Bill Monroe's Poor Technique

[JonZ]

I'd still like to know which materials implied this notion.

For the sake of moving the thread forward, let's just assume I am wrong about it.

Now how about the question as to whether there are things that BM did while playing that are now either discouraged by teachers or avoided by professionals. Or, as I previously put it, has bluegrass technique evolved? And by evolved, I don't just mean changed. Do professionals now use different techniques that have been found to be more effective?

[M.Marmot]

I am not saying that these practices (if my assumptions are correct) made him any less of an artist. It is a purely technical question about how technique has evolved since the man invented it.

When I refer to the "modern mandolinist", I am referring to the various professionals currently teaching and performing.

Thats still rather a broad and indistinct genre of player.

The reason that i asked just what you mean when you refer to the 'modern mandolinist' is that until you bring some definition to this we really are going to be huffing and puffing in circles.

You have provided no clear and quoted examples of reasoned critique regarding Monroe's playing nor identified anyone who has forwarded such a critique. Moreover your 'modern mandolinist' encompasses such a broad and ill defined individual that it could be easily argued that it is impossible to find a definite example. I mean 'Various professionals currently teaching and performing' really brings us no closer to establishing a grounds for comparison with Monroe's technique.

So, unless someone is willing to 'fess up and bravely admit that they have not only identified Monroe's flaws but also use them to teach their students what not to do, then this really is a dead end debate.

Unless of course you step in to that very breach yourself and start to build some rationale for critically contemplating Monroe's playing.

If you nominate someone whose playing you see as an example of this 'modern mandolinist' it would help.

Failing this, how about you close the grounds for comparison to a genre of mandolin playing, contemporary Bluegrass seems the obvious choice.

Or even if you compile a list of good techniques that you think the 'modern mandolin' player should sport that might get us nearer an actual reasonable area of debate.

Or even something as blatantly honest and straightforward as what elements of Monroe's playing would you not want to adopt for your own?

As things stand there is a distinct impression that maybe you spent more time relishing the nettling thread title than considering the threads actual contents... which is a pity is it an interesting subject for exploration.

[JonZ]

You have provided no clear and quoted examples of reasoned critique regarding Monroe's playing nor identified anyone who has forwarded such a critique.

Please look up the word "implied".

Moreover your 'modern mandolinist' encompasses such a broad and ill defined individual that it could be easily argued that it is impossible to find a definite example. I mean 'Various professionals currently teaching and performing' really brings us no closer to establishing a grounds for comparison with Monroe's technique

From my question "has bluegrass technique evolved", one could infer that we are talking about professional bluegrass teachers and performers.

Or even if you compile a list of good techniques that you think the 'modern mandolin' player should sport that might get us nearer an actual reasonable area of debate.

Or even something as blatantly honest and straightforward as what elements of Monroe's playing would you not want to adopt for your own?.

As I have already said, I have observed the following characteristics that I find questionable.
1. Not playing strict up-down on 8th notes.
2. Scraping in the picking area suggests extreme angle of attack.
3. Scraping in the picking area suggests tight grip on pick.

So now that we have established that you are not so great at analyzing my comments, do you have any analysis to share on Mr. Monroe's technique, as compared to the generally accepted best practices of current professional bluegrass mandolin performers and teachers?

[Mike Bunting]

[QUOTE=M.Marmot;857674]Thats still rather a broad and indistinct genre of player.

Well put.

[JonZ]

Would anyone care to jump in on my poor grammar and spelling?

[hank]

I don't know about your grammar and spelling but you sure have an ugly avatar.

[JonZ]

Ouch!

[billkilpatrick]

while i tend to favor iconoclasts in general, i feel you've chosen the wrong icon. true - he played way too fast, for my taste - melody suffered a bit - but if you consider the razzle-dazzle approach and technical wizardry of some mandolin players today and their gattling-gun approach to the tune (remember the tune?) ... it's a pleasure to hear an old-time musician stretching limits just a little bit ... as opposed to ignoring it all-together in a blitzkrieg flurry of notes.

[hank]

Lol!!

[JonZ]

Bill--I like listening to Bill Monroe too.

[SincereCorgi]

Despite the piling-on, I think you made some good points, Jon, especially about digging up the top of the mandolin. Most modern players would probably say that making a new hole in your instrument indicates, to some degree, an aspect of technique that could... ah... be approached differently. (How's that for walking on eggshells?)

Modern bluegrass virtuosi are held to pretty ruthless standards: they've got to play perfectly in time, with extremely clean execution, and be able to do it just-like-the-recording every time. Developing that level of consistency probably means developing a different, slightly more formalized and cautious technique than Monroe-style playing, which was pretty rambunctious.

