dupreejan - Posted - 01/09/2017:  21:44:02

Over the decades of attending festivals, buying albums, playing and listening to Bluegrass, an introducing others to Bluegrass music, I have compiled a list of common complaints  voiced by others and occasionally by me. 1. After about the  third song all of it sounds alike (Scruggs type songs, and anything from the 50's and 60's usually). 2. I like it up until they start singing (Bill Monroe, Ralph Stanley, Del McCoury, Bobby Osborne usually). 3. They play every song at the same tempo, way to fast ( a lot of bands) 4. It has too much fiddle. 4.That banjo starts to sound irritating after a few songs ( mostly arch tops). 5. I really like that song they are playing originally, but not the way they have changed it around. So if there are any up and coming bands out there, that can avoid these "faults", they will probably have lots of success. But, if you avoid too many, it may not be Bluegrass anymore.

Edited by - Bill Rogers on 01/11/2017 03:06:06

stanleytone - Posted - 01/10/2017:  01:23:44

As an archtop player, I heartily agree. Archtops can sound irritating,especially to flathead players. That's why us archtoppers play archtops!LOL

As far as all songs sounding the same after 3 songs, blues songs all sound the same after ONE song!

One good thing about those complaints is that it weeds out those who don't really know or love the music.

Edited by - stanleytone on 01/10/2017 01:31:49

collegiate - Posted - 01/10/2017:  01:31:15

I identify with the sentiment.

What little playing skill I have I learnt from Janet Davis' excellent book 'You can teach yourself banjo', however the speed at which she plays the examples makes the underlying tune unidentifiable.

I have also Jack Hatfield's book 'Best of Jack Hatfield. which contains BG songs and a number of gospel songs which I find much more pleasing than the machine gun numbers you talk about.

I will now retire to the bunker

GStump - Posted - 01/10/2017:  04:31:08

A most interesting subject. It is, after all, in the ear of the listener. We play the banjo and this music because we love it, NOT to become rich and famous "playing a banjo." Naturally, many thoughts and perspectives go across my mind when this subject comes up. One thing that occurs to me is this - years ago, ( in the time frame of the 50's and 60's) when you heard a tune or song kicked off, w/in the first measure or two, you KNEW who was doing the song! Part of this no doubt is because back then, there were NOT 3000 bands playing the music and touring and/or recording the yearly album! There were perhaps a dozen well known and recognizable bands. You had Bill Monroe, Flatt and Scruggs, Reno and Smiley, The Osborne Bros., JD Crowe and his group, The Stanley Bros., Carl Story, a few others of course. Then as you move into the 70's, you get the Seldom Scene, the Country Gentlemen, and so on - the point being, that ALL these groups did in fact sound quite differently from one another/each other. The music was NEW and FRESH! So indulge me on this topic as we explore that thought - There were in fact fewer bands, and it was NOT just the singing, OR the way in which the instruments were played, but also the choice of material, the songs and tunes, the arrangements, the backup, the kickoffs and breaks and endings. So of course it follows that it wasn't nearly so difficult to quickly realize which band might be doing a particular tune. Now of course, the number of bands is in fact much larger. Therefore it has by sheer number of bands and musicians become quite a bit harder to know who is doing the tune/song! Another thought that comes to mind - back in the day, it was not nearly so common for band members to change bands nearly as often as they do today! (some musicians change bands about as often as I change underwear) ALSO - along those lines, SO MANY musicians today appear as a guest artist on another group's album! I won't say I hate this thing, But.... why do a dozen musicians (we all know who they are) SO OFTEN appear on someone else's album? Even a well established band - the "band leader" or "front man/woman," will make a decision to employ the services of a well known musician on their next recorded album. Even when that band already has the spot filled!? For instance, when the band already has a very good banjo player, or fiddle player, or what have you? It's one thing to have a very good, well known fiddler appear on the album IF the band does not normally carry a fiddle player. It's quite another to have that well known fiddler appear as a guest artist on the entire album, IF the band normally carries a fiddle player! To me, this is an unjust situation. It comes across as not being fair to that regular member. And it makes one think that it becomes a matter of simply selling more albums, "more product" if you will. OF course there are better fiddle players than others, or banjo players, or mandolin players.... or singers! Again, that's a matter of debate and opinion. However, quite expected, as time went by and the music grew and the number of bands increased over the years, of course it became harder to distinguish the bands from one another! The problem is twofold - Today there are so many more bands and musicians; AND as the number of bands and musicians increased, again, quite naturally it did become harder to play something "different" from everyone else. That is, to establish "your own sound and individuality." It can be done but the task became harder as time marched on! On occasion a group or a band leader comes along, and quite obviously the "intent" of the band is to play tunes that are associated with one of the great groups of a time gone by - sometimes as closely as possible, in both the singing and the playing of the respective individual instruments. The other approach is to do songs or tunes that weren't necessarily performed by that particular group "back in the day," but to make an attempt to do said song/tune "like" that group might have done it. Ok, I've said my piece.... I'll stop while I'm ahead and before I dig my hole any deeper! NOTE - I didn't really want to make any judgement calls about things I observe, but no doubt my feelings about some things did come thru!

