it seems to me the rudiments of the style you play Joel would make it-- the style most likely to have good results in the classical style --of course not being a practitioner that is just a guess--

Back in the 60s I learned classic/al guitar using the Shearer book.
It's still one of the best methods available -- highly recommended.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

it seems to me the rudiments of the style you play Joel would make it-- the style most likely to have good results in the classical style --of course not being a practitioner that is just a guess--

---

"Classical banjo" is played on a "bluegrass" set up banjo with picks and wire strings. 

In India the term is used, but not in reference to the western classical period.
Rather it's used to distinguish the established academic traditions from folk traditions.
In the same way that we might call violin classical, and fiddle folk.
North Indian Classical music predates the western classical period by quite a bit.
Even in the west, Baroque (pre-classical period) compositions are lumped into "classical music".
And of course the modern form a several orchestral instruments have come about since the classical period as well, not just the classical guitar.
In my mind the term is more of a reference to the styles and instruments we currently use to play classical music, not necessarily a tie to the time period.

 

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

it seems to me the rudiments of the style you play Joel would make it-- the style most likely to have good results in the classical style --of course not being a practitioner that is just a guess--

---

"Classical banjo" is played on a "bluegrass" set up banjo with picks and wire strings. 

 

 

---

I play at least two gigs a week exclusively using my old Whyte Laydie with nylon strings, I play late 19th and early 20th Century tunes including ragtime pieces, they call me the banjo player !  If as you claim "classical banjo" is played with a bluegrass setup then I would not mind betting that those who are playing it are just called banjo players by most who bother to listen to them, Personally I dont care what anybody calls this style, I am just delighted that people do listen to, and enjoy what I do !

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoonfed

 

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

it seems to me the rudiments of the style you play Joel would make it-- the style most likely to have good results in the classical style --of course not being a practitioner that is just a guess--

---

"Classical banjo" is played on a "bluegrass" set up banjo with picks and wire strings. 

 

 

---

I play at least two gigs a week exclusively using my old Whyte Laydie with nylon strings, I play late 19th and early 20th Century tunes including ragtime pieces, they call me the banjo player !  If as you claim "classical banjo" is played with a bluegrass setup then I would not mind betting that those who are playing it are just called banjo players by most who bother to listen to them, Personally I dont care what anybody calls this style, I am just delighted that people do listen to, and enjoy what I do !

Is that a baroque banjo I see in your avatar :-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoonfed

 

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

it seems to me the rudiments of the style you play Joel would make it-- the style most likely to have good results in the classical style --of course not being a practitioner that is just a guess--

---

"Classical banjo" is played on a "bluegrass" set up banjo with picks and wire strings. 

 

 

---

I play at least two gigs a week exclusively using my old Whyte Laydie with nylon strings, I play late 19th and early 20th Century tunes including ragtime pieces, they call me the banjo player !  If as you claim "classical banjo" is played with a bluegrass setup then I would not mind betting that those who are playing it are just called banjo players by most who bother to listen to them, Personally I dont care what anybody calls this style, I am just delighted that people do listen to, and enjoy what I do !

 

 

note Joel said that not I--nope Joel you ain't sticking only me with that--depends on the song--you guys would be more adept at the subtle dynamics and 3 finger pinched --I'll not say what I think pick wearing guys might do better

 

 

 

 

---

Howdy Marty Joe, nope , that's a tubaphone in my avatar pic being played at a sadly now defunct steam/rural craft rally in Sussex, time perhaps to update since I mostly wear a bowler hat these days !

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoonfed

 

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

it seems to me the rudiments of the style you play Joel would make it-- the style most likely to have good results in the classical style --of course not being a practitioner that is just a guess--

---

"Classical banjo" is played on a "bluegrass" set up banjo with picks and wire strings. 

 

 

---

I play at least two gigs a week exclusively using my old Whyte Laydie with nylon strings, I play late 19th and early 20th Century tunes including ragtime pieces, they call me the banjo player !  If as you claim "classical banjo" is played with a bluegrass setup then I would not mind betting that those who are playing it are just called banjo players by most who bother to listen to them, Personally I dont care what anybody calls this style, I am just delighted that people do listen to, and enjoy what I do !