[Brad Nicholas]

I'll take a stab at points 1-3

1. None of the bluegrass instructional material that I have, nor any picker that I have ever met has suggested that the type of staccato and syncopated blues material that Monroe pioneered would be better played in DUDU style. It wouldn't sound the same.
2. I can't directly address the angle of attack. Is there a good way to easily see it? Anyway, I will say that the stories that have been passed down reflect a musician who viewed the mandolin as a tool and he used and abused it for 50 years or so on a daily basis. That wear didn't happen overnight and a lot of it was not playing wear. He scraped the finish off, gouged the inlay out, used it for a clipboard to sign autographs. If you're fishing for some Monroe criticism, I can offer that I recommend against doing those things to your mandolin. Actually, I take that back. Don't do that to my mandolin. Your mandolin belongs to you and you can use it to play ping pong or or as a fancy wood block in your percussion ensenble. I don't really care.
3. The videos of Monroe that I have and the ones I've seen online do not show a death grip on the pick. Loose wrist, lightly closed fist, relaxed and powerful.

Someone might come up with something, but I don't think you're going to find as much as you'd hoped for. A lot of modern players and teachers do not go for Monroe style playing. I don't think that's because they view his technique as poor so much as they have a different goal in mind. To get the results that he achieved musically, I don't think there's a lot to look for in the way of improving on the way he went about it. Now if your goal is to sound completely different, you would want to employ different techniques.

[Jim Broyles]

What do you think of the technique here? I think it's exactly the way I would teach a beginner; from where to pick, how to hold the pick, pickstroke direction and sequence - everything.

[JonZ]

No fishing, no hoping, just wondering.

[Rob Fowler]

As I have already said, I have observed the following characteristics that I find questionable.
1. Not playing strict up-down on 8th notes.
2. Scraping in the picking area suggests extreme angle of attack.
3. Scraping in the picking area suggests tight grip on pick.

So I guess this brings it down to that nowhere did any instructional material infer that Monroe's technique had flaws or "not to do's" but is more something that YOU are inferring as Monroe's playing "faults." Why not just come out with that in the first place instead of making it seem like some instructor or instructional material taught you this? Hmmm......

So really, instead of picking on Monroe and inferring that his playing is maybe faulty because he did the 3 things you mention then you really have to be more broad and apply that idea to others and not just Monroe.

Now in terms of the finish being worn off the top of a mandolin:
What about Mike Marshall and his worn Loar? What does that infer about his playing technique? What about Thile's Dude and his broken headstock and marked-up top infer? Sam Bush and Hoss? Andy Statman and his snakehead?

It basically comes down to the fact that there is NO STANDARD for how the masters play their mandolins and just because they have beat up mandolins means NOTHING as to how there might be faults in their technique leading to their instruments getting that way. Countless threads have already beat the horse to where it has imploded and vanished into thin air.

These guys play their instruments a lot and any tool used a lot is going to get worn.

Also, in any genre of music that keeps on and doesn't die out (like ragtime or 80's pop) it's very natural for others that come after the originators and evolve the technique, many times making it better, depending on what what you define as "evolving a technique."

The questions you ask I think are really meaningless as it takes away what all these master pickers have accomplished in their life: GREAT TONE, GREAT TECHNIQUE, and an ability for them to move many with their music.

I for one and stepping away from this thread and doing something productive like..... picking up my mandolin and picking it a bit.

[Cheryl Watson]

Bill Monroe was an original and talented artist who has often come under attack for his "sloppy" playing. He is so misunderstood by many. People who think he was "sloppy" and had improper form and such just don't get it. It is not a clean, notey style of playing such as Butch Baldassari, Adam Steffey, Chris Thile. It is a dirty, bluesy sound with a lot of complex accents, downstrokes and slides. It is a completely different technique. I "try" to play both styles, and I "get" both styles. I hear it said all the time: Why don't you slow that tune down and maybe you could hit all of the notes cleaner. With Monroe style, you don't hit all of the notes cleanly and evenly. It often slurs and has accents with downstrokes instead of playing standard up-down-up-down etc. It is a language in and of itself that sounds so completely different than playing a guitar and that is one reason why I love Monroe style so much. It really adds a nice contrast to clean guitar breaks.

[JonZ]

What do you think of the technique here? I think it's exactly the way I would teach a beginner; from where to pick, how to hold the pick, pickstroke direction and sequence - everything.

Nice clip.

You're right. That's some pretty solid picking technique on display.

You ought to post this one in the "Bluegrass Hair" thread. There's some great bluegrass hair technique on display too.

[Cheryl Watson]

For the sake of moving the thread forward, let's just assume I am wrong about it.

Now how about the question as to whether there are things that BM did while playing that are now either discouraged by teachers or avoided by professionals. Or, as I previously put it, has bluegrass technique evolved? And by evolved, I don't just mean changed. Do professionals now use different techniques that have been found to be more effective?

That is an interesting question, actually. There are many who are influenced by Bill Monroe but play a cleaner style i.e. the late, great Butch Baldassari played Monroe "pretty" IMHO, and many players are influenced by his style. I myself do this weird thing where I will play some thing clean and midstream, add a Bill Monroe influence in the later part of the solo. I do this on "Lady Be Good" and also on "Beaumont Rag" to name a few but there must be many players who do this. It must contrast but also "work" together and it is a challenge to make it work, no doubt.

