The singer doesnt play an instrument?.....

**thejamdolinplayer** · Feb-09-2011, 8:34pm

This isn't exactly a mandolin topic, but I know I will get plenty of feedback here on the cafe..

Why is bluegrass music the only type of music where people want to complain if the lead singer or harmony singer dont play an instrument.? It is mainly females in this genre that dont play and sing but what is the big deal if they dont, they play an instrument and that instrument is their voice,

I have heard comments like, "Oh she can sing but where is her guitar?" Or how about this one, " She must not of been able to make it in country music so she's trying out bluegrass and they got her some ringers." Is it a jealousy thing?... Im not sure but bluegrass music seems to be the only music that people complain about this issue.

Like I said it is mainly females, with bands like Alecia Nugent, Donna Hughes, Amber Collins and so on. I also play in a band and we have 2 girls that sing with us(one is my sister and the other is my wife). My sister plays guitar but not on stage and my wife does not play anything and we constantly get compliments about their singing and that they should sing more, but every now and then you will hear

" Well they are good but why aren't they playing something?"

I tell them all the time i will give them half of mando and guitar skills for half of their singing. Anyways enough rambling, lets hear your thoughts...

Rob
http://www.westvon.com/NESB

**jaycat** · Feb-09-2011, 8:49pm

Bluegrass is an insular form. There is no place for a Jimi Hendrix, an Ornette Coleman, a Tom Waits, or a Thelonious Monk.

Not a criticism, just an observation. Just don't expect wholesale breaks from tradition.

**Matt DeBlass** · Feb-09-2011, 8:50pm

Must be a Bluegrass thing. On the other hand, in smaller acoustic rock and folk bands playing the bar scene the othermusicians might be inclined to complain if everyone else is doing double-duty on vocals and an instrument while a singer gets a cut of the night's pay while not "pulling their weight" with an instrument in their hands.

**mandolirius** · Feb-09-2011, 8:55pm

Originally Posted by thejamdolinplayer

This isn't exactly a mandolin topic, but I know I will get plenty of feedback here on the cafe..

Why is bluegrass music the only type of music where people want to complain if the lead singer or harmony singer dont play an instrument.? It is mainly females in this genre that dont play and sing but what is the big deal if they dont, they play an instrument and that instrument is their voice,

I have heard comments like, "Oh she can sing but where is her guitar?" Or how about this one, " She must not of been able to make it in country music so she's trying out bluegrass and they got her some ringers." Is it a jealousy thing?... Im not sure but bluegrass music seems to be the only music that people complain about this issue.

Like I said it is mainly females, with bands like Alecia Nugent, Donna Hughes, Amber Collins and so on. I also play in a band and we have 2 girls that sing with us(one is my sister and the other is my wife). My sister plays guitar but not on stage and my wife does not play anything and we constantly get compliments about their singing and that they should sing more, but every now and then you will hear

" Well they are good but why aren't they playing something?"

I tell them all the time i will give them half of mando and guitar skills for half of their singing. Anyways enough rambling, lets hear your thoughts...

Rob
http://www.westvon.com/NESB

This is just a guess, based on my impression that non-playing singers really came to prominence during the 50's. That was a decade that saw a lot of animosity between country music and bluegrass. In fact, that was the decade that really saw the separation of bluegrass and country. Prior to 1950, country music was a broad tent with a lot of diversity.

I know when rock & roll came along, via Elvis and others, country music took a big hit in popularity which affected record sales. In order to compete, country went electric, went for the flashy outfits and bands were built around singers who may or may not have held a guitar on stage. Country music wanted a more modern image and that didn't include bluegrass, which seemed too "hayseed" or "backwoodsy". I have often heard the quote, although I can't remember who said it, that you couldn't give a fiddle away in Nashville in 1959.

So, to your question, I think that in non-playing singers, some bluegrass folks saw the Nashville system developing and they didn't like it. They saw some greats but also some rather marginal talents get promoted as "stars" and decided that non-playing singers weren't no part of nothin'. Bluegrass went through some pretty lean times around then, when a lot of bands couldn't survive. Those that did often had to cut back to two or three members, supplented with local add-ons, as they travelled around. A non-playing singer would be seen as an extravagence.