 

 

note Joel said that not I--nope Joel you ain't sticking only me with that--depends on the song--you guys would be more adept at the subtle dynamics and 3 finger pinched --I'll not say what I think pick wearing guys might do better

 

 

 

 

---

I find many benefits to not using picks, but that's just me. 

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

I was reading "Learning the Classic Guitar" by Aaron Shearer (Mel Bay Pub) and came across this, which I believe applies to the banjo style we now call "Classic".

"Classica or Classical Guitar

The nylon-string guitar is commonly known by two related names: the classic guitar and the classical guitar. Since both names adequately distinguish this guitar from its steel-string relative, I readily accept either. Thus, using one term of the other has never been a major issue with me. As many guitarists have done, however, I've chosen one term in preference to the other. The following are my reasons.

'Classical guitar' may have arisen because much of the guitar's early development and repertoire dates from the Classical period of music (1570-1830). Granted, the guitar does have important roots in the Classical period. The overall design and construction of modern guitar, however, was developed by Antonio Torres (1817-1892). His remarkable innovations date from about 1850-- well after the Classical period ended. Further, 'classical' can be misleading, suggesting that this type of guitar is suited only for classical music.

To me, 'classic guitar' seems more appropriate. According to Webster's Dictionary, classic means 'of recognized value: serving as a standard of excellence; traditional, enduring.' Also, the term 'classic' is somewhat more distinctive that 'classical.' There are many pieces of music that date from the Classical period which have never become classics. Something becomes classic through the test of time. Thus, it's accurate to say that, among the various types of guitar, ours is the 'classic' guitar."


When speaking of the banjo, the version we know of today (and is common) was developed well after the Classical period. The version generally used for "classic banjo" was developed in the 1870s, hitting the final form (more or less) by the early 1890s (with a three octave neck). The banjo as we know it does not have any connection with the Classical period.

Yes, it is true that a small number of banjoists did play arrangements of Romantic and Classical era music on the banjo, but this was an exception.

Shearer's comment on the term "Classical" being misleading is a strong one. More than a few people have sought my guidance on "Classical music for the banjo" only to be disappointed to discover that there is not much available from the Classic banjo era.

---

I was once told that classical music should be called concert music. I would just call it concert style or guitar style.

I don't argue one great style against another--also they can all sound less than good --my opinion I ask no agreement

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoonfed
I play at least two gigs a week exclusively using my old Whyte Laydie with nylon strings, I play late 19th and early 20th Century tunes including ragtime pieces,

---

It's my understanding -- mainly from the curriculum category name under which Tony T teaches that type of material in his ArtistWorks school -- that the music you're describing is "classic" banjo. That doesn't necessarily make it so, but I wanted to share. It's also my understanding, classic banjo pieces were originally played on five-string banjo, with gut strings and bare fingers in an early three-finger style.

I believe that when people talk about playing "classical" music on banjo, they're referring to concertos, sonatas, partitas, symphonies and other types of pieces the names of which I do not know composed from the Renaissance to the 21st century. Bach, d. 1750, seems to be one of the most popular composers of "classical" pieces that players bring to banjo. Contemporary artists including Bela Fleck, Jens Kruger, and Adam Larrabee have composed works -- some commissioned -- that I understand to be in the classical style.

I also understand "classical" is a broad term that encompasses multiple styles from different periods within the many-centuries era.

Anyway, that's my understanding of the difference between "classic" and "classical" as applied to music played on banjo. If one of these terms is also applied to the design and constuction of the instrument, I'm not familiar with that.

another great music that was happening in about the same time as classic banjo--and is said to have been popular was the American March Music--I wonder if they jammed together much--something along the lines of sousa and ossman

Not to muddy the waters too much, but it's helpful to remember that when we apply descriptive terms to music of the past, those descriptive terms are retrospective. When we say we play renaissance or baroque or classical music, we are applying ill-fitting descriptors to music that was just music during its time, and the old ones had nothing to do with the labels we use today. These are terms made up by academics in order to organize music of the past that was not so organized, nor was the technique and repertory so systematic. The terms we use today are for the convenience of academics for the purpose of research grants and for teaching.

