Why old time and bluegrass are not the same.

[ralph johansson]

Not bluegrass:

A nice illustration of the James-Lange theory of emotion. The fun is in the laughter.

[Tom Wright]

Bluegrass has always been about performance, about delivering a song with skill and virtuosity, to my understanding.

The fiddle tunes we play for contra dances have a purpose: driving the dance, and genre purity is mainly ignored. Instrumentation is variable, plenty of amplification for large rooms, and we improvise plenty, both in melodic and harmonic ways, as well as adding various types of percussion. English Country Dance gets even farther from genre purity, mixing tunes from the 17th and 18th centuries with modern tunes written for the dancers. Instrumentation even more variable; clarinet, cello, flute, violin, mandolin, guitar, and always piano for both English and contra dances.

Isn't "Old-Time" just the social version of dance music? It's playing dance tunes without having to accommodate dancers.

Putting things another way: Bluegrass is a commercial venture, Old Time is a social activity, and playing dance music is utilitarian. The first two have reasons for rules of a sort, branding for bluegrass and style consistency for Old Time sessions. Jam sessions are their own world, with jazz jams being fairly open but still exhibiting some discrimination against some instruments or tunes.

[DavidKOS]

English Country Dance gets even farther from genre purity, mixing tunes from the 17th and 18th centuries with modern tunes written for the dancers. Instrumentation even more variable; clarinet, cello, flute, violin, mandolin, guitar, and always piano for both English and contra dances.

Man, you said a mouthful there!

[doublestoptremolo]

Bluegrass started as a commercial venture, and still is, but it also became something else. Bluegrass jams are social activities, and they're really what keeps the music going. A lot of people (myself included) like playing bluegrass more than listening to it being performed. That's why people go to weeklong bluegrass festivals and never go near the stage. I can think of maybe 5 to 10 bluegrass acts that I would be interested in paying to see. Just because bluegrass is marginally more commercially successful than old-time doesn't mean it's like a Steve Miller Band concert.

Performance? Virtuosity? Skill? Sorry, not many of the bluegrass jams I've been to. We suck just as much as the old timers do, probably more so, just in more keys.

I think one main reason that bluegrass is marginally more commercially successful than old-time, though, is it has songs, which normal people (those that don't spend a lot of time on instrument forums) prefer. The comment about "tunes" above misses the point: bluegrass isn't really a tune music, it's a song music. You wouldn't know it from looking at the Monroe camp jam list or reading Mandolin Cafe, but Bill Monroe was a country singing star who played the occasional instrumental. Flatt and Scruggs were country stars. There's a reason Master of Bluegrass and Foggy Mountain Banjo go in and out of print--few people other than pickers want to listen to instrumentals.

And--just my experience--it's easier to learn to play along to a vocal number than to a fiddle tune. Say you're jamming with some others and newbie who plays guitar but generally Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, etc. comes up and wants to join in. What's easier for him to play along to? Will the Circle be Unbroken, This Land is Your Land, Little Georgia Rose, Wagon Wheel--or Ducks on the Millpond, West Fork Gals, Katy Hill?

[doublestoptremolo]

And just to clarify, I was referring to the older jam lists from the Monroe camp, like this one, with a lot of instrumentals only 15 mandolinists in the country know how to play: http://monroemandolincamp.com/wp-con...w-Jam-List.pdf. The newer list is more balanced, with actual songs.

Then there's this book, ostensibly for "the bluegrass mandolinist," but full of obscure tunes that stand about as much chance of being played at a bluegrass jam as "Billie Jean" or "The Girl from Impanema": http://www.louismartinmusicbmi.com/samples.htm

[JeffD]

Isn't "Old-Time" just the social version of dance music? It's playing dance tunes without having to accommodate dancers.

I can go with that to a point. So much of the OT music I play is dance music, or dance forms, or was dance music in past times. But there are other sources for the tunes as well, and they get folded in. [I am not an ethno-musicologist, or a music historian. This is all just based on my listening a lot, and some reading.] For example there are more than a few tunes derived from popular music and songs of times long long past. Popular, political, military, regional and just plain goofy entertainment songs and music nobody ever danced to. And then all the crooked tunes, that cannot today be used for a dance. I don't think they are all just mutations and deformations of dance tunes, though some may be. And I am convinced that some tunes originated with some fiddler umpty ump decades past making a go at a theme from classical music.

Putting things another way: Bluegrass is a commercial venture, Old Time is a social activity, and playing dance music is utilitarian.

