The Old-Time chop police

[SincereCorgi]

That being said, there is a lot the mandolin can do, to not only fit in, but to enhance the proceedings.

Play the melody.

Tremolo some double stop harmonies

Play backup chords, (you can even emphasize the backbeat).

Did I mention play the melody?

What I usually do is play the melody.

Well, lest people think I'm some crazy machine that only has a CHOP/OFF setting, I didn't do the 'bluegrass chop' every time I played rhythm. A lot of what I played when I played rhythm was sort of shuffle-chop stuff (like, uh, a washboard, I guess?). Maybe I'm not wired right for old-time, but the idea of playing the melody over and over a dozen times without switching to rhythm or otherwise changing the texture sounds like pretty dull music-making to my way of thinking.

[JeffD]

but the idea of playing the melody over and over a dozen times without switching to rhythm or otherwise changing the texture sounds like pretty dull music-making to my way of thinking.

In a way I understand what you are saying, but in reality, there is a lot of magic there. The tune is whole thing. You ride the tune like a little road trip. You get all up inside the tune and try to find its essential tuniness, and do everything to bring out that tune, express the tune's message more thoroughly, or more effectively, more precisely.

Its not about me its about the tune. Nobody cares how well I can improvise. Nobody cares how well I can play actually. The tune is beautiful as it is, who am I to think I can improve it with spontaneous re-composition. What they care about is how well I can make the tune sound. How does the tune sound in my hands. What has my years of playing done to me that I can apply to this tune here, and help it on its way, so that someone hearing it will pick will get infected with it and become a new host organism and pick it up.

One of the instructors at Swannanoa quoted Quincy Jones saying: "Rythm is as old as time. It goes back to a heartbeat, and its the first music ever made. Harmony is simple math. But melody, is a gift from God."

[sgarrity]

Listen to Mike Compton play behind John Hartford on all of his old-time fiddle tune recordings for a master class in playing mandolin rhythm in old time music.

[fatt-dad]

Not true. Sure its fellowhip and sharing, but focused a certain way. Of course there are exceptions, of course there are times nobody says anything. But that doesn't mean its appropriate.

If you substituted "play the saxephone" and instead of old time we were discussing bluegrass, it would be the same thing. There is nothing inherently wrong with saxophone in a bluegrass jam, its just not appropriate. If someone started playing "Inagotadavita" at a traditional irish jam.

Fellowship and sharing, of course absolutely, but that does not mean the folks are of a mind for fusing together disparit musical traditions.

For that you go to the "fusing disparit musical traditions" jam.

Hey, I don't want to sound defensive, but I also said, "Nobody likes a big mouth." Within the context of old-time music you could never say, the "chop" is taboo, like a sax on bluegrass. Last night I had to chop 'cause the guitar player lost the rhythm and the tune was falling apart. The chop helped for one lap and then I went back to noting. The subject of the OP was is there a place for chop chords in old-time music and I say, "sure!" Fellowship requires a sensibility to what is going on around you.

You do realize that there are folks that say there is no place for a mandolin AT ALL in old-time music.

f-d

[JeffD]

Fellowship requires a sensibility to what is going on around you.

Oh I agree, and every situation, at the time, is unique. It is never ok to just do what you want irrespective of its impact on those around.

You do realize that there are folks that say there is no place for a mandolin AT ALL in old-time music.

f-d

Absolutely. One of the first things I heard at the workshop was that the banjo and the fiddle are old time music. The banjo provides everything the fiddle needs and the fiddle completes the banjo - the two of them together are the perfect little OT machine. And the question asked of the mandolin player - when you go up to that jam, what do you think you are to add?

Of course then we learned what we mandolinists are capable of adding.

[woodwizard]

"Of course then we learned what we mandolinists are capable of adding".

I will say again ... if it sounds good it probably is.

[Rob Gerety]

the idea of playing the melody over and over a dozen times without switching to rhythm or otherwise changing the texture sounds like pretty dull music-making to my way of thinking.

You probably won't like Irish session playing.

[Perry]

Playing the melody all the time.....

I really like this approach even on bluegrass style fiddle tunes...it's more interesting then passing around the torch though that can be fine too.

As mentioned above you can really get inside the tune...and change the texture...also let's face it even good players are not always going to hit the same notes all the time but if you keep consistent rhythmic timing and play notes from the right scale you can stumble upon nice little harmonies and counter melodies. Since the melody is always covered by someone you can slip in and out chordal back-up; partial chords double stops etc. Of course it helps to have a guitar player playing some chords and everybody needs to pair the melody down to it's primal pulse at least as a base point...no frilly stuff!
It's more of a group effort this way..strength in numbers.

