moonlight Waltz, Old Dangerfield, Jerusalem Ridge, Kentucky Waltz, and on and on and on.........

I'm a mandolin nut. I pretty much like it all. Burns, Bush, Lawson, Thile, Steffey, Compton, Gorman, White, Stecher, O'Brien, McCoury, Fibish, Stiernberg, Rachell, Young, Del Grosso, Skaggs, Sizemore........you get the idea. I was listening to Yank on the way home today. Some of it I like more than others. Some of it has more soul to me than others. Some of it is too "slick" at times, focused on technical prowess over serving the song/tune. Thile for example. (Fasten your seat belts folks......) Some of his stuff is purely about showing off his technical superiority. Some of it is amazingly musical and full of soul and passion. I go to see him any time he's within a two hour drive. Listen to the Thile/Daves recording and tell me you don't hear some of Monroe's style/influence. Mike Compton is arguably the leading practitioner of Monroe-style mandolin but has taken what Monroe did, added IMHO better technical ability and a healthy dose of the blues to carve out his own style. Ronnie McCoury's style is firmly rooted in Mon's playing with a modern Dawg-esque flair that keeps it fresh and interesting. You don't have to love him. But many, if not most, bluegrass mandolin players start with Monroe and then adapt his style or use it as a springboard to find their own voice.

I'll leave you with this video which illustrates how his style of chord-based playing can be used in almost any style of music. Music starts about 1:50 in:

[Mike Bunting]

Dead on, Shaun.

[David Lewis]

It seems to me that most people in this discussion, if not all, are happy to agree to disagree. There's one undoubtedly great player who I don't enjoy listening to. I won't say who... I just don't "get" him. I may listen and it could "click", so I'll not say who. But that's ok. Bluegrass itself can be a difficult genre to 'get'. I enjoy playing orange blossom special to students who are steeped in more contemporary genres. Once they get it, they love it. But some just never do. And that's ok. Music speaks to us. Or it doesn't. And you should never be scared of voicing an honest, thoughtful opinion. (I love monroe, btw)

[foldedpath]

That photo of young Thile and Monroe is priceless!

I'm not a Bluegrass player, so I'm barely qualified to comment, except in a sense of the "big picture" about traditional music. So here goes.

Fire up 'yer blowtorches!

Before I picked up mandolin, I spent many years playing Blues guitar, both acoustic under the influence of Rev. Gary Davis and his fans (Kaukonen, etc.) and then later the electric Chicago style from all those guys who moved up north from the Delta. I think I have every vinyl LP that Freddie King recorded in a box somewhere. That was my personal Rosetta stone for decoding how to play Blues, but it was already in the later generation from the sources.

I've never been able to get into Robert Johnson, or the other very raw, early Delta Blues stuff before it all went electric. I can appreciate where it came from, but it's just hard to listen to (for me). Trying to emulate that sound, would be some kind of historical recreation project. Many musicians have gone down that path, and I respect what they're doing. I'm just not into that side of the Blues. I'm more of a Robben Ford fan when it comes to electric blues guitar, and I know that's way outside the pale, for hardcore Blues guys.

Bringing it back to Bluegrass... for me, Monroe is the Bluegrass version of Robert Johnson for Blues players. You either get it, or you don't.

Personally, I don't enjoy hearing Monroe's staccato, machine gun picking style on the fast tunes, or contemporary players who mimic that style. Because I'm into Irish and Scottish music these days, I like fast playing with as much expression as you can cram into the notes as they fly past.

I think that's where players like Grisman, Marshall, and Thile (and many others!) have opened some doors, with their style of playing. It's not just a fast flurry of notes, it's notes with expression. If I was a Bluegrass player I think I'd lean to the modern side, but I can see where the influences are in that music, and I can respect it, like I respect Robert Johnson's place in the history of Blues guitar.

[Mike Bunting]

Why would we fire up our blowtorches?

[foldedpath]

Why would we fire up our blowtorches?