While not rigorously true in every case, (so few things are) yea, I can go with that as a characterization. My only modification might be to change "commercial venture" to "performance activity". But I get what you mean.

At least in my experience, etc., etc.

[A 4]

A while back, and I assume it was here on the Mandolin Cafe, I read about Todd Phillips album "In the Pines," which I thought was described as a very influential and early "progressive bluegrass" record. So I listened to it, and one of my reactions was that "these are old-time fiddle tunes, just slowed way down and with a lot more notes added." Maybe bluegrass and old-time are not the same, but progressive bluegrass and old-time are closer? A lot of people nowadays, many who seem to be associated with Berklee, have at least a familiarity with old-time.

Looking it up now, I see "In the Pines" is 1995, which doesn't seem that early to me. And no disrespect intended from my description above - it is fantastic.

[allenhopkins]

When did evolution give us this instinctive need to categorize everything?

If bluegrass is "stage music" -- which maybe is how it started, but not really all it is now -- and old-time is "communal (living room/back porch) music, with no soloists and few songs (and no time limits on tunes), where do you put Charlie Poole? Or the Skillet Lickers with their "Corn Liquor Still" comedy skits? Or Snuffy Jenkins, Mainer's Mountaineers, Dock Walsh and the Carolina Tar Heels? All non-bluegrass (pre-bluegrass?) groups that put on stage shows, toured around as professional entertainers; I'd call them old-time musicians, based on style and repertoire, but developed well beyond the "communal" or even dance-band environment that the essayist contends is essential to old-time music.

Quite a few of those old-time bands whose music city-billy musicians try to emulate today, were professional groups organized by impresarios and "lead" musicians to perform for audiences, and to make recordings. Old-time music, for many musicians of 70-90 years ago, was "stage music" to the extent that they could make a living performing it professionally. They went on the radio, booked concerts, recorded 78's for Victor or Bluebird or Gennett, put out songbooks -- same thing that Bill Monroe would do ten or 20 years later.

So what's the difference now? For one thing, commercial acceptance. Bluegrass has had an audience -- one whose size has varied, but which never went away -- since Bill and Charile Monroe split and Bill formed the Blue Grass Boys. Bluegrass on the Opry, the Wheeling Jamboree, at Bean Blossom and Fincastle, on Decca and Columbia Records. It's spawned a host of amateur pickers, but also a host of professional and semi-pro performing bands, who can find audiences and make a little money, and release their own recordings.

Old-time performing groups, in contrast, found their audiences diminishing. You might still get a tune from the Crook Brothers or Sam and Kirk Magee on the Opry, and festivals like Galax and Union Grove continued to feature old-time fiddle and fiddle bands, but old-time music became a musician's style, one that emphasized people playing together in a non-performance setting. Not that some of those musicians wouldn't have liked to draw an audience, make a record, get a radio spot -- but the opportunity wasn't there.

Until –– the New Lost City Ramblers brought historical scholarship (I guess) and research into old-time music, both professional and amateur, from 30-40 years before, into live performance in the folk revival. Which set off an old-time revival, as new bands of young musicians got together to perform old-time music professionally and semi-professionally. Walt Koken's name was brought up; much of what grabbed me about old-time music came from listening to him and the rest of the Highwoods String Band 45 years ago. So the stage-show approach of Charlie Poole and Gid Tanner gets recycled by the Red Clay Ramblers or the Sweets Mill String Band.

So now we still have professional old-time music, though much less than professional bluegrass music. And we have groups of amateur old-time and bluegrass musicians who get together to play, in styles that are distinct but constantly demonstrate their similarity and past linkages. What I love, is the willingness of so many musicians to play music that cuts across the categories. I may go to what's labeled a "bluegrass jam" in a little western NY town, and hear musicians play Angelina Baker, followed by Whiskey Before Breakfast, Faded Love, and Blackberry Blossom -- without caring that they're playing old-time, Celtic, Western swing, and bluegrass in some kind of music-tradition mash-up. Categories be damned!

As for back-up guitar, the Old-Time Police should make all guitarists emulate Riley Puckett, and play bass runs with their fingers. No more flat-picks!

[JeffD]

As for back-up guitar, the Old-Time Police should make all guitarists emulate Riley Puckett, and play bass runs with their fingers. No more flat-picks!

Amen!

[Jack Roberts]

....Performance? Virtuosity? Skill? Sorry, not many of the bluegrass jams I've been to. We suck just as much as the old timers do, probably more so, just in more keys.....

Ouch! That will leave a mark...

