Column: Where is Bluegrass Headed?

[Charlieshafer]

The basic problem with labels is this: if you want them to be strictly applied, you'll choke off your favorite style of music. If you allow some leeway in verbiage, your favorite genre will expand. Here's why:

1: The uninitiated in any form of music or art need labels to get them interested in hearing or seeing something they don't know. Look at the algorithms on Spotify, Pandora, Amazon or iTunes. "If you like this, you might like...these." Whether you care about them or not, they introduce people to a lot of music they'd never hear before. A LOT of music. Far more than word of mouth. Far more than traditional radio. These algorithms live by labels.

2: When going to see music, and folks are unfamiliar with a certain band, they'll need the road sign of "Irish" or "Bluegrass" or "Jazz" etc. They want to find something they're comfortable with. There aren't enough labels to cover all the new forms of music. You can only have so many before you lose the general public's interest. But the casual bluegrass-y music fan may or may not care about who is traditional and who is not. But by supporting the entire genre, they help make being a traditional bluegrass player more financially viable.

3: This need for a generalized road sign extends to the press as well. Casual music writers or general event editors in local newspapers want to appeal to as broad a spectrum of readers as possible. They're trying to build a community. A specific genre's need to exclude the less-than-pure from their own little circle won't appeal to a broader population and that won't interest the writers and editors.

As far as the way it's played, let the traditionalists play it as straight as they want, no problem there at all. But if they jealously guard the name, they'll lose their audience over time.

This sort of... I don't know..elitism extends to those who say that their genre is more difficult to "get" or play well than any other are also nuts. We all know I.T.M., Scots, Old-time, and bluegrass who all say no one can ever truly play it right unless they live it, play it, whatever. This thought process may have held somewhat true years ago, but it's not the case anymore, even if it ever was. With the proliferation of music camps like Alasdair Frazers, Jay Ungars, Mike Blocks, etc, young players are exposed to it all, and killing it all.

So there's a bit of a paradox going on right now which is understandably confusing to those who might be stuck in their ways, but here's the contradiction: players need to cross boundaries to make their music more sellable to a wider range of people, but need the traditional labels so the marketers can at least get them noticed by the right people.

[Willie Poole]

Those are some good points Charlie and I would believe that in different parts of the country that would true...I play quite a few shows every year and I would guess that 90% of the people that come to listen to my band say that they sure miss bluegrass played in the traditional style...Also I have seen and heard some of the pickers that have taken "Bluegrass courses" at some of the colleges, namely East Tennessee State, and they are like a bunch of robots playing the music from what appears to me that they learned from reading sheet music, they have no stage presentation at all, at least not very much, no drive to the music, given time they may well become great musicians but what they are learning now just doesn`t seem to me to be real bluegrass...

The OP asked where is "bluegrass headed", well all he has to do is listen to those kind of pickers and he will see where it has already gone...

Just my opinion so please don`t shoot me...Willie

[Charlieshafer]

Just my opinion so please don`t shoot me...Willie

Ha! Actually, Willie, you're right in that respect. The newer players will have the skills, but in all genres, they don;t have the stage polish yet. That's experience. And yeah,there's a niche for the hard-core trad players and fans for sure, but I agree that it is very much geographical. Up here, a Ryman Auditorium that would be all trad grass and old-school country would probably fail pretty quickly. It'd would be a novelty for a while, then be gone. But give the kids a chance; they may not be playing bluegrass the old way, but they'll play some pretty good stuff when they get a little experience.

[JeffD]

3: This need for a generalized road sign extends to the press as well. Casual music writers or general event editors in local newspapers want to appeal to as broad a spectrum of readers as possible. They're trying to build a community. A specific genre's need to exclude the less-than-pure from their own little circle won't appeal to a broader population and that won't interest the writers and editors.

More often than not, in musical genres that are not main stream, the casual music writers are just that, casual. Distinctions are missed not because they might exclude, but because they are missed.