Texasbanjo - Posted - 01/10/2017:  05:08:24

I guess different people have different "complaints" about bluegrass.  I love traditional songs, yes, songs, and prefer singing to just instrumentals.  I get tired of listening to  breaks by fiddles especially because the fiddles don't seem to know when to quit.  Usually the guitar and banjo and mandolin, etc. take a short break and then let someone else have the spotlight and that's fine.  I'd like to hear more bass breaks, that's something you just don't hear very often and when you do, it usually brings the audience to their feet if it's a good, solid break.  

I also think some bands try to play too fast.  When it's too fast, there's just a blue of notes and you don't really know what they are, whether they're playing right or not, it's just too fast to really listen to.  Nothing wrong with fast songs, but there is a time when it gets too fast.

I get irritated if there's too much banter going on between songs.  I don't need to listen to a bunch of jokes or a sermon, I want to listen to  music.  If you want to talk, sing instead.  To me, it seems like they aren't prepared for the gig and are wasting time so they won't have to play so many songs.  I could be wrong, but that's usually what I think.

To keep everything from sounding the same, our group used to start off with a fairly fast song and then a slower one -- different tempo, doesn't sound the same.  We'd do a couple of vocals and an instrumental, and keep it where it was interesting, not the same old same old all the time.  Tried to get breaks in by all instruments and sometimes all together on an instrumental.  Seemed to work okay for our group.  At least the audience never got up and left during our gig.

Basically, I love bluegrass, vocals, instrumentals, jammin', it's just all one big happy, sometimes scrappy, family.  

heavy5 - Posted - 01/10/2017:  05:40:50

After 60 some years a fan , yes , there are times it can get very predictable & old .
We particularly enjoy a talented new group that really has it together w/ maybe something just a bit more interesting than you've heard .

chuckv97 - Posted - 01/10/2017:  05:51:39

For me ,any genre of music gets old if I listen too much to it,,whether it's BG, old time, folk-roots, classical, jazz, etc. There are some great tunes, and then there are lots of mediocre tunes. I agree with what's been posted above - too many bands sound similar nowadays, just like the present day country music out of Nashville.

steve davis - Posted - 01/10/2017:  05:55:17

Can't please everybody.

rupickin5 - Posted - 01/10/2017:  05:55:26

As someone (was it Hartford?) once said "limitation is the basis of style"...

IMHO that is why (to my ears...) bluegrass always sounds like bluegrass. Think about it...B.B. King always sounded like B.B. King...Muddy always sounded like Muddy. Jazz always sounds like jazz...Classical always sounds like classical. I know the repertoire of any band, artist, orchestra will always vary, but the underlying sounds or forms have a basis in their style. 

So, I think it takes uniquely gifted singers, songwriters, & instrumentalists to stand out from the crowd.   

o2playlikeEarl - Posted - 01/10/2017:  06:14:11

quote:

---

Originally posted by stanleytone

 

As an archtop player, I heartily agree. Archtops can sound irritating,especially to flathead players. That's why us archtoppers play archtops!LOL

As far as all songs sounding the same after 3 songs, blues songs all sound the same after ONE song!

One good thing about those complaints is that it weeds out those who don't really know or love the music.