[foldedpath]

Performance? Virtuosity? Skill? Sorry, not many of the bluegrass jams I've been to. We suck just as much as the old timers do, probably more so, just in more keys.

Irish trad sessions can suck just as much as OldTime or Bluegrass jams. We just call them "modes" instead of keys. It gives the guitar player a little more excuse for being confused.

[yankees1]

Bluegrass musicians use the tune to show off their musicianship. Old Time musicians use their musicianship to show off the tune.

Beautifully said !

[Jess L.]

... What I love, is the willingness of so many musicians to play music that cuts across the categories. ...

I like that too. It's enjoyable to play, and to listen to. (IMO)

... Performance? Virtuosity? Skill? Sorry, not many of the bluegrass jams I've been to. We suck just as much as the old timers do, probably more so, just in more keys. ...

Irish trad sessions can suck just as much as OldTime or Bluegrass jams. We just call them "modes" instead of keys. It gives the guitar player a little more excuse for being confused.

Lol!

[Jess L.]

I detect a bit of anti-intellectualism in some of these comments. ...

I'm not sufficiently intellectual to even know whether or not I'm intellectual or anti-intellectual.

However, years ago:

I was waiting in line at the Post Office to buy some stamps (back when people still sent things called 'letters' lol). A kindly-looking and very elderly gentlemen was standing in line behind me. After some time, he asked, very politely:

"Excuse me miss, are you an intellectual?"

My instantaneous reflex response was, "Certainly not!" Yeah my reaction surprised even me, especially since the phrase "certainly not" is, in itself, stereotypically something only 'intellectuals' would say. Then I caught myself and realized he meant no harm, he wasn't trying to be insulting, he was probably just lonely and figured that might be a good conversation starter... it was a college town after all, probably half the people there would qualify as intellectuals (in the good sense of the word, that is). So we ended up having a good little chat about music (heh the only thing I know to talk about is music, cars, & tech).

As to my initial reaction feeling insulted that someone thought I was an "intellectual", I don't know where that comes from... family & community I guess. Certainly not something I'm proud of, rather just an observation. Most of my early brainwashing er I mean socializing, I've managed to dispense with and reprogram to something more useful in modern society, but there are straggler leftovers from time to time.

[Jess L.]

A nice illustration of the James-Lange theory of emotion. The fun is in the laughter.

Not sure I follow... maybe I misunderstood what you meant?

I'd say that it looks like the people in the video are laughing & smiling *because* they're having fun, not the other way around. In other words, the fun happens first, because they're enjoying the music they're playing, and then the outward display follows. (Not referring to the lyrics, but to the players' body movements etc.)

If they weren't having fun, they wouldn't have any reason to act as happy as they do - they're not on-stage getting paid to put on a show. The players' good-times behavior seems genuine, not just contrived just to fit the tune, although of course that works well there too.

So I went ahead and looked up a webpage about the James Lange theory of emotion. If I'm understanding what they're saying there, I have doubts about the theory's accuracy. The webpage's author does as well:

"... modern researchers largely discount the James-Lange theory, ..."

"... It was the later work of neuroscientists and experimental physiologists who demonstrated further flaws with the James-Lange theory of emotions. ..."

"... Another issue with the theory is that when tested by applying electrical stimulation, applying stimulation to the same site does not lead to the same emotions every time. A person may have the exact same physiological response to a stimulus, yet experience an entirely different emotion. Factors such as the individual's existing mental state, cues in the environment, and the reactions of other people can all play a role in the resulting emotional response. ..."

However, the page also says:

"... there are some instances where physiological responses do lead to experiencing emotions. Developing a panic disorder and specific phobias are two examples. ..."

etc.

That page mentions a different theory, the Cannon-Bard theory of emotion, which seems to make more sense to me.

Not sure this is related, but I can say one thing I've observed with regards to PTSD - a loud noise, for instance, can produce two distinct and separate reactions - (1) the conscious mind hears the noise, realizes it's something harmless and nothing to worry about, and then (2) a split second later the body reacts anyway (startled effect or jumping etc). For a fraction of a second, the part of the mind that controls the body seems to be either unaware of, or disregards for some reason, the other part of the mind that's concluded that the sound was nothing to worry about. Not sure which one of the "emotion theories" that might fit into, maybe neither.

But hey what do I know, I'm not a researcher.

Anyway, yeah I know this isn't ShrinkCafe but there's some degree of relevance I think - because the enjoyment factor of music is a strong motivating force to continue playing said music even if there is little or no monetary compensation or world fame-and-fortune rockstar status involved. The music generates its own rewards.