This is likely more true at the more local level.

[Timbofood]

Those are some good points Charlie and I would believe that in different parts of the country that would true...I play quite a few shows every year and I would guess that 90% of the people that come to listen to my band say that they sure miss bluegrass played in the traditional style...Also I have seen and heard some of the pickers that have taken "Bluegrass courses" at some of the colleges, namely East Tennessee State, and they are like a bunch of robots playing the music from what appears to me that they learned from reading sheet music, they have no stage presentation at all, at least not very much, no drive to the music, given time they may well become great musicians but what they are learning now just doesn`t seem to me to be real bluegrass...

The OP asked where is "bluegrass headed", well all he has to do is listen to those kind of pickers and he will see where it has already gone...

Just my opinion so please don`t shoot me...Willie

We have got to meet!
As I have said time and time again,
You have got to know where you came from to know where you are going!
I don’t begrudge any working musician their interpretation of what they are playing regardless of genre, I have the ability to exercise final censorship and either leave the venue, turn off the station or stay. Those who simply want to grouse about any subject will always do so. You cannot change human nature without a pretty big fight. It’s hard enough to try to enlighten some people.
I’ve known lots of musicians over the years some well, some only in passing but the thing they all shared with me was a very deep love for the music they played. For me I’d say that is enough, learn a little from all of them, play what you love and play it with the heart and soul. Let other people say what they will, opinions are like noses everyone has one and it’s better to keep them out of other peoples business.

[JAK]

Once I heard somebody ask Bill Monroe if anybody would be around to play bluegrass and "carry the torch" when Bill was no longer on this earth (upright), and Bill answered, "No." Maybe Bill was correct....

[T.D.Nydn]

Once I heard somebody ask Bill Monroe if anybody would be around to play bluegrass and "carry the torch" when Bill was no longer on this earth (upright), and Bill answered, "No." Maybe Bill was correct....

That is an incredible answer to think about,,you can read all kinds of thing's in it...

[hnicoleanderson]

Bluegrass progressed already into country pop. If you stray too far from it's roots, it's no longer bluegrass as it becomes something else.

[hnicoleanderson]

I've expressed this opinion before, but what the hell, why let that stop me... IMO musical genres have a shelf-life, after which comes a point of diminishing returns. You may bemoan the fact that there's no 'real' bluegrass around anymore, but really, what are you going to hear anyway that's going to rival Bill Monroe, Jimmy Martin, Flatt and Scruggs, etc.?

There are still blues bands, but what is there in the same league as Muddy, Wolf, Sonny Boy? Same with jazz, is there really any need to listen to (hardly) anything post-Miles, Coltrane, Monk, Mingus?? Etc etc ad nauseam. You still have the old records, give them a spin and enjoy!

OMG! I guess you have never heard of Wynton Marsalis, Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Buddy Guy, Ricky Skaggs, EmmyLou Harris, Alison Krause to name a few.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDZkg5_YSWc

[Tom Coletti]

A lot of people seem to have some concern over what us millennials are doing with music so as a mid-20-something I can assure you that we have no intention of ruining everything. We don't really know what music is going to turn into either, but with that being said, it may be helpful to consider a few things from our vantage point:

There's an unfathomable amount of musical information available to us now, and bluegrass is a just small piece buried in the pile of info. If we do find bluegrass, we probably dug through so many other genres of music along the way that we'll be instinctively coloring our bluegrass experience with the other genres we've experienced.

A lot of people start with something mainstream because it's near the top of the pile. While listening to something like, say, country-pop, they may hear something in the instrumentation they like, then perhaps dig a bit deeper to the Avett Brothers or Mumford, then Punch Brothers, everyone who's played with Punch Brothers, etc., and then they've opened the door to all sorts of festivals, workshops, and everything else on the road to 'grass with some encouragement. But merely chiding them about "not being bluegrass" might make them feel unwelcome or inadequate, and they may associate that bad experience with the genre and stop digging there.