---

  blues songs all sound the same after ONE song!   It's the same with crap....I mean rap.  LOL

o2playlikeEarl - Posted - 01/10/2017:  06:17:08

I'm a F&S fan so it's great to be able to see The Earls of Leicester.  I know what I'm going to get and it's always GREAT!  I hope they keep going for a long time.

KYSLOWFINGERS - Posted - 01/10/2017:  06:20:10

1. Can't agree 2. Strongly disagree ( especially if you allow Carter to fill in for Ralph) 3. Strongly agree. Play Shady Grove by Doc Watson and then by Ricky Skaggs and Kentucky Thunder. The former pure heart and soul, the latter more like when I was 8 years old and played 33rpm LPs at 45 LOL. 4. Fiddle if it's a fiddle tune, Jerusaleum Ridge - Monroe/Baker A++++++ 5. Depends PS: I personally think 95% of good bluegrass was recorded prior to 1980. Just my thoughts.

steve davis - Posted - 01/10/2017:  07:44:20

Some want their bluegrass to remain in the 40s standard while others want it to progress.
Two audiences.

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  08:14:10

quote:  Yeah, it's even more true with the current(what passes for Country music out of Nashville today).  

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

 

For me ,any genre of music gets old if I listen too much to it,,whether it's BG, old time, folk-roots, classical, jazz, etc. There are some great tunes, and then there are lots of mediocre tunes. I agree with what's been posted above - too many bands sound similar nowadays, just like the present day country music out of Nashville.

---

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  08:16:50

quote:

---

Originally posted by rupickin5 Maybe somebody needs to do something with Bluegrass like Led Zeppelin, and The Rolling Stones did with the Blues.

 

As someone (was it Hartford?) once said "limitation is the basis of style"...

IMHO that is why (to my ears...) bluegrass always sounds like bluegrass. Think about it...B.B. King always sounded like B.B. King...Muddy always sounded like Muddy. Jazz always sounds like jazz...Classical always sounds like classical. I know the repertoire of any band, artist, orchestra will always vary, but the underlying sounds or forms have a basis in their style. 

So, I think it takes uniquely gifted singers, songwriters, & instrumentalists to stand out from the crowd.   

---

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  08:19:37

quote:

---

Originally posted by o2playlikeEarl

 

quote: That is why Zeppelin and the Stones took the Blues and changed it. And became the greatest bands in History.  

---

Originally posted by stanleytone

 

As an archtop player, I heartily agree. Archtops can sound irritating,especially to flathead players. That's why us archtoppers play archtops!LOL

As far as all songs sounding the same after 3 songs, blues songs all sound the same after ONE song!

One good thing about those complaints is that it weeds out those who don't really know or love the music.

---

  blues songs all sound the same after ONE song!   It's the same with crap....I mean rap.  LOL

---

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  08:33:38

One good example is Traveling McCoury's do "Let Her Go" by Passenger. It starts out slow like it is supposed to, and my Daughter says "Oh I like this song, they sound good." Then, a couple of bars later they speed up to about the pace of "Pike County Breakdown" and then she says "That's not how it goes, that does'nt sound right". Or a couple of other bands do "Stand by Me" starts out with the original tempo, my wife says "Oh good, they're finally doing a nice song" then all of a sudden it's like they are playing Bill Monroe's version of "Little Maggie". And she says "What happened to Stand by Me". Oh well, at least I try to take Bluegrass to others.  

Edited by - dupreejan on 01/10/2017 08:36:39

Richard Hauser - Posted - 01/10/2017:  08:41:13

The initial post has probably just "primed the well". Here are some of my complaints.

1. Why are so many festivals held in the middle of nowhere ? They seem to avoid motels, restaurants, etc.. Lots of concessionaires, including people selling instruments/accessories, have be priced out of many festivals.
If an attendee doesn't bring everything they might need (i.e. strings, picks, etc.), they won't be able to get it.

2. Bands should realize the difference between performing and entertaining. The average person wants to be entertained. That requires all aspects of entertaining, not just displaying picking skills. Vocals are more important than picking anyway.

3. Band members don't have to wear suits of uniforms, but they shouldn't look like the just finished washing and waxing the car either.

4. Why don't promoters do more to encourage concessionaires ? Diabetics might as well forget about eating at a bluegrass festival.