Who cares what the old-time police say!

[allenhopkins]

Do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law -- Aleister Crowley.

Old-time music, when it was old-time, was wildly varied, completely idiosyncratic, narrowly regional, and uniquely personal. As I said in an earlier post, the different bands played whatever came into their minds, with whatever instruments they happened to play. Hawaiian guitar, tenor banjo, Autoharp, cello, tuba, kazoo, harmonica, ukulele, uke-banjo, hammered dulcimer, piano, pump organ, and of course mandolin, were featured by different groups whose music has been recorded and whose legacy is the "old-timey" music we play today.

I'm a bit uncomfortable with the current orthodoxy that limits the roles of different instruments to a narrow range, and excludes other instruments and other techniques as not "old-timey." Listen to the Three Stripped Gears, the Red Fox Chasers, Carter Brothers & Son, Prince Albert Hunt's Texas Serenaders, Charlie Poole's Highlanders, Shortbuckle Roarke Family, the Allen Brothers, McGee Brothers & Arthur Smith, and a host of other individualistic and creative groups that don't sound like the "standard" revival old-time band today. And even among revivalists, check out Double Decker String Band or the Red Clay Ramblers for unorthodox and creative arrangement, instrumentation, and repertoire.

Probably there's an instinctive human preference for rule-making, and we wish we could guarantee universal "good taste" by legislating against behaviors we find "tasteless." But I don't accept that any person(s), no matter how learned, skilled or experienced, can define "old-time music" and separate the melody-playing sheep from the chord-chopping goats. It's like defining "jazz" or "rock" or "classical" -- setting the rules, drawing the boundaries, and excluding the nonconformists.

Doesn't mean that I want Archie Shepp playing "free jazz" in my Dixieland combo, or Eddie Van Halen taking the guitar solos in my bluegrass band. I just went to concert by an interesting NYCity band called Red Rooster, and they made some very pleasant country-folk original music with guitar, 5-string banjo, accordion and tenor saxophone. They knew how to blend disparate sounds and make things work together.

Drawing this long-winded rant to a close, I think that universalizing individual preferences into restrictive rule frameworks is suspect at best, and crucially limiting and creativity-killing at worst. You're free to say what you like and don't like, but that only defines your worldview, not boundaries to which everyone must conform.

[JeffD]

I take your point Allen, but would you not agree that those with a creative bent, that want to put things together in new ways, try things out and see what new things work, etc., they should first educate themselves through listening to and playing the more orthodox and less recently diluted forms, so that they know from which bottles they take their spices when they make their new concoction?

I am trying to draw a distinction between mixing and matching and pushing boundries and boarders out of a creative curiosity and need to create, versus the intellectual lazy who don't want to bother about boundries because it takes work to know where they are. (Bringing a saxophone to traditional Irish venue because you have found a cool way of using sax to bring out something in the jigs and reels and pipe and whistle music that uniquely works with the saxophone, (Hamish Moore and Dick Lee come to mind) or bringing a saxophone because, well, that's what you know how to play.)

Chopping because you have a feeling how it can contribute to the music, anchor the beat, and enhance the overall sound, versus chopping because that's, umm, what you do.

[allenhopkins]

Don't disagree with your perspective, JeffD, that a person would be well-advised to get some familiarity with a particular musical genre before attempting to "extend its boundaries." Also concur that the pig-headed "I play this way because that's the way I play -- like it or lump it!" approach is destructive to good relations at jam events, and to good music in general.

But I hear too much of "there's a right way and a wrong way to play old-time/bluegrass/Celtic/blues," with the usual corollary that "the way I/we play it is, of course, the right way." And I find this particularly invidious in regard to old-timey music, which was in its early recorded heyday a sprawling, diverse, heterogenous, individualistic style (or styles) that encompassed a wide variety of instruments, repertoire, techniques, and attitudes. To say that old-timey music is nothing but fiddle-based dance tunes with a frailed/clawhammer banjo, an open-chorded flat-picked guitar, and a mandolin that plays along with the melody -- and that everything else is heresy -- seems unnecessarily dogmatic to me.

And remember, we're talking about a jam here, not a band practice or a teaching workshop. In the better jams in which I've participated, lots of individuality was welcome, as long as the participants showed some respect for their fellow musicians, didn't try to dominate, had ears as well as fingers, and gave everyone a chance to contribute. Sure, there were things I liked more than others -- and sometimes things I really disliked -- but I wouldn't have said, "By definition, your music (and you) aren't welcome to participate."

[fatt-dad]

(Warning: No mandolin content)

I'm on a minister of music committee at my church (St. Paul's Richmond, Virginia). We have a long history (Robert E. Lee was a congregant). We also have an organ that was installed about 10 or 15 years ago. It's deluxe!