[DavidKOS]

If bluegrass is "stage music" -- which maybe is how it started, but not really all it is now -- and old-time is "communal (living room/back porch) music, with no soloists and few songs (and no time limits on tunes), where do you put Charlie Poole? Or the Skillet Lickers with their "Corn Liquor Still" comedy skits? Or Snuffy Jenkins, Mainer's Mountaineers, Dock Walsh and the Carolina Tar Heels? All non-bluegrass (pre-bluegrass?) groups that put on stage shows, toured around as professional entertainers; I'd call them old-time musicians, based on style and repertoire, but developed well beyond the "communal" or even dance-band environment that the essayist contends is essential to old-time music.

They were indeed professional musicians and entertainers. As were the BG boys, F and S, etc.

As for back-up guitar, the Old-Time Police should make all guitarists emulate Riley Puckett, and play bass runs with their fingers. No more flat-picks!

https://www.flatpickerhangout.com/archive/5341

"describes the techniques in the book as taken from source recordings, of guitar players using thumbpicks and sometimes fingerpicks, and describes the use of a flat pick as a modern innovation. He intends for the book to apply to those who use a flatpick. The author might delight in discovering several early guitarists in fact did use a flatpick, and were quite influential. "

http://eamusic.dartmouth.edu/~larry/...uckette_OP.pdf

comments about Puckett and flatpicking solos.

https://www.banjohangout.org/archive/256714

"Riley Puckett is the man most guitarists have to hear and should pay close attention to. While the Boom Chuck is great and actually preferable to almost anything else. A real flatpicker will find a lot of red meat listening to Puckett's sides with Gid Tanner and the Skillet Lickers. Riley kept his runs running from beginning to end (by way of the middle) and was able to syncopate while still holding down the rhythm astutely."

https://oldtimeparty.wordpress.com/2...riley-puckett/

no agreement on exactly what picks Puckett used - but mostly a combination of thumb-pick and finger picks, not a flatpick.

but one response was interesting:

Dave Pounds Says:
December 5, 2014 at 10:10 pm | Reply
Well, all I can say is that I am his grandson, and according to his daughter (who knew him better than any of the people you mentioned and who I am looking at right this minute), he played right-handed, high off the bridge, and used a thumb pick and a pick on all four fingers…and, yes, we have a full set of the picks he used INCLUDING one of the small steel picks that he used on his pinky.

So there you have it - full on 5 finger picking!

Thanks for mentioning Riley.

[ralph johansson]

When did evolution give us this instinctive need to categorize everything?

If bluegrass is "stage music" -- which maybe is how it started, but not really all it is now -- and old-time is "communal (living room/back porch) music, with no soloists and few songs (and no time limits on tunes), where do you put Charlie Poole? Or the Skillet Lickers with their "Corn Liquor Still" comedy skits? Or Snuffy Jenkins, Mainer's Mountaineers, Dock Walsh and the Carolina Tar Heels? All non-bluegrass (pre-bluegrass?) groups that put on stage shows, toured around as professional entertainers; I'd call them old-time musicians, based on style and repertoire, but developed well beyond the "communal" or even dance-band environment that the essayist contends is essential to old-time music.

-------------------
As for back-up guitar, the Old-Time Police should make all guitarists emulate Riley Puckett, and play bass runs with their fingers. No more flat-picks!

You saved me a lot of work with this post! Indeed, all those acts performed, and recorded. Some sold quite well, e.g., before the Depression a new single by the Skillet Lickers sold around 200,000 copies. And one of their best known songs, Down Yonder, was a pop song by L Wolfe Gilbert.


It's a bit disturbing that the only videos of contemporary old-time linked to here feature rank amateurs. For some truly professional exponents of the genre I would cite Bruce Molsky and Rachel Eddy; and Eddy in particular approaches the "genre" in quite an unprejudiced manner. There's a YouTube video of her on stage with a cello. During her years in Sweden she led an all-female group called the Liza Janes with snare drum and cajón and some (to my ears) BG-inspired rhythm mandolin. Check out her album "Hand on the Plow" with its beautiful blend of ancient and modern influences (esp. in the rhythm)

[A 4]

It's a bit disturbing that the only videos of contemporary old-time linked to here feature rank amateurs. For some truly professional exponents of the genre I would cite Bruce Molsky and Rachel Eddy; and Eddy in particular approaches the "genre" in quite an unprejudiced manner.