5. More musical variety. A little old time music is a good change of pace. Bands like the original "Seldom Scene" created new bluegrass fans.

These comments are generalities. But more positive actions by all parties could increase the popularity of this music.

Kenneth Logsdon - Posted - 01/10/2017:  09:54:45

The biggest complaint is that..... " That ain't Bluegrass", which is true..

We need an influx of new Bluegrass to add/combine with the heritage songs, a timeless dateless treasure.. But it isn't happening, Its been a long time since Rocky top or even Cumberland River..

Instead the so called new is something else, imitation of other genres/styles and that Cows Nest Stuff, wornout in itself.. It simply is not Bluegrass or any derivative of.. Just call it what it is..

If anyone wants to play/listen to the "new", fine.. Go to the Cows Nest Festival to do it...Don't insult/denigrate Bluegrass with it..

Redmanc - Posted - 01/10/2017:  10:11:50

I'm a fan. I love the old recordings especially with the singers mentioned.
The material can be repetitive and tiresome. I wonder how lifetime professionals of the music do it. I mean 40 years of "Blueridge Cabin Home" sounds like something from a fever dream.

PKM - Posted - 01/10/2017:  10:32:51

I had a professor of one of my music courses years ago pose the question on the first day of class: " Why do you listen to music ? What do you like to get from it ? Do you listen to certain music to reflect a mood you are in, or to change it ? How receptive are you to music that is initially unfamiliar to you ? Etc. etc.
The exercise caused me to think that people listen to the same music for different reasons.
In one of the bands I play in, we have a member or two, who bring songs up for consideration because of the sentimental attachment and memories they draw for them. I guess it reminds them of when they were happy, high and 18, but often the musical characteristics are uninspiring without those 40 year old memories.
I like the new stuff, just as much as the old. I think its cool what some of these very young bands are doing and don't get bogged down in whether or not it fits the title of Bluegrass. But I can't get that band to do one song that is younger than 30 years !!
Everyone has different expectations and requirements from their music.
The Earls of Leicester puzzle me. I love listening to them. They are amazing talents. But so much energy and effort devoted to replicating a sound that already exist seems like little more than an academic exercise. Earl & Lester already did this. To me, its like going to see an Elvis impersonator, or a group imitating the Beatles. I love it, but don't completely understand why these musicians find reward in it.

teakinmn - Posted - 01/10/2017:  10:46:05

I love the old (F&S, etc) performers, and not just  because I'm supposed to. Listening to that material helps one make sense out of learning (in most of our cases) the banjo's role and sound in an ensemble. I really like the Earls of Leicester as "keepers of the torch" in that regard -- they have that sound nailed. They are so tight musically, and their vocals are easy to listen to. They ARE bluegrass. That being said, I'm a huge fan of the likes of The Nitty Gritty Dirt Band (drums? keyboard? -- sure!), and in more recent times Nickel Creek, Crooked Still, Old Crow Medicine Show, Devil Makes Three, and lots of others. Those bands all have great bluegrass chops, but you wouldn't categorize some of their original, or cover, material as bluegrass. Doesn't matter to me -- I know what I like when I hear it. 

eagleisland - Posted - 01/10/2017:  11:21:17

 Many forms of music seem offputting until one really starts understanding it. When I was younger, for example, I really didn't get funk music. It all sounded the same to me - and I thought it was really repetitive and not particularly interesting.

It was years later when I finally understood that most of it was based off minor pentatonic scales - hence the melodic similarities - and really started to be able to hear the amazing rhythmic stuff going on. The notes may have been limited, but the spaces and the way they were used were almost infinitely varied. Man, could those cats find the pocket - and when I became sufficiently understanding of these things I began to fully appreciate the musicianship required to make it all happen.

Bluegrass has a similarly simple basic form, and it CAN sound awfully repetitive unless you know what to listen for. Sometimes, even then. And I'll be frank - a lot of songs in the bluegrass canon, even some of the classics, really aren't all that great - AS SONGS. Some of 'em are downright cheesy - melodically dull, lyrically boring.

Ultimately, it IS all about the songs - or it should be. When we play this music - or any form of music, really - it should be less about us and more about the song itself. If it's a song worth doing, it's up to us as players to put ourselves in service of that song, and treat it with care and respect.