It's really easy to single out some kid listening to whatever's popular this week and talk about how music isn't what it was, but that ignores the possibility that said popular thing is someone's start down the path that one day lands them across from you at the next jam circle. They'll play stuff a bit differently than the traditional way, most likely, but the traditional way of playing still exists. Nobody ruined it or took it away, it just got company.

Some might say "well that's fine, just call it something else," but to some degree, language and its uses change as much as music does. Vernacular updates and takes on new words to express new ideas, or new meanings or connotations to recontexualize old ones, so the reason the "bluegrass" label has stuck to these derivative styles of music may be partly because the mental image formed when someone says "bluegrass" has expanded to include those derivatives in their minds.

I don't know where bluegrass is headed or why or how, but it's going somewhere and people are having fun with it. That's all that matters to me.

[jaycat]

OMG! I guess you have never heard of Wynton Marsalis, Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Buddy Guy, Ricky Skaggs, EmmyLou Harris, Alison Krause to name a few.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDZkg5_YSWc

Yep, I've heard of 'em. All fine players. I would only rate Hendrix in the category of 'innovator,' however, and in the rock rather than blues genre.

[mando_dan]

Thank goodness Pink Floyd didn't spend too much time learning the Little Richard and Chuck Berry repertoire.

[Timbofood]

I stand by my earlier comments.
The idea that Jaycat has not heard of any of those musicians is absurd! The man has shown his diverse musical knowledge tim and again over the years, read past posts.
Tom makes a good point, the stacks of information available today tower over the small amount that was poured out in very small glasses forty some years ago. Back then you had to LOOK for bluegrass music and not many folks were out there to brain pick, you had to spend a lot of time finding the people, places where you could learn something from a human being face to face. There was no internet, it was an analog world which we old geezers hold close to our hearts,that’s just how we are wired.
The “new breed” of bluegrass minded folks have a very very large pool to draw from which was simply not there before. We had paper magazines, paper mail, everything took longer, we learned patience too.
Wait until you see things which are important to you morph into something which “passes” for how you learned it. Then you can make comments about someone not knowing something.
As for bluegrass becoming country pop, well, I’m not sure just who you listen to but, there are some very fine “traditional style” bands out there as well as the slick guys and “out there” bands. I lean toward the more traditional as a rule but, A little slick doesn’t get me wound up but, some of the latter, I just move along. If everyone loved the same thing it would get a little dull.
Just an old guys take on progress.

[ProfChris]

A lot of people seem to have some concern over what us millennials are doing with music so as a mid-20-something I can assure you that we have no intention of ruining everything. We don't really know what music is going to turn into either, but with that being said, it may be helpful to consider a few things from our vantage point:

There's an unfathomable amount of musical information available to us now, and bluegrass is a just small piece buried in the pile of info. If we do find bluegrass, we probably dug through so many other genres of music along the way that we'll be instinctively coloring our bluegrass experience with the other genres we've experienced.

A lot of people start with something mainstream because it's near the top of the pile. While listening to something like, say, country-pop, they may hear something in the instrumentation they like, then perhaps dig a bit deeper to the Avett Brothers or Mumford, then Punch Brothers, everyone who's played with Punch Brothers, etc., and then they've opened the door to all sorts of festivals, workshops, and everything else on the road to 'grass with some encouragement. But merely chiding them about "not being bluegrass" might make them feel unwelcome or inadequate, and they may associate that bad experience with the genre and stop digging there.

It's really easy to single out some kid listening to whatever's popular this week and talk about how music isn't what it was, but that ignores the possibility that said popular thing is someone's start down the path that one day lands them across from you at the next jam circle. They'll play stuff a bit differently than the traditional way, most likely, but the traditional way of playing still exists. Nobody ruined it or took it away, it just got company.