**mandolirius** · Feb-09-2011, 9:00pm

Originally Posted by jaycat

Bluegrass is an insular form. There is no place for a Jimi Hendrix, an Ornette Coleman, a Tom Waits, or a Thelonious Monk.

Not a criticism, just an observation. Just don't expect wholesale breaks from tradition.

Gotta disagree. I think we've seen lots of breaks from tradition already, with much more to come. The question is whether it's called bluegrass or not. I don't think a new name is needed. I feel traditional bluegrass covers the original sound nicely. But there are tons of folks doing bluegrass-related music, some of it quite innovative. Don't forget how young bluegrass is, as a musical form.

**thejamdolinplayer** · Feb-09-2011, 9:06pm

Monroe was an innovator combining many music forms to create bluegrass, but yet all the traditionalist expect everything to still sound like Monroe or Scruggs. We have to give on, i will leave you with my quote.

"Respect your roots but dont stay stuck in the rut"....

Lets get back to topic though, this is about the question at hand not what is bluegrass.....

**mrmando** · Feb-09-2011, 9:07pm

Have 'em learn to play harmonica, tambourine, kazoo, accordion, shaker, guiro, rainstick, Vibra-Slap, AK-47 ...

**barry k** · Feb-09-2011, 9:23pm

Monroe had a female in his band too, she played accordian . I have been around bluegrass all my life and do not like the direction it is moving in. Now we have singers without instruments, keyboards and drums (yea yea, I know Scruggs use em too) It will be branded some other name soon, so we will just have to embraced it I guess. Heres another idea , at a concert or bluegrass festival, if we hear something we dont like, we can always stand up and walk out and NOT buy their CD's , ive done it.

**EdSherry** · Feb-09-2011, 9:25pm

Martin -- AK-47, OK. But kazoo? The horror!!

Rob -- I suspect it's a "pulling your weight" thing. A "trad" BG band has five or six instruments (gtr/bass/b*njo/mando/fiddle/Dobro), and "tradition" had it that everybody in the band played something to fill out the sound.

Learning to play basic rhythm guitar or bass is not difficult (which is not to downplay the importance of having a GOOD bassist/rhythm guitarist!), and the perception I often run across is that a "serious" musician should learn to play an instrument if they want to perform in a band setting.

With so many good lead singers out there who can play passable rhythm guitar or bass, there traditionally has been little need to have a "can't play, just sings" member, especially in professional bands. And there's little enough money in the music as it is, so someone who can pull "double duty" (vocals/instrument) is more valuable than someone who can't when it comes time to divvying up the pie.

With family bands it's a different story, but now you're venturing into "is so-and-so in the band because of their talent, or because of their family connections with other band members?" territory.

And of course there's always the antipathy toward the "chick singer."

Lots of SF Bay Area bands have women in lead vocal roles (Laurie Lewis, Kathy Kallick, the Good Old Persons, Sidesaddle, the All Girl Boys, etc.) and many of them are crackerjack instrumentalists.

That said, I've been in a couple of bands with non-instrumentalist lead singers, and I personally would rather have a great lead singer who doesn't play an instrument than a lesser-quality singer who does play any day.

**journeybear** · Feb-09-2011, 9:26pm

Could it be that the music is so darn easy to play that anyone who can't play an instrument is obviously not talented enough to be in the band?

Or that the pay for play is so low that those dollars would be stretched too far if the singer didn't play an instrument?

Or that since so many bands have three- or four-part harmonies, someone just singing would be seen as not pulling his or her own weight?

Or that someone who could sing so well that he or she didn't need to play an instrument would soon decide to pursue a solo career?

At any rate, whatever the reason, keep in mind that all the items Martin mentioned are generally considered to be not fittin' and proper for use in a bluegrass band.