Glenn Tate - Posted - 01/10/2017:  11:46:02

#4 That banjo starts to sound irritating after a few songs ( mostly arch tops).

As a 45+ year banjo picker, I learned something a long ago, that unfortunately many banjo pickers never learn. Contrary to popular belief, a 5-string banjo does have a volume control. It's called the right hand. When you are not taking a break, and even then, if you can't hear the rest of the instruments, you're playing too loud. Back off on the right hand to reduce the volume until you can hear everyone else. Nothing is more obnoxious than a super loud banjo drowning out everything else. BTW, that applies to everyone in a band or a jam, you are part of a GROUP, not a solo artist.

Jack Baker - Posted - 01/10/2017:  12:49:12

No complaints here--just pick it....Jack 

---

Originally posted by dupreejan

Edited by - Jack Baker on 01/10/2017 12:49:48

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  13:14:36

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glenn Tate

 

#4 That banjo starts to sound irritating after a few songs ( mostly arch tops).

As a 45+ year banjo picker, I learned something a long ago, that unfortunately many banjo pickers never learn. Contrary to popular belief, a 5-string banjo does have a volume control. It's called the right hand. When you are not taking a break, and even then, if you can't hear the rest of the instruments, you're playing too loud. Back off on the right hand to reduce the volume until you can hear everyone else. Nothing is more obnoxious than a super loud banjo drowning out everything else. BTW, that applies to everyone in a band or a jam, you are part of a GROUP, not a solo artist.

---

Yeah, sometimes it seems like everyone in the band is competing with each other instead of playing together.

toolnut - Posted - 01/10/2017:  13:15:21

Biggest complaint for me is trying to impress me with speed. When it gets so fast you can't tell what song it is anymore it doesn't sound good.

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  13:19:45

The Steeldrivers do a pretty good job. We have to keep coming out with something new. It's like, how long would the Beatles have lasted if they kept writing songs around "I want to hold your Hand."

Bart Veerman - Posted - 01/10/2017:  13:23:40

You have just described the reasons most people hate bluegrass and why you don't hear it on main stream media.

Dick Hauser: BG festivals are out in the middle of nowhere because the out-in-the-boonie places are cheap venues compared to main stream music festivals. If they'd be closer to big cities, motel/hotel accommodations then be prepared to pay $150 ~ 300+ for admission PER DAY...

monstertone - Posted - 01/10/2017:  13:43:16

I've heard that complaint too. Both ends of it. It all sounds the same, & BG has to progress. B.S! I'm sorry, NOT! If you don't like like it, go away.  

Different strokes for different folks I guess. Being drawn to the banjo, I was weaned on F&S. Along the way, I began to discover other groups. Each had their own sound, despite the fact they were traditional BG,,,,until the Seldom Scene came along. For some they seemed to be the line in the sand, so to speak. I liked the Scene. But I walked out on a New Grass Revival concert.

The Old Guard is gone now, but their legacy remains intact. There are are a lot of excellent bands playing today that are every bit as firmly rooted in the BG tradition as the first generation bands. Their breath of fresh life to the community is their material & arrangements.       

Laurence Diehl - Posted - 01/10/2017:  13:47:29

You can't have a genre stay in a static form and also attract a large audience. It's either or. But there is nothing wrong with it staying as a niche art form, enjoyed by a few diehard fans. Just don't expect wider acceptance.

warpdrive - Posted - 01/10/2017:  15:49:26

Good point Laurence, you don't see large gatherings for swing band music(i'm sad to say, it's were our best music came from!)
Bluegrass has yet to be honored at the Kennedy Center, ( the one that the presidents attend and they show on tv every year)too me, that says it all! If Bill Monroe, or Earl Scruggs, or The Osborne Brothers(my favorite pick for who should go first in a kennedy center honors)if none of those guys can't get a kennedy center honor, based on there merits, what chance does our genre have?

Bill Rogers - Posted - 01/10/2017:  15:54:05

Exactly, Laurence.  Maintaining the  "purity" of the music, aka "little change,"  may keep many players happy, but it won't expand the audience.  Of course, diluting the style may remove those elements that attracted players in the first place.  The bright side:  as long as there's an argument on semantics (e.g.--Just what defines "bluegrass?) it means that both ends are being served:  preservation and innovation.