I guess I should save that phrase for something really controversial... like "Monroe sucks!" or something. But let's see what the reaction is to the "machine gun" phrase...

[Mike Bunting]

Sounds like you are trolling. I'll pass.

[sgarrity]

I don't think "machine gun style" is all that incendiary!

[Austin Bob]

I understand the OP's point of view, but I don't particularly agree with it.

I feel the same way about some very revered early blues players that shall remain nameless. I get that they were pioneers, but I've never been impressed with their playing.

[foldedpath]

Sounds like you are trolling. I'll pass.

Not trolling, if it wasn't clear from the original post. I don't troll here, just expressing an honest opinion.

Edit to add, this is what I mean:



For me, that's the "Robert Johnson Blues" side of BM. Can't relate to it, personally, with almost no dynamics and timing that could be charitably described as "loose." But it's real, and it's authentic, and it's great for what it is.

I still play some of his tunes, like Lonesome Moonlight Waltz, because they're great tunes, and I honor his place in the music. Even if I don't want to pick like that.

[almeriastrings]

What irks me more is all this talk of "real" and "soul" and "true." There is no "fake" or "false" music, for starts.

We obviously live on different planets.

Spice Girls, anyone? Justin Bieber?

[sgarrity]

This video says a lot IMHO. He was probably in his mid-70s here. This is how you play Southern Flavor as far as I'm concerned. You also get to see the stubborn, entertaining side of his "I'll Show You" personality.

[David Lewis]

We obviously live on different planets.

Spice Girls, anyone? Justin Bieber?

That's not music... :razz:

[Tom Coletti]

This is how you play Southern Flavor as far as I'm concerned.

No. Having already explained my opinion on Southern Flavor's untapped potential, any "this is how Bill and everyone else should do it" statement doesn't fly with me. For the record, this is the first Monroe clip that I ever saw way back in high school. I loved it immediately, but I knew that there were other ways to play it, and so I started learning to play the mandolin.

We obviously live on different planets.

Spice Girls, anyone? Justin Bieber?

Bieb's content may be music designed primarily for marketing and sales, and yes, it has very irritating, generic, and unpleasant qualities to those who study music, but as much as you and I hate it, it is still "real music." If he released an album with twelve tracks of absolute silence for purchase on iTunes, then that might constitute "fake music." It would probably sound better than his previous albums put together, but still. I hate Justin Bieber as much as the next guy, but I don't claim that he doesn't make music or that he isn't a musician. He's a godawful musician by my musical standards, but a musician nonetheless.

And Justin Bieber is normally the scapegoat for people who have very little experience in the modern Pop scene. I can assure you that Justin Bieber isn't even in the top ten of the worst Pop artists out there now. (Chris Brown, Nicki Minaj, etc. will surprise you with their awfulness) And while there is plenty of unpleasant "electronic" music, there are plenty of good examples.


But getting back on track with the general thread, I agree with foldedpath regarding the Bill Monroe/Robert Johnson comparison. For me, that version of Kentucky Mandolin wasn't too bad (much better than the previous version that I found, and i especially like the banjo in this one) but the Rawhide kickoff was too fast and the note fidelity suffered. It's one thing to play so quickly that the notes are a crazy blur, but it's too blurred to make sense in this case. Other players are guilty of that, too. Heck, most of them are. I get it that bluegrass is known for its speed, but come on. Sometimes I wish that the entire genre can slow down just a tad so that we can actually have the time to savor every note.

=====

As for this whole "unnamed player" or "a certain group" or a "person that we won't mention," nobody's being cute or fooling anybody. We're clearly talking about Chris Thile & Punch Brothers and people love to completely shoot them down. "They're not bluegrass" is something that I see all the time. They themselves never claimed that they were in the first place. Bill Monroe took old-time instruments and made a specific bluegrass sound. Nobody said "that ain't how the Carter Family did it." Punch Brothers took what we'd now consider bluegrass instruments and made their own sound too, which, as much as many of you may hate it, appeals to different people and opens up new audiences and genres to bluegrass instrumentation.