During the heyday of the banjo orchestra and the highly regarded soloists like Horace Weston, a style developed that included specialized techniques mainly for projection of sound in large concert halls. Whatever they called the style at the time, we should try to recognize that the 19th-century banjoists were not creating music for posterity—they were just playing the popular music of their time. I don't think they called their music and their style, "classic."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

another great music that was happening in about the same time as classic banjo--and is said to have been popular was the American March Music--I wonder if they jammed together much--something along the lines of sousa and ossman

---

It's my understanding that marches were included in the works we retrospectively refer to as classic banjo.

yes with the tremendous amount songs available on the classic websites I had little doubt of that --but that ain't what I was wondering about

Interesting re terminology,, Charlie Byrd , the nylon-string jazz guitarist who studied classical guitar under Washington guitarist Sophocles Papas (also Aaron Shearer’s teacher) , put out this set of three blues tunes.
Papas owned Columbia Music, the publisher, and I believe he referred to the “concert” guitar as “classic guitar”, not classical guitar as was the norm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eulalie

Not to muddy the waters too much, but it's helpful to remember that when we apply descriptive terms to music of the past, those descriptive terms are retrospective. When we say we play renaissance or baroque or classical music, we are applying ill-fitting descriptors to music that was just music during its time, and the old ones had nothing to do with the labels we use today. These are terms made up by academics in order to organize music of the past that was not so organized, nor was the technique and repertory so systematic. The terms we use today are for the convenience of academics for the purpose of research grants and for teaching.

During the heyday of the banjo orchestra and the highly regarded soloists like Horace Weston, a style developed that included specialized techniques mainly for projection of sound in large concert halls. Whatever they called the style at the time, we should try to recognize that the 19th-century banjoists were not creating music for posterity—they were just playing the popular music of their time. I don't think they called their music and their style, "classic."

---

That's a very concise yet accurate analysis. Our modern obsession with applying a 'genre' tag to 'identify' historic playing is symptomatic of the way we have become culturally accustomed (or some would argue manipulated?) to expect or assume that musical activity is artificially isolated or 'ring-fenced' and labeled. Which itself is essentially a consequence of the growth of commercial music publishing and in particular the 'capture' inherent in recording technology i.e. the shift from music as an immediate and transient experience to the normalising of music as permanently available, salable product. The reality of most historic social musical contexts were that they were characterised by a lack of concern with definition other than as social entertainment. Activity was far less easily delineated and the homogenising effect of simplistic modern genre labels is complicit in obscuring understanding of that wonderful diversity and the fascinating contrast with today.

Today 'folk' musicians, while talking-up 'authenticity' and busily citing original sources for tune, are paradoxically caught up in that peculiar assumption of music as product and falling over themselves to sell their music in imitation of a commercial template. Maybe we would benefit by recovering from this artificially-imposed commercial mania/delusion and rediscovering the beauty and natural purpose of the transient?

Interestingly the term 'classic' banjo which is the specific focus of this thread is one clear example that is not the result of external academic attribution.  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pomeroy

...Today 'folk' musicians, while talking-up 'authenticity' and busily citing original sources for tune, are paradoxically caught up in that peculiar assumption of music as product and falling over themselves to sell their music in imitation of a commercial template. Maybe we would benefit by recovering from this artificially-imposed commercial mania/delusion and rediscovering the beauty and natural purpose of the transient?

Interestingly the term 'classic' banjo which is the specific focus of this thread is one clear example that is not the result of external academic attribution.  

---

Thanks for your insightful response.  I completely agree that we should be participating in whatever type of music from the past as a continuing tradition, rather than patting ourselves on the back and pretending we're recreating an historical artifact.  I am always amused when a fiddler plays a tune exactly as it was recorded on a 78 in 1928, thinking he or she is gaining status by preserving history.  That 1928 fiddler very likely played the tune differently in another unissued take.

When I play old music, while I'm informed by the source and understand the historical context, it's my music now.  As for the label, "classic," for banjo when referring to a modern interpretation or rendition of old music, it seems that label was conjured during the 40s or 50s by folks who wanted to preserve both style and repertory that was hugely popular a half-century ago.  Nothing wrong with that. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Old Hickory

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

another great music that was happening in about the same time as classic banjo--and is said to have been popular was the American March Music--I wonder if they jammed together much--something along the lines of sousa and ossman

---

It's my understanding that marches were included in the works we retrospectively refer to as classic banjo.