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  16:59:49

quote:

---

Originally posted by Redmanc



I'm a fan. I love the old recordings especially with the singers mentioned.

The material can be repetitive and tiresome. I wonder how lifetime professionals of the music do it. I mean 40 years of "Blueridge Cabin Home" sounds like something from a fever dream.

---

That's why Earl Scruggs formed the Earl Scruggs Revue. He wanted to go in a different direction, but Lester Flatt wanted to keep doing Lonesome Road Blues, Fireball Mail, Cripple Creek, and that song Jimmy whatever the Newsboy.

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  17:04:06

banjohangout.org/global/ckedit...png") no-repeat center rgb(255, 0, 0); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-radius: 0px 0px 2px 2px; top: -1px; width: 17px; height: 17px; right: 17px; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 0px; font-size: 0px; display: block; position: absolute; z-index: 9999; cursor: pointer; -ms-border-radius: 0px 0px 2px 2px;" title="Insert paragraph here" unselectable="on">↵

quote

: Yeah, I paid $150 to see Old Crow at the Ryman. $300 for me and my wife.

---

Originally posted by Bart Veerman

 

You have just described the reasons most people hate bluegrass and why you don't hear it on main stream media.

Dick Hauser: BG festivals are out in the middle of nowhere because the out-in-the-boonie places are cheap venues compared to main stream music festivals. If they'd be closer to big cities, motel/hotel accommodations then be prepared to pay $150 ~ 300+ for admission PER DAY...

---

dupreejan - Posted - 01/10/2017:  17:13:02

We don't want to totally put away the original. We just want to create off of it, and see where we can take it. Also, you want to keep up the value of your banjo don't you?

chuckv97 - Posted - 01/10/2017:  17:35:05

Gordon Lightfoot songs were some of the first out of the BG envelope that were done by "progressive" bluegrass bands. Two of his are getting airplay lately on BG Jnctn. - "It's Worth Believing" by Claire Lynch , and "Wherefore and Why" by Kenny and Amanda Smith. And of course there were two of his on the landmark JD Crowe Rounder 0044 album.

Rick McKeon - Posted - 01/10/2017:  17:45:20

What an amazing topic for a bluegrass forum! So, we're just being honest here.

In my opinion a lot of Celtic music and fiddle tunes are based on an interesting lick that is fun the first few times through, but gets boring after several repeations. It seems like they get a nice lick going but then they beat it to death - over and over and over again. I start asking myself, "When are they going to get off that lick and play something different?"

For this type of song the only relief is when the song finally ends. We clap not so much out of appreciation as out of relief that it is finally over. I love the banjo and bluegrass music, but there are some facets that I don't appreciate.

Rick

Bill Rogers - Posted - 01/11/2017:  03:01:07

This thread has drifted away from "playing advice," if it ever was there; moving to "Other Banjo-related..."

steve davis - Posted - 01/11/2017:  05:41:21

I don't want the bluegrass I listen to to follow a certain path.I want to be surprised.

Glenn Tate - Posted - 01/11/2017:  05:44:50

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bill Rogers

 

Exactly, Laurence.  Maintaining the  "purity" of the music, aka "little change,"  may keep many players happy, but it won't expand the audience.  Of course, diluting the style may remove those elements that attracted players in the first place.  The bright side:  as long as there's an argument on semantics (e.g.--Just what defines "bluegrass?) it means that both ends are being served:  preservation and innovation.

---

I'm reminded of Larry Cordle's "Murder on Music Row." While there should be room for Bluegrass Music to grow, we sure don't want the same thing to happen to it, that has happened to Country Music. The Eagle's music was closer to Country Music, than what they are calling Country Music these days.

steve davis - Posted - 01/11/2017:  06:09:28

You can't tell people what to listen to,imo.

The music has to fit the audience.

Gumbograss - Posted - 01/11/2017:  09:44:33

quote:

---

Originally posted by stanleytone

 

As an archtop player, I heartily agree. Archtops can sound irritating,especially to flathead players. That's why us archtoppers play archtops!LOL

As far as all songs sounding the same after 3 songs, blues songs all sound the same after ONE song!