And Punch Brothers are doing us a favor. Would you rather that young people listened to Nicki Minaj or Punch Brothers or--I can't believe I'm saying this--even Mumford & Sons? At least the general public is more likely to dive deeper and discover what you call "real" bluegrass through one of the latter two. With M&S it may take longer for "mainstream" kiddos to find bluegrass, but Jerry Douglas played on their last album, and once they find Jerry, they'll find AKUS and Sam Bush and Bela Fleck and then they're in.

I'll admit that I had a very difficult time appreciating PB & Chris several years ago, since most of it flew over my head and wasn't the sound that I had expected. Bill Monroe was the only mandolinist that I knew about for months. Now having been exposed to lots of bluegrass and becoming somewhat tired of the sound that I had expected, Chris Thile & Punch Brothers are a refreshing retreat for me, and their covers are really where they excel. I'm just frustrated by the ignorance that surrounds them. I was open to Bill Monroe over an extended period with some success, but it seems like people shoot down PB & Chris almost immediately without getting the full picture, then refuse to come back and try something new. Barriers are put up. Purist mentality kicks in. Things stagnate. Thanks to those who posted the videos earlier in this thread which led me to the version of KM that I wasn't aware of. Now I'd like to return the favor to try to break down some other walls.

For those who believe that Chris Thile is a show-off with only technical ability and no soul, this tune that he wrote may prove that he has both:


For those who believe that Punch Brothers don't have any classic "drive" or bounce or whatever, here's this one:


Just keep an open mind and give them a shot. You may be surprised.

--Tom

[Mike Bunting]

What are you talking about, nobody is knocking Chris. I had no idea to whom that poster was referring. I thought we were allowing people like what they wanted, now you are telling me I should like CT. I don't need you to do that, I was listening to Chris long before you discovered him, I have his first record. You seem to have the notion that the people here who are describing why they like Monroe, don't like anything else. Wrong.

[Ron McMillan]

Put me down as one who thinks Chris Thile has no equal, past or present. The first 19 seconds of Thile intro to 'I get a kick out of you' on Dolly Parton's 'Little Sparrow' album represents to me the material of months of study and endless respect. It's blindingly fast, but not in the least machine-gun like. Slow it down to about 60% speed and you hear flawless syncopation and immaculate, varied timing that is so subtle you don't know it's there when you hear it at full speed.

On the original topic, I am not much of a bluegrass fan, so I don't go out of my way to listen to Bill Monroe. Modern bluegrass seems to me to be too obsessed with playing the most notes in the shortest period of time, music that is largely absent of subtlety. YouTube clips of jam sessions at bluegrass events are (to me) a big y-a-w-n for that reason. In the history of traditionally-derived music, Bill Monroe earned and deserves huge respect, and it is almost inevitable that for some people this involves his elevation to near-deity status. To me that's unnecessary, but understandable. It's not to my personal taste, but that's only important to me.

ron

[almeriastrings]

I must say, you seem very keen on insisting that other people have to like what you like and agree with your point of view on music generally. You don't like Monroe - fine by me! No problem at all with that, but please, don't try and tell me what I should like and why your view of things is somehow superior. It isn't. It's merely that our tastes diverge completely. I did (carefully) watch both the clips you posted, and while I do think Chris Thile is an incredibly talented musician - I still did not like either of them. I won't go into why (though I could, at length) it is enough to say "sorry - just does not do a thing for me".

What Mike says is true. Many of us DO like other things as well. I hugely admire the late Jethro Burns, for example. Inventive, technically outstanding and always musical and listenable. I can't PLAY like him, but I can certainly enjoy and appreciate what he did. Likewise, David Grisman... so, we are not "closed minded" - some of us just have very different preferences. Coffee black or white? Tea with sugar or not? Neither is inherently superior. Totally down to personal taste. On guitar, I tend to prefer Dan Crary over Tony Rice - I would never try to argue one was "better" or "worse" than the other, however.