---

The body of work covered by the (rough) era we now call "Classic Banjo" included pretty much every genera of popular music concurrent with that era.  Frank Bradbury, later, arranged for banjo "Theme from the Third Man" and "Song Sung Blue".  In my opinion, as long as one is maintaining stylistic basics in classic banjo, any pop song today could be arranged for classic banjo.  

The "March" made up a large part of the repertoire, military style all the way to ragtime, patrols, galops, grand marches, polka marches, if you can name a type, I could likely find some sheet music for it.  

This included original works for banjo as well as arrangements of popular music. 

Conversely, some banjo compositions were arranged for band and were played by Author Pryor and Sousa like George Lansing's "Darkies Dream".  While really a schottische composed for banjo, it became popular at first as a brass band piece. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eulalie

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pomeroy

...Today 'folk' musicians, while talking-up 'authenticity' and busily citing original sources for tune, are paradoxically caught up in that peculiar assumption of music as product and falling over themselves to sell their music in imitation of a commercial template. Maybe we would benefit by recovering from this artificially-imposed commercial mania/delusion and rediscovering the beauty and natural purpose of the transient?

Interestingly the term 'classic' banjo which is the specific focus of this thread is one clear example that is not the result of external academic attribution.  

---

Thanks for your insightful response.  I completely agree that we should be participating in whatever type of music from the past as a continuing tradition, rather than patting ourselves on the back and pretending we're recreating an historical artifact.  I am always amused when a fiddler plays a tune exactly as it was recorded on a 78 in 1928, thinking he or she is gaining status by preserving history.  That 1928 fiddler very likely played the tune differently in another unissued take.

When I play old music, while I'm informed by the source and understand the historical context, it's my music now.  As for the label, "classic," for banjo when referring to a modern interpretation or rendition of old music, it seems that label was conjured during the 40s or 50s by folks who wanted to preserve both style and repertory that was hugely popular a half-century ago.  Nothing wrong with that. 

---

Not "preserve" so much as describe.  I've posted this before so I will try and make it short.

In the late 1940s, some people who played banjo in their youth were retiring.  Time, and money, on their hands, they wanted to start playing banjo again.  When they went to their local music stores no one knew what the heck they were talking about.  Banjo-- like Pete Seeger and "folk music"?  Or "hillbilly" radio music.  "Here are some wire strings, sheet music?  That is not a thing."

Suddenly what they called "banjo playing" needed defining. While pick playing came along during their lifetime (and many picked up the plectrum themselves), that was easy to describe.  But explain "banjo, played with fingers on gut or nylon strings,  which used standard notation to record music" at a casual cocktail party.

Meanwhile, something else happened-- Segovia. And with Segovia, scads of Americans and British people lined up to start playing Spanish guitar.  Segovia's version of the Spanish guitar was called "classic guitar" early on to differentiate it from pick playing guitar (and I am sure removing the "Spanish" was part of it).  This was being packaged by the players as "classical" in attempt to sell programs to universities and conservatories.  "Classical" or "Classic" guitar was generally known by people as a guitar, played with fingers on gut or nylon strings, which used standard notation to record music. 

Thus... "have any hobbies?"  "Yeah, I play banjo."  "Oh, like Pete Seeger?"  "No, more like the Classical Guitar."

When the ABF formed they were using "Classical Banjo".  Walter Kaye Bauer even self published a "Classical Banjo Tutor" without any "Classical music" in it.  Eventually, Eli and Madeleine Kaufman realized that there was not anything "Classical" about the banjo and started using "Classic" and it has stuck (for better or worse).

brass band that is the word I was looking for--thanks Joel for you nice response--
since this was before electric the mixing of the two may have been a monumental feat or maybe not--
after that of course the tenors and plectrums made their own mark with the horn crowd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eulalie

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pomeroy

...Today 'folk' musicians, while talking-up 'authenticity' and busily citing original sources for tune, are paradoxically caught up in that peculiar assumption of music as product and falling over themselves to sell their music in imitation of a commercial template. Maybe we would benefit by recovering from this artificially-imposed commercial mania/delusion and rediscovering the beauty and natural purpose of the transient?

Interestingly the term 'classic' banjo which is the specific focus of this thread is one clear example that is not the result of external academic attribution.  