**thejamdolinplayer** · Feb-09-2011, 9:44pm

Originally Posted by EdSherry

That said, I've been in a couple of bands with non-instrumentalist lead singers, and I personally would rather have a great lead singer who doesn't play an instrument than a lesser-quality singer who does play any day.

Agreed.....

**JonZ** · Feb-09-2011, 10:06pm

I think I saw the Laurel Canyon Ramblers, opening for Ralph Stanley, with a singer who did not play an instrument. The reason being an accident that cut off two fingers of his left hand with a power saw. So he couldn't play rhythm guitar any more.

I always wondered if he eventually took up the Dobro.

That was when Ralph had a second banjo player playing pretty much note for note behind him. So much for tradition.

**allenhopkins** · Feb-09-2011, 10:42pm

Ralph S is largely a non-playing singer at this point; does a couple clawhammer banjo numbers, but carries a banjoist for the rest of the songs. Guess he's earned the right to "sit out" when he chooses.

So many country -- not just bluegrass -- singers would walk onstage with a guitar, which they'd have hanging un-picked from their shoulders during most of their set. And who can forget Elvis Presley's intricate guitar accompaniments? I believe the SPBGMA rules allow one "non-instrumentalist" singer per band in their contest.

Older country groups usually had all members at least holding an instrument; A P Carter was an exception, though I understand that he made some stabs at Hawaiian guitar from time to time. Just was looking at a picture of Patsy Montana & the Prairie Ramblers, and Patsy's holding a fiddle! Anyone ever hear her play fiddle?

Last time I saw Bill Monroe he had a "girl singer" working with him, and the Blue Grass Boys backed her up on two or three songs as part of the set. Tater Tate didn't look happy about it, either. She didn't play an instrument. Speculation in the audience was that she was Bill's current girlfriend.

A guitar or other instrument seems to have been the standard "stage accessory" of quite a few country singers of both genders, though some hardly made a pretense of playing it. I think it's a "roots" thing, harkening back to the singing guitarists like Jimmie Rodgers, Gene Autry, et. al. You know, sorta like the cowboy hat and the fringed shirt, worn by people from Tennessee and Georgia, where the cowboys were few and far between. Remember Bill Monroe's old Blue Grass Boys uniform, with the riding pants?

One interesting theory above is that bluegrass is basically "small combo" music, with a six-piece band considered "big," so that in order to get all the instruments into the music, everyone's got to play something. Weren't western swing bands similar, in that most of their singers at least held a fiddle or some such?

**barney 59** · Feb-09-2011, 10:52pm

I've often thought that a great many bands would benefit from getting a really great singer. Voice is an instrument or at least can be,think Ella Fitzgerald-- and it takes a great deal of study and work to be really great. There are a lot of bands whose instrumental work is astonishing but the singing is just so so and for a group of obviously accomplished musicians to not recognize their failings in the vocal department is bewildering to me . It's wonderful if you have a John Duffy in your band who can play AND sing or you can be the Punch Brothers who surely can play.....

**Mike Bunting** · Feb-09-2011, 11:25pm

Originally Posted by allenhopkins

Remember Bill Monroe's old Blue Grass Boys uniform, with the riding pants?

I don't believe that had much to do with the west. Kentucky is a famous horse breeding area, ever hear of the Kentucky Derby?

**MoBob** · Feb-09-2011, 11:43pm

I saw Jim and Jesse in the 1970s, had a female singer who did not play an instrument.

**SincereCorgi** · Feb-10-2011, 12:50am

Originally Posted by mandolirius

Don't forget how young bluegrass is, as a musical form.

Relatively speaking, it's lasted a pretty long time (depending on your definition of bluegrass). Most genres turn into eccentric little footnotes after ten or twenty years- it's lasted longer than ragtime, longer than disco, longer than the big band era, etc etc.