Some might say "well that's fine, just call it something else," but to some degree, language and its uses change as much as music does. Vernacular updates and takes on new words to express new ideas, or new meanings or connotations to recontexualize old ones, so the reason the "bluegrass" label has stuck to these derivative styles of music may be partly because the mental image formed when someone says "bluegrass" has expanded to include those derivatives in their minds.

I don't know where bluegrass is headed or why or how, but it's going somewhere and people are having fun with it. That's all that matters to me.

This! (as I believe Tom's generation say).

There is an important place for those who fell in love with a particular musical tradition and work to keep it alive, but it's inevitably a minority and niche place. For a different example, think trad jazz or the various national and regional folk traditions.

Most people who like music seem to like performers who take from a variety of influences and make it their own. The ones who succeed as performers (outside those preservation groups) are those who create something new, at least in my experience.

Bluegrass, in the preservation community, isn't heading anywhere - that's the whole point! Bluegrass-influenced music is doing some interesting things. It's great that I can listen to both.

[Tom Haywood]

I heard Mr. Bill say once that anybody who played the music different than he did was not playing bluegrass. And, of course, pretty much nobody was playing it the way he did. That explains his comment that there will be nobody to carry it on after he is gone. It seems a little presumptuous to contradict Bill and declare that Flatt & Scruggs and many others are playing bluegrass, but many of us have done that without any hesitation and now we want to limit the definition of bluegrass to only those we consider to be under our tent. And we'll gladly argue with each other about who should be there. Anything that is frozen in time, carved in stone, put on a pedestal, or put on display in a museum with a canned story is either dead or dying. Anything living is growing into whatever it will become. Don't get me wrong - I love "traditional" bluegrass. I know it when I hear it and I know it when I don't. I think it should be called traditional bluegrass to try to maintain a definition of that sound - as long as we don't limit it to only Bill's sound. Sort of nearby to where I live there are still some bluegrass festivals and bluegrass association meetings that are lightly attended. I'm inclined to say that traditional bluegrass is mostly dying around here, though, because the guys who would show up at jam sessions every weekend are mostly all dead or too ill to get out, and the guys in the age group just after them mostly only go out to play with their long-time band friends who already know how to play it. Seems like a lot of them just want to be in a museum. So the "traditional" language is not being passed on to very many young folks around here..

[poymando]

Punch Brothers are the best traditional bluegrass band on the circuit now. The music is in excellent hands.

[Chris Daniels]

Punch Brothers are the best traditional bluegrass band on the circuit now.

C.

[Ted Lehmann]

At a bluegrass festival, later in the evening, as the stage show winds down, as folks break out their instruments and gather round, what tunes do they play? From whom?

How many Chris Thile songs do they play?
Why is that?

How much of that is because the songs that modern bands play are more complex, nuanced, and, yes, difficult to master. The songs played and sung around the jam usually come from a catalog of shared musical experience, making the jam possible. They are old, beloved songs. It's always been interesting to see new songs enter the jam circle. Some are jam breakers, and if the person who calls them doesn't notice, can break up the jam as members leave to find a more congenial group where they feel they belong. One contemporary exception is The Gibson Brothers, many of whose songs are entering jams. The songs chosen are relatively easy to learn, have strong, evocative tunes, and are in a three verse and chorus pattern jammers like and can learn. "Erase the Miles," one of my favorite bluegrass songs, doesn't achieve this, and I don't remember having heard it in jams.

[AlanN]

Around these here parts, the only new songs which have made it to the parking lot are some James King and Hot Rize. Instrumental numbers - maybe Butch Baldassari or Alan Bibey tunes; not many, at all. That parking lot is one restricted roadway.

[outsidenote]

The only way for a genre to survive is for young people to play it. Inevitably, if they take an interest, they will place their own interpretations on the music and it will change. I personally enjoy listening to Courtney Hartman, Molly Tuttle, Joe Walsh and other young musicians. If thats not Bluegrass, then the genre is truly dead. If so, I will continue to enjoy its derivatives. The old stuff is still there for us to enjoy in many great recordings.