---

Thanks for your insightful response.  I completely agree that we should be participating in whatever type of music from the past as a continuing tradition, rather than patting ourselves on the back and pretending we're recreating an historical artifact.  I am always amused when a fiddler plays a tune exactly as it was recorded on a 78 in 1928, thinking he or she is gaining status by preserving history.  That 1928 fiddler very likely played the tune differently in another unissued take.

When I play old music, while I'm informed by the source and understand the historical context, it's my music now.  As for the label, "classic," for banjo when referring to a modern interpretation or rendition of old music, it seems that label was conjured during the 40s or 50s by folks who wanted to preserve both style and repertory that was hugely popular a half-century ago.  Nothing wrong with that. 

---

Not "preserve" so much as describe.  I've posted this before so I will try and make it short.

In the late 1940s, some people who played banjo in their youth were retiring.  Time, and money, on their hands, they wanted to start playing banjo again.  When they went to their local music stores no one knew what the heck they were talking about.  Banjo-- like Pete Seeger and "folk music"?  Or "hillbilly" radio music.  "Here are some wire strings, sheet music?  That is not a thing."

Suddenly what they called "banjo playing" needed defining. While pick playing came along during their lifetime (and many picked up the plectrum themselves), that was easy to describe.  But explain "banjo, played with fingers on gut or nylon strings,  which used standard notation to record music" at a casual cocktail party.

Meanwhile, something else happened-- Segovia. And with Segovia, scads of Americans and British people lined up to start playing Spanish guitar.  Segovia's version of the Spanish guitar was called "classic guitar" early on to differentiate it from pick playing guitar (and I am sure removing the "Spanish" was part of it).  This was being packaged by the players as "classical" in attempt to sell programs to universities and conservatories.  "Classical" or "Classic" guitar was generally known by people as a guitar, played with fingers on gut or nylon strings, which used standard notation to record music. 

Thus... "have any hobbies?"  "Yeah, I play banjo."  "Oh, like Pete Seeger?"  "No, more like the Classical Guitar."

When the ABF formed they were using "Classical Banjo".  Walter Kaye Bauer even self published a "Classical Banjo Tutor" without any "Classical music" in it.  Eventually, Eli and Madeleine Kaufman realized that there was not anything "Classical" about the banjo and started using "Classic" and it has stuck (for better or worse).

---

Joel, you have indeed posted this before, how do you know that this took place ? As you often ask yourself, do you have primary sources to lay before anybody reading this ? Or is it anecdotal ? Most members here are very familiar with your disdain for white socks and loafers and what you term "wire strings" when pretty generally the rest of the world calls them steel strings and, for better or worse the banjo playing community at large enjoy "old time" banjo (I guess another affectation like classic banjo) and bluegrass, I personally rather have come to dislike both styles, I enjoy playing similar tunes to you and the relatively small number of others on this forum who play in a similar vein, to me neither is superior to another and each to his own, I guess that I am fortunate in that a good many people pay to hear me play every week and I and the audience have no interest in "authenticity" They all just enjoy hearing the old tunes played on an old banjo by an old guy and, we all call it banjo playing, in common with most of the Western world we have no need or desire for it to have a descriptive name, outside of this small community called BHO nobody cares.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoonfed

---

Joel, you have indeed posted this before, how do you know that this took place ? As you often ask yourself, do you have primary sources to lay before anybody reading this ? Or is it anecdotal ? Most members here are very familiar with your disdain for white socks and loafers and what you term "wire strings" when pretty generally the rest of the world calls them steel strings and, for better or worse the banjo playing community at large enjoy "old time" banjo (I guess another affectation like classic banjo) and bluegrass, I personally rather have come to dislike both styles, I enjoy playing similar tunes to you and the relatively small number of others on this forum who play in a similar vein, to me neither is superior to another and each to his own, I guess that I am fortunate in that a good many people pay to hear me play every week and I and the audience have no interest in "authenticity" They all just enjoy hearing the old tunes played on an old banjo by an old guy and, we all call it banjo playing, in common with most of the Western world we have no need or desire for it to have a descriptive name, outside of this small community called BHO nobody cares.

---

Nick, if you play "classic" or "classical" music on the banjo on steel strings and/or with fingerpicks, you are in good company.  Tony Trishka has a number of videos out where he plays convincingly on a resonator banjo strung with steel strings using fingerpicks.  