Tonight, we had a candidate play the organ and lead the choir (an interview of sorts). We were talking afterwards and we talked abou the subject of playing Bach on a "modern" organ. His perspective is that it's good to know the limitations of the instrument that Bach had for composing, but if Bach was alive to day, he's use all the horsepower of our more complicated "modern" organ.

In other-words, he never throttle back the potential of a contemporary organ just to be historically authentic. That said, you have to understand the historical context to know how to be true to the music.

In light of this thread, I found the organist's comments interesting. . .

f-d

[JeffD]

Tonight, we had a candidate play the organ and lead the choir (an interview of sorts). We were talking afterwards and we talked abou the subject of playing Bach on a "modern" organ. His perspective is that it's good to know the limitations of the instrument that Bach had for composing, but if Bach was alive to day, he's use all the horsepower of our more complicated "modern" organ.

In other-words, he never throttle back the potential of a contemporary organ just to be historically authentic. That said, you have to understand the historical context to know how to be true to the music.

In light of this thread, I found the organist's comments interesting. . .

Indeed, it is a classic battle. Do you play what the composer wrote, what the composer intended, what the composer would have intended if modern instruments were available? I know certain composers were more forward thinking, always trying to transcend the tools available, so it really is a legit approach.

And the classic battle about interpretation and re-interpretation of traditions - there is lots of music that came out of a time we cannot even imagine living in now. I always try and find the hints about what life might have been like then in the music itself, but even unconsciously I surely impact the future of the music in my playing of it. I am sure I play it a lot more self-consciously than it might have been played years ago, when musicians were more isolated from each other.

On the line between being a strict traditionalist, and a post-ipod modernist there are many points - each of us will be comfortable somewhere along that line.

[chasgrav]

I think it's always fair to say "chopping" mandolin chords isn't appropriate when you're trying to recreate a specific sound, (say, that of some particular band that came before). To say it's not consistent with "the old-time tradition" is ludicrous.

What is lost on many people is how innovative and unfettered many "old-time" players were. I'll hold up the Galax-area crowd, including the Camp Creek Boys, as examples. Even Tommy Jarrell's father was often shocked by the changes he brought to the music.

Duke Ellington said, "If it sounds good, it is good".

[AlanN]

Oh yes. Even the chop-meister John Duffey eschewed its constant use, to the point of calling it "disgusting" one time.

Gotta love that man (and his trousers).

[mikeyes]

The Chop isn't even universal in bluegrass. WSM varied what he did all the time as do all good BG mandolinists. In fact I've read the the reason WSM started using the chop a lot was to keep his band in tempo.

I play a lot of OT and in our band what ever seems to work, works - including the chop.

I agree with Allen, unless you are playing with a group of musicians that only plays a single narrowly defined regional style, the "rules" are more directed at good music than adhering to an interpretation of holy scrip.

[AlanN]

The Chop isn't even universal in bluegrass.

Very true. Just yesterday, was listening to Country Gentlemen 25 Years and on came Aunt Dinah's Quilting Party, a tune very much in the boom-chuck realm. John Duffey, Mr. Chop Man hisself, chose not do the metronomic chop on this, rather play rich double-stops behind. Sounded good to me.

[Caleb]

Great thread! I’m pretty new to the genre, but I’m doing lots of listening to old music, which I figure is the best place to start. It has been my experience that the best training for the hands is often first the training of the ears.

Regarding chopping at an old-time jam, I say just ask if it’s appropriate within that particular context. From what I’ve seen, most people who play acoustic music are generally pretty kind and laid back folks. I was in this very situation over the weekend at an old-time music festival. I ended up playing with two other mandolin players, and within a matter of seconds I realized I was completely out of my league, technically, with these guys. But they let me take a lead on the fiddle tunes where I felt comfortable; and where I didn’t, I just played open chords, trying to make it sound like they did (I learned more about rhythm playing in 30 minutes with those guys than I have in four years on my own!). I asked if chop chords would be appropriate, and was kindly and gently informed that “that’s mostly for bluegrass.” I don’t think those guys would have tossed me out on my ear if I did some, but the point is that I was trying to take the “When in Rome” approach and fit in. I might get a different answer at the next jam, and that’ll be okay too.

It seems to me that context is everything here. Just like it’s hard to judge an entire culture based on a conversation you had with one person from that culture, it’s very hard to determine what’s acceptable in old-time (or whatever tradition) based on what some person said or did at a particular jam. People are individuals with individual taste, so it’s going to vary from place to place. I say just be humble first and foremost, and you’ll figure out where you fit in pretty quickly.