[JonZ]

So I guess this brings it down to that nowhere did any instructional material infer that Monroe's technique had flaws or "not to do's" but is more something that YOU are inferring as Monroe's playing "faults." Why not just come out with that in the first place instead of making it seem like some instructor or instructional material taught you this? Hmmm......

The questions you ask I think are really meaningless as it takes away what all these master pickers have accomplished in their life: GREAT TONE, GREAT TECHNIQUE, and an ability for them to move many with their music.

I don't like the sound of that "Hmmm...." I feel guilty, but I'm not sure about what.

I find the "Thou shalt not question the Masters" approach to life kind of scary actually.

[Mike Bunting]

Are you in a position to "question the masters" when you don't even understand the basics of playing? You posted another thread asking about the fact that you caused your mando to "jiggle" when you tried to temolo and seemed unaware of the idea of playing from the wrist.

[JonZ]

Dang, exposed!

However, the credentials of the questioner are irrelevant to the validity of a question.

I did not realize how protective some people are of BM, to the point where questioning aspects of his technique is taken as an affront. I suppose there is a history of similar threads with some people putting him down and others saying "how dare you!". I assume this history fuels a lot of speculation about my intentions. But really, I have no hidden agenda. This was just something I was curious about.

I like the playing of Bill Monroe, and appreciate his contribution to music. The thread title was meant to be ironic (meaning I said the opposite of what I believe to be true for comic effect).

To those who have given interesting, informed answers to my questions, from a variety of perspectives--thank you.

Now Mike, you have made four posts here without saying anything about Bill Monroe's playing. So, I am going to have to forbid you from further questioning my questions.

[jim simpson]

Jonz,
I guess the title of your thread seems to state a negative, I can understand why many might get defensive on Bill's behalf. I have listened to all periods of Bill Monroe's recordings and do hear an artist who's style evolved. His playing at times might have reflected his state of health or just plain fatigue. I've never observed an artist who was willing to give more to his audience and fans. I enjoy listing to all of the variances and still feel that I learn new things upon relistening.
An ealier response mentioned Roland White not caring to hear his early work because of his own style evolved or improved. I still like hearing the early live playing where you hear improvisation and risk taking. I believe Roland still plays in a rather organic style. He certainly displayed that style in a workshop that I attended.
No harm in questioning our masters, it's often the way we question or communicate that sends an unintended message.

[Ken_P]

I'm not a Monroe fan by any means, and I've leveled the "sloppy" accusation against him many times. That being said, it's always been a matter of personal taste for me, and I can fully understand why others enjoy it more than I do. Technique wise, I'm not aware of anything he did that would be considered "wrong". Good technique, to me, will allow you to achieve exactly the sound you want with the least possible amount of effort. Monroe certainly had that down - he sounded like he wanted to sound with technique to spare.

[Ivan Kelsall]

JimB - That's where i learned "Southern Flavour" from. I know the OP posted his question in a provocative manner to gain our response,which he's certainly done - good for him !.
Regarding Bill Monroe's remark saying that folk heard notes that he wasn't playing ( or words to that effect),i think Bill was adding a little 'mystique' regarding his style,i think that he was mischeivous in that way.
Bill Monroe's technique was based on what he heard in his head & required himself to play,good or bad as that may seem to 'purists'. I personally wish my technique was as 'poor' & you could never say that his style was sterile,full of energy & tailor made for everything he did,YES - 'awesome' doesn't even come close,
Ivan

[swampstomper]

JimB -- thanks for posting that video, it makes my point more eloquently than any words. First, to address the actual technique of mandolin playing. JonZ, go back and look at that left hand -- the fingers barely move off the fingerboard (except for that cool part where he just moves the whole hand to the mando body while stroking on the E note -- a master's bit of showmanship). Look at the economy of motion. Then look at the right hand: wrist motion, hand position, angle of attack. Just what is wrong with that technique? I defy you to find a teacher or instructional material that would say otherwise.

But more importantly, listen to the music. The M-U-S-I-C. As Emory Lester says (and he's about as "modern" as you can get) "this isn't a contest -- it's music". After the statements in the first two breaks (the second subtly different from the first) Marty rips down a wonderful guitar solo that perfectly complements the tune -- not a showoff break (and he can play as machine gun as you want, if he choses to), no a musically-perfect complement. Monroe then just gets inspired for the third break, reaches another level of musicianship -- listen to the dynamics, that is impossible without excellent technique. No, I don't worship Monroe, but he is the TECHNICAL standard by which all others are judged. When he burst on the scene with Charlie it was like a thunderbolt from the blue -- there were other good mandolinists back then but no one could play as fast, as clean (yes), as melodically as Bill Monroe. When he formed his own band and brought the blues into his playing, it required a whole other approach. As Tim O'Brien has said (also a "modern master"), when he was young he followed Monroe from show to show just to see what he might do on a given night (like Deadheads, says O'Brien).

I am happy to question Monroe or anyone else's music -- but the more I listen to Monroe -- and really LISTEN closely -- the more the genius comes out. Just listen to the famous Chop behind Richard Greene on Grey Eagle. Tell me that doesn't just make the tune -- and believe me, getting a chop to sound like that takes... wait for it... TECHNIQUE.