That video of Little Brown Jug features Tricia Spencer, who is a professional musician (maybe she also has a day job, like many Old-Time pros). She is half of Spencer and Raines, who I really like.

Not Bluegrass:



Just because so many of the videos are at Clifftop doesn't mean they don't play inside sometimes. Here's Rachael Eddy (Not Bluegrass):

[JeffD]

It's a bit disturbing that the only videos of contemporary old-time linked to here feature rank amateurs. For some truly professional exponents of the genre I would cite Bruce Molsky and Rachel Eddy; and Eddy in particular approaches the "genre" in quite an unprejudiced manner.

Ralph I am going to have to disagree with you. (Not with your observation, but with your being disturbed.)

Yes there are many professionals in the genre. But, as opposed to BG, the main thrust of OT is you me and your neighbor and that guy across town on that old banjo, and who my great grampa played with, and where did you learn that tune, and l'll make the corn bread and chili and you and your brother come over for a jam.

Yes there are exceptions. Wonderful expections. There are bluegrass jams dominated by folks without a thought of getting acclaim or professional opportunities, and, as you point out there are more and more and many OT bands making CDs and making money.

But my point is the emphasis, the main thrust. Even when done at a party or jam, BG is "stage oriented", and even when done on stage, OT is trying to evoke the back porch.

I was linking jams, without regard as to whether they perform or record. They play, and that moment when they play, is the whole point of OT.

BG is much more star oriented and IMO star worshiping. OT has that aspect, and is becoming that way more and more, but am not happy about it. I think it entirely misses the point. I enjoy those might who join me in my "rank amateur" jam because they like the tune we are playing, much more than those who join a Rachel Eddy jam because its Rachel. (And don't get me wrong, I think Rachel Eddy's playing is sublime, absolutely.) If I name drop, it will be the name of a tune!

IMO etc., etc.

[JeffD]

Not Bluegrass:



Yes I know the Canote Brothers perform and are among the best. Among my favorites.

But isn't this jam full of sublime moments.

I much prefer when they "hold court" (I hate that description), than when they are on stage.

[JeffD]

Ralph, I am not in any way trying to pick a fight. I did not mean to come across that way. There is just perhaps a phase angle between how you and i come at this. On most things we likely agree more than we disagree.

[Mike Snyder]

At my skill level, I don’t believe that I could sit with a top bluegrass band and feel that I added something of value to the tunes. They are very advanced technically and that is needed to be successful in that genre. I have sat in jam situation with Spencer and Raines and Raines mentioned that the tenor banjo sounded good on a particular tune. Those two have the advanced abilities to play across genres. Top shelf in old time music today. The music is just more accessible to mid-level musicians like me. I have played mandolin in several bluegrass bands and was barely hanging on by my teeth at every performance. Probably had to do with the anatomy of a bgrass tune. I have to play this break at this point in this tune and I hit a clam note I have to catch myself and pull it out of the ashes. There is more freedom of movement in old time. Play to your strength. Spencer and Raines are the perfect example. He knows a couple thousand tunes and plays the melody clean and clear. She is the master of rhythm fiddle. Chordal monster fiddler and ALWAYS knows what a tune needs to make it better. Plenty of bgrass players have this sort of intuitive ability, too, but in the confines of performance it is less apparent.
Or maybe I’m just a huge S&R fan.

[JeffD]

Looking it up now, I see "In the Pines" is 1995, which doesn't seem that early to me. And no disrespect intended from my description above - it is fantastic.

Not sure what you mean.

[doublestoptremolo]

But, as opposed to BG, the main thrust of OT is you me and your neighbor and that guy across town on that old banjo, and who my great grampa played with, and where did you learn that tune, and l'll make the corn bread and chili and you and your brother come over for a jam.

Everything in the paragraph applies to a bluegrass jam, though. The fact that we might have learned the songs off records originally doesn't negate the community aspect of it.

There are bluegrass jams dominated by folks without a thought of getting acclaim or professional opportunities . . .

Lord I would hope so. Not the best career path.

But my point is the emphasis, the main thrust. Even when done at a party or jam, BG is "stage oriented"

This I don't get. How is gathering with friends and strangers--in a campground, church fellowship hall, parking lot, under a tree, or on someone's back porch--and standing or sitting in a circle and playing bluegrass songs, "stage oriented"?

[JeffD]

Bluegrass musicians use the tune to show off their musicianship. Old Time musicians use their musicianship to show off the tune.

Of course there are exceptions, and everyone who plays wants to be heard, but as a general emphasis of the genre, I agree with you 100%.