[danny_ga]

I agree with Caleb's perspective. Each style of music has it's own 'things' that make it that style. If a group of people are playing that kind of music, they probably like the 'things' that make that music what it is. If we try to infuse things from our own, but different, styles, we should expect some resistance.

I get the privilege of playing all kinds of music with all kinds of people - from old time to Contempoary Christian to Rock. I love aspects of all the different styles. Out of respect to the music and the jam, I try to stay true to the song. Sure, I'll slip in a blues note on what should be an old-time song - or put a G-run in a Contemporary Christian song from time to time, but I try to use it as a touch of cayenne pepper thrown into the sauce, not trying to turn the sauce into chili.

The dulcimer player in the OP obviously likes traditional old-time music or he wouldn't be playing the dulcimer. He has probably spent a fair amount of time listening to and trying to replicate a certain sound. That sound doesn't include a Bill Monroe chop. Hearing one in the middle of what may be his favorite song would probably be a bit frustrating.

[mikeyes]

It is very hard, especially in a musically diverse area such as North America, not to be influenced by the music around us. The old time bands that Allen mentions certainly were influenced by popular music and if you look at Irish music in the 40s and 50s in this country you will be presented with dance music using the standard dance band compliment such as drums and sax.

Bluegrass is a great reminder of this. Bill Monroe readily admits that blues influenced his music - I call it the "German influence" since his main mentor was an African-American blues man named Arnold Schultz - and if you look at the McGee brothers (who played with Uncle Dave) they searched out blues players where ever they traveled.

Early country music such as Jimmy Rogers was blues influenced (or straight blues) and Texas Swing, while not OT per se, certainly grew out of country dance music which can argueably be said to be a strong part of OT.

OT music, in all of its diverse forms, didn't just die out. I remember listening to the Fruit Jar Drinkers on the Opry when I was a kid. It just evolved into a bunch of other things as other music influenced it or tastes changed. Remember the vast number of records we have are from professional musicians who made more money playing gigs than they would have farming or mining. They were in it to make a living as much as anything else and they followed the needs of the audiences. Even the most famous blues men did something like this at times by playing dance music in Mississippi dance halls. As far as I can tell, none of them were trying to start a religion even though they had strong ideas about how the music should be played.

My point is that if you are a preservationist, so be it. You can play the music note for note and setting up guidelines is appropriate. If you enjoy the style but are not living in total isolation, then you can experiment with what makes you feel good. If your friends agree, form a band.

Sam McGee once told me that he was a "bluesman". My brother-in-law was his banker in Franklin, TN and I was lucky enough to jam with him a few times. This was a surprise to me since I always thought he was Uncle Dave's sidekick and would be a staunch OT musician. It turns out that Uncle Dave was much more of a generalist and a vaudeville/medicine show artist capable of playing any style of music that the audience wanted to hear. That whole end of the OT styles had a lot to offer (Charley Poole, for example.) I suspect that any "impurity" that the OT police may find can be documented without a very much searching in 20s to 40s OT recordings.

[JeffD]

I have come to believe it is less about impurity or purity or preservationist efforts, and more about common respect.

Sure, Duke Ellington said, "If it sounds good, it is good". But he was talking to and about folks who knew what sounded good and what could sound good. Duke Ellington did not say,"Do what ever you want, and then tell me it sounds good to you, so it must be tolerated."

What ever kind of jam you visit, you listen carefully, and see what is going on, how are things done, what the sound is, and then figure out what can you do that goes along, or even contributes to the sound. What ever it is do it softly at first, and if you get some acknowldegement then perhaps a little louder, and if its working they will let you know and then you can crank it.

That is very different from going in and doing what you are used to without knowing if it fits or not, and then blaming the "their jam here" police for not accepting the "your jam here" playing style.

This is true of every kind of jam, not just OT, or BG, or IT, jazz, blues, country, folk, Italian folk, traditional scandi, klezmer, whatever.

You don't walk into a discussion about who makes the best barbeque, and start talking politics. Its not because barbeque discussions are composed of small minded unimaginitive people, or because they want to preserve the purity of their discussion.

Common respect for the jam you are visiting, and common respect for the newcomer to your regular home jam. We all want to belong, we all want to lead, and we all will screw it up at times.

[mandobsessed]

As someone who plays both clawhammer banjo and bluegrass mandolin I think some of the chop problems arise from the differences between bluegrass and old time rhythm. A standard bluegrass chop doesn't quite fit over a clawhammer rhythm whether bum ditty or bump a ditty. Generally if you pull back on the volume a bit and let the chop ring a bit more you should be fine but again YMMV.