---

Here in Louisiana, the Cajun musicians say bluegrass sounds alike after a few songs, and the bluegrass musicians say the same thing about Cajun music! And yes...I play an archtop because I LIKE that sound!

OldPappy - Posted - 01/11/2017:  10:00:23

I like bluegrass, especially Bill Monroe, and Black Mountain Bluegrass Boys.

My only complaint is the banjo player is usually finger picking instead of down picking

dupreejan - Posted - 01/11/2017:  10:13:46

quote: I have heard Mention My Name by different groups, sounds good.

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

 

Gordon Lightfoot songs were some of the first out of the BG envelope that were done by "progressive" bluegrass bands. Two of his are getting airplay lately on BG Jnctn. - "It's Worth Believing" by Claire Lynch , and "Wherefore and Why" by Kenny and Amanda Smith. And of course there were two of his on the landmark JD Crowe Rounder 0044 album.

---

dupreejan - Posted - 01/11/2017:  10:20:35

banjohangout.org/global/ckedit...png") no-repeat center rgb(255, 0, 0); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-radius: 0px 0px 2px 2px; top: -1px; width: 17px; height: 17px; right: 17px; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 0px; font-size: 0px; display: block; position: absolute; z-index: 9999; cursor: pointer; -ms-border-radius: 0px 0px 2px 2px;" title="Insert paragraph here" unselectable="on">↵

quote

: Yeah, I have heard a couple of people say that when hearing a 4 string banjo Irish/Celtic tune. And thought it myself. They have no refrain or bridges in the arrangements. It is good for dancing I guess.

---

Originally posted by Rick McKeon

 

What an amazing topic for a bluegrass forum! So, we're just being honest here.

In my opinion a lot of Celtic music and fiddle tunes are based on an interesting lick that is fun the first few times through, but gets boring after several repeations. It seems like they get a nice lick going but then they beat it to death - over and over and over again. I start asking myself, "When are they going to get off that lick and play something different?"

For this type of song the only relief is when the song finally ends. We clap not so much out of appreciation as out of relief that it is finally over. I love the banjo and bluegrass music, but there are some facets that I don't appreciate.

Rick

---

Brett - Posted - 01/11/2017:  10:29:26

I believe a great many "possible" fans get turned off being subjected to very substandard bands on venues they shouldn't be on (because the promoter could fill time with a $250 band).  It's amazing how many substandard bands won't record themselves in order to improve themselves.  Recordings don't lie.  It is on the recordings you can hear timing fluctuations, 2 guys singing lead, etc.   On the same train of thought, I can understand why a promoter might try to fill some slots (early in the day or mid-afternoon) with $250 bands, because he is trying to break even (for once).  I understand the comment about a venue out in the middle of nowhere (to try to not go bankrupt promoting/supporting a festival), but does it truly have to be in a cow pasture in August when it's 105 degrees?  Again, I see the other side also, cooler temps are prone to greater chances of rain, and stuck cars, smaller audience, promoter going even more broke, etc. 

Bluegrass seems, to me, to be more of an involved form of music also and not for spectators.  I've talked to many performers about this, they can hardly sit and listen to other bands for wanting to go out and jam and pick. 

Tim13 - Posted - 01/11/2017:  11:28:21

The problem isn't the music so much as it is the song writing.  Anyone can practice enough to be competent in a band on any instrument, but few people know how to write a good song.  When a band says they are about to play some of their own stuff, it's usually bathroom break time, or time to eat/drink.....LOL.

Tim

Joe the banjo guy - Posted - 01/11/2017:  12:03:01

I would agree with the complaint that songwriting seems to take more of a backseat in bluegrass than it does in some other genres.  In science, sometimes people talk about the "unit of analysis."  That is, what is the thing you are measuring.  I find that it's a useful idea in music.  In different genres, there are different "units of analysis."  In bluegrass, the unit tends to be the solo.  That is the thing that the music is designed to deliver.  I prefer music where the unit of analysis is the overall song.  In that kind of music, the musicians serve the song (as Steve mentioned earlier).  But that is just my taste!  I don't think it's inherently superior to music that is designed to deliver hot licks or complex chord structures or whatever.  I DO think, however, that general popular opinion about music would be more in line with a song-based approach.