[Timbofood]

Outside note,
Your examples of your take on bluegrass are:
A-yours which is perfectly fine, you find that to be your taste I find them to be a good diversion from the old school, no argument.
B-a very good example of the evolution of the music, probably geared toward a more “listenable” vein than some others as far as I’m concerned.
But, you are not considering the fact that Until fairly recently, this has been an oral and aural traditional style of music, the vast library you allude to of the “old guard” (my term) available via recorded media is all well and good but, many of us here learned from a much smaller information pool.
The given is, that the first generation artists are dying, even some of the second generation are gone. I will forever be grateful to have seen as many of the developers of the genre as I have without seeing, meeting, and learning from them, I would not have learned to play. If there are NO traditionalists, the root dies, if there is no evolution, the root still dies.
Anyone here that was lucky enough to have seen the grace and style of Lester Flatt, Bill Harrell, Don Reno, Charlie Waller, Bill Monroe,
Ralph Stanley, and so on when they were out there know what I mean.
As I have said before time and again,
“If you dont know where you came from, how do you know where you’re going?”

[Mandoplumb]

Timbofood is right on. And that is the problem with so much of the music of today as well as just about everything else. No one is educated on where it comes from, so everything is considered "new".

[Willie Poole]

I think this is a discussion that will never get a true answer to it...I remember the first time I heard the song "someone killed country music down on Music Row" by Larry Cordell put everything into perspective....As is stated here music will evolve, sure but lets look back when it was called "String Music', it evolved into hillbilly and then later evolved into two separate class`s one called Country and one called Bluegrass so if it does evolve into some other form lets find a decent name for it, the songs that Jimmy Rogers and the Carter family used to sing have now been placed into a category called "Old Timey Music" and for years they were called the beginning of Country Music, the cowboys at one time were called "Opera singers" thus the name "Grand Ol`e Opry" then they got classified into "Country and Western"....

As for myself, I know true bluegrass when I hear it and it isn`t about what instruments are used to play it, it isn`t just about cabin homes, trains and truck driving etc it is the way it is presented with feeling and some good three part harmony in most cases, bands have tried different ways of doing the harmonies some with a high lead voice and two parts below the lead, some have even swapped parts as they sang the song, usually tight family harmonies like The Louvins and The Browns (Jim Ed, Maxine and Bonnie Brown) and later on The Osborne Bros...Even though Sonny and Bob weren`t always considered traditional bluegrass, much the same as John Duffey could sing any part that was needed and when the Seldom Scene was formed they didn`t want to be 100% bluegrass but they also didn`t want to sound like the "New Grass" bands that were around at that time...

As I said this is very selective as far as what our taste`s are but when a good bluegrass song is played most of us know that is true bluegrass and not this new stuff with many off chords that aren`t really needed, hell anyone can throw in a relative minor chord all through the song and the audience will think that is the way the song was originally written....And that takes it away from being "True Bluegrass" in my opinion...

Thanks for letting me state my opinion....

Willie

[Timbofood]

Willie, I like your perspective with regard to the “Seldom Scene” and The Osborne Brothers. They were progressive too but, they knew the roots, firsthand. The new blood that sees “Greensky Bluegrass” as the only exposure to Bluegrass music, has a hard row to hoe. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that the guys have a market and a business plan but, traditionalists, they surely are not. My band, Great Lakes Grass, did an anniversary show at Bell’s brewery with them several years ago and the difference between their following and ours (the first band to ever play Bells) was interesting to say the least.
Did the people that drove or took the train from Chicago to see them have a clue what we did? Not on your tintype! I like the guys just fine but, they hear something completely different from me when it comes to the music.

[T.D.Nydn]

An awful lot of bluegrass tunes use a relative minor,how is that "not bluegrass"?..