**Ivan Kelsall** · Feb-10-2011, 1:05am

We need to remember that the human voice is the most versatile & beautiful 'instrument' of all (unless you've heard me of course,then the argument goes down the pan !).
One of my current favourite bands Is "Carrie Hassler & Hard Rain". CH doesn't play,she's purely a singer,but Oh boy !,what a singer. It doesn't bother me at all,if the lead singer doesn't play an instrument,for me it's the voice that counts every time,& as a rider to this thread,i prefer a female voice to most male voices,with a few exceptions of course,
Ivan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QzP0vE-w0U

**mandolirius** · Feb-10-2011, 1:18am

Originally Posted by SincereCorgi

Relatively speaking, it's lasted a pretty long time (depending on your definition of bluegrass). Most genres turn into eccentric little footnotes after ten or twenty years- it's lasted longer than ragtime, longer than disco, longer than the big band era, etc etc.

That's certainly one way to look at it. However if you took ragtime and big band as sub-genres of jazz, then the larger form is still around. Same with disco. It was a pop-culture phenomena, which means it was doomed to have a limited shelf life. But if you see it as just a part of what we call R & B or Soul then, once again, the larger musical form still exists.

Bluegrass has to change if it's going to stay relevant. It nearly died once already, due to....inbreeding, I guess is the word. There weren't many new songs being written and those that were followed a pretty set formula. There were very few women involved in the music. This was the late 50's/early 60's. The Country Gentleman did a lot for bluegrass by introducing new repetoire and showing that bluegrass could, like jazz, adopt songs from other styles and make them bluegrass.

After that you had rock infuences through Newgrass Revival and others and then a large influx of women, still mainly as singers but some instrumentalists as well. All of these developments have contributed to the longevity of bluegrass and there will be more of them as time goes on.

**Spencer** · Feb-10-2011, 2:26am

Could be this will change with younger bands. I can think of two who do very well with lead singers who don't play instruments: Joy Kills Sorrow from the US, and Downtown Ramblers from Sweden. Haven't heard anybody complain about them, and they play some excellent music.

Spencer

**Rick Cadger** · Feb-10-2011, 4:11am

People do what they do. We all have limitations.

If a band finds a singer that they think fits with the sound they want but that singer is not able to play another instrument then the band decides if the contribution of the singer is equal to that of any other member, or at least substantial enough that they'd rather not lose that singer. Obviously if you can find a great singer who can also play one of the instruments you need then that's a great bargain. Otherwise, you work with what you have.

Quite often the non-playing singer is the go-getter who was motivated enough to put the band together in the first place. In such cases, that drive surely counts for something.

Some singers can play instruments, but can't multi-task to the point of singing and playing at the same time. I can sing ok and I can play ok, but if I do both at the same time then my limitations begin to show.

BB King says that he can't sing and play at the same time. His band didn't sack him yet.

**Bertram Henze** · Feb-10-2011, 5:21am

I think it depends on what exactly is being sung.

BG singing often follows that blues pattern of a high-pitched voice moving across just two or three notes, conveying that message "look my life is so bad, my voice gone south, can't even sing". Many people (and I, for that matter) get the impression that this can't take much of your brainpower so you might perfectly well do something else beside it, such as playing an instrument (women can yell at their husband and throw a frying pan at him at the same time, can't they?)

If there is, OTOH, a ballad with a complicated melody full of emotions and subtle nuances, everybody will acknowledge that as a full-time job.

Now you can claim that I am not into BG and just ignorant of what is going on in a song, but so are audiences.

**Stephen Cagle** · Feb-10-2011, 6:32am

I must admit that it felt a little funny in the beginning. I toured with Ray Deaton and his now wife Anita Fisher a few years ago (The Anita Fisher Band). Anita stood center in between Ray and I and on the other side of her was Jimmy and Brian. After 1 show the thought of it being weird or different went right out the window. Playing in a setting like that, YES the voice is an instrument. Don't forget the Lewis Family. I'm sure a few people have heard of them and they have done just fine.

Stephen Cagle

**AlanN** · Feb-10-2011, 6:47am

I saw Ronnie Bowman and the Committee some time ago, with Ronnie's wife on stage, vocals only. Good voice, good band dynamic. I didn't think anything of her not having an instrument. Plus, all the bases were covered already - guitar (2 - Ronnie, Wyatt Rice), mando, fiddle, banjo, bass.