The "authenticity" argument has spun on a giant hamster wheel for decades in the early music world—which is even more pedantic than banjoism—and current thought has settled into something resembling reality: If you play convincingly with understanding and people like what they hear, that is authentic.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoonfed

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eulalie

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pomeroy

...Today 'folk' musicians, while talking-up 'authenticity' and busily citing original sources for tune, are paradoxically caught up in that peculiar assumption of music as product and falling over themselves to sell their music in imitation of a commercial template. Maybe we would benefit by recovering from this artificially-imposed commercial mania/delusion and rediscovering the beauty and natural purpose of the transient?

Interestingly the term 'classic' banjo which is the specific focus of this thread is one clear example that is not the result of external academic attribution.  

---

Thanks for your insightful response.  I completely agree that we should be participating in whatever type of music from the past as a continuing tradition, rather than patting ourselves on the back and pretending we're recreating an historical artifact.  I am always amused when a fiddler plays a tune exactly as it was recorded on a 78 in 1928, thinking he or she is gaining status by preserving history.  That 1928 fiddler very likely played the tune differently in another unissued take.

When I play old music, while I'm informed by the source and understand the historical context, it's my music now.  As for the label, "classic," for banjo when referring to a modern interpretation or rendition of old music, it seems that label was conjured during the 40s or 50s by folks who wanted to preserve both style and repertory that was hugely popular a half-century ago.  Nothing wrong with that. 

---

Not "preserve" so much as describe.  I've posted this before so I will try and make it short.

In the late 1940s, some people who played banjo in their youth were retiring.  Time, and money, on their hands, they wanted to start playing banjo again.  When they went to their local music stores no one knew what the heck they were talking about.  Banjo-- like Pete Seeger and "folk music"?  Or "hillbilly" radio music.  "Here are some wire strings, sheet music?  That is not a thing."

Suddenly what they called "banjo playing" needed defining. While pick playing came along during their lifetime (and many picked up the plectrum themselves), that was easy to describe.  But explain "banjo, played with fingers on gut or nylon strings,  which used standard notation to record music" at a casual cocktail party.

Meanwhile, something else happened-- Segovia. And with Segovia, scads of Americans and British people lined up to start playing Spanish guitar.  Segovia's version of the Spanish guitar was called "classic guitar" early on to differentiate it from pick playing guitar (and I am sure removing the "Spanish" was part of it).  This was being packaged by the players as "classical" in attempt to sell programs to universities and conservatories.  "Classical" or "Classic" guitar was generally known by people as a guitar, played with fingers on gut or nylon strings, which used standard notation to record music. 

Thus... "have any hobbies?"  "Yeah, I play banjo."  "Oh, like Pete Seeger?"  "No, more like the Classical Guitar."

When the ABF formed they were using "Classical Banjo".  Walter Kaye Bauer even self published a "Classical Banjo Tutor" without any "Classical music" in it.  Eventually, Eli and Madeleine Kaufman realized that there was not anything "Classical" about the banjo and started using "Classic" and it has stuck (for better or worse).

---

Joel, you have indeed posted this before, how do you know that this took place ? As you often ask yourself, do you have primary sources to lay before anybody reading this ? Or is it anecdotal ? Most members here are very familiar with your disdain for white socks and loafers and what you term "wire strings" when pretty generally the rest of the world calls them steel strings and, for better or worse the banjo playing community at large enjoy "old time" banjo (I guess another affectation like classic banjo) and bluegrass, I personally rather have come to dislike both styles, I enjoy playing similar tunes to you and the relatively small number of others on this forum who play in a similar vein, to me neither is superior to another and each to his own, I guess that I am fortunate in that a good many people pay to hear me play every week and I and the audience have no interest in "authenticity" They all just enjoy hearing the old tunes played on an old banjo by an old guy and, we all call it banjo playing, in common with most of the Western world we have no need or desire for it to have a descriptive name, outside of this small community called BHO nobody cares.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

I do.  Not only was this documented in the 5 Stringer as it was happening, I know people who lived through it.  One person took lessons from Fred Van Eps.

As far as "wire strings"-- well, they are wire.  Also, that is what they were called historically, in countless publications on both sides of the pond. Even Cammeyer, Morely and Grimshaw called them "wire strings."