Anybody else with this problem?

[Mandolin Mick]

I was wondering if anybody else struggles with this ...

I've been playing for 40 years, play many instruments besides mandolin, played professionally, etc., but my biggest problem as a musician is ... I hear certain songs and instrumental parts different than they're actually played! And, even after I learn the song the proper way, I still hear them my own way! I was learning Kentucky Mandolin by Bill Monroe recently and it came up again. I can play it the right way, but only after fighting my own head! It used to come up in my Beatles tribute band when I played the bass run for Taxman. I heard it different than McCartney played it, and it threw the band off. I learned the run the right way, but I still hear it the wrong way til this day!!!

[Kevin K]

To me, that's not a bad thing. Each of those listed had musical ideas in their head and heart and followed them. Made their own sound for us to enjoy. If everyone played the exact same, would be boring. Use those thoughts and make your own tunes, beside putting your mark on the original ones.

[Markus]

It depends on what you're going for, like Kevin says.

I like a bit of interpretation, don't mind hearing the version in someone's head [vs. the recorded one].

For a Beatles tribute band I would want to hear `just like the record', but for Bill Monroe tunes I don't mind someone making it their own. I've seen Mike Compton take Evening Prayer Blues a lot farther than Bill did ... if you ask me, I just might like Mike's version better [ditto on how he plays Wheel Hoss].

I respect those who try to make it `just so', but normally find more excitement out of personalized versions [that stick to the song].

That all said, music played with conviction and feeling is better than rote music ... and if having it `just exactly perfect' [or not worrying about that] is what makes you play with passion then do it. Obviously, you've found what works for you.

[Mandolin Mick]

It's interesting that you bring up Evening Prayer Blues because I hear that one different than it actually is as well, and it caused me cat fits learning it!

Having said that, I bring my classical training into Bluegrass and I brought it into rock when I played that ... note-for-note. If I don't play it like it was envisioned by the artist I've failed ...

[Ed Goist]

I was wondering if anybody else struggles with this ...
... I hear certain songs and instrumental parts different than they're actually played! And, even after I learn the song the proper way, I still hear them my own way! ...snip...

YES, YES, YES! I can't thank you enough for posting this...
Though I am just a casual hobbyist, I've always experienced this (with guitar parts since I was a teenager, and now on mandolin) and just thought it was something unique to me.

[Polecat]

For me, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to play any kind of music from the oral tradition (that includes more or less everything except classical music, as far as I'm concerned). Every generation makes music its own, and that's as it should be - I change the words and sometimes the chords in songs I "cover", and if anybody has a problem with that, it's theirs, not mine. I personally see little point in slavishly copying someone else's way of playing something - you can bet that they didn't, if their music is in the least original, that's how innovation happens.

[Markus]

It's funny how, when learning songs you think you know every detail of, so often we end up going back to the song to find out what was being played was not what we thought we were hearing. Despite having listened to that song again and again and again.

I like all the little things I find in tunes that I didn't clue in on until learning, though they frustrate the heck out of me.

[Steve-o]

Interesting thread. I don't have this problem, but then I suck at improvisation. I am wondering if those of you with this problem are natural inclined toward improvisation.

[Mandolin Mick]

Exactly the opposite ... I hate improvisation with a passion. I'm a perfectionist by nature and that's why I was in a Beatles tribute band as a young rocker; note-for note or I'm not interested. But that's what's so frustrating about this problem, because I hear it differently than it really is ...

[Jason Kessler]

In those situations, I tell myself "well, they got it wrong," or " they missed that part." I hear something different, and have no qualms about playing/singing it that way. I was the same with classical, and quickly grew weary of the apoplectic ravings of the Classical Police, just as I am of the Bluegrass Police, the Blues Police, the Polka Police, etc.

But a Beatles tribute band? Yeah, I can see doing that note-for-note...

[Mandolin Mick]

That was the funny thing about doing the Beatles ... when cover bands do their own version of somebody else's song people say that it's interesting or whatever. But, the Beatles were the Beethoven, Bach, Mozart and Handel of rock `n roll and the standard was getting as close to the recorded versions as possible.

[Markus]

Most of us play bluegrass, not in Bill Monroe tribute bands.

Given the discussions we've had regarding what bluegrass is [and isn't] ... there's quite a wide variety in how much tradition is stuck to. In terms of Beatles bands ... leaving tradition would leave the whole point of it.

Shockingly, people even play Monroe's music without a hat on!

[JeffD]

I experience something like this. When you play a particular genre of music for a long time, there is a tendancy you can get to hear and play whole phrases, as opposed to individual notes. So you hear a new tune and say to your self, "OK thats da-di-da-da followed by di-dli-di-dli, followed by dum-yyyum-di-dum.

And this works a lot.

But often a tune violates convention and does not have the expected phrases. I find that I often hear the phrases, even when they are wrong, rather than the notes of the phrase.

[barney 59]

There are certain songs and tunes that I learned a long time ago. Some of them I worked really hard to get them exactly the way it was recorded. Years go by and occasionally I will listen to the original and I am somewhat stunned at how much my version has changed from where I started. They morph somehow. I don't think that it's necessarily a bad thing. I am after all a "folk" musician. I define that as someone who essentially plays by ear and plays music that is more or less unwritten. Everyone hears differently. Once I was at a festival and Kenny Baker was out in the parking lot jamming with some others. There was another fiddler there that was quite good but you could tell that he had had classical training, learned most of the old standards from the book and was probably out on a summer jaunt "slumming" it with the bluegrassers. After playing some old standard ,and I can't remember which one, that Kenny played brilliantly the other fiddler turned to Kenny and said "That wasn't such and such"----Kenny returned with "Well that's the way I F#@*ing heard it!"

[grassrootphilosopher]

I was wondering if anybody else struggles with this ...

I've been playing for 40 years, play many instruments besides mandolin, played professionally, etc., but my biggest problem as a musician is ... I hear certain songs and instrumental parts different than they're actually played! And, even after I learn the song the proper way, I still hear them my own way! I was learning Kentucky Mandolin by Bill Monroe recently and it came up again. I can play it the right way, but only after fighting my own head! It used to come up in my Beatles tribute band when I played the bass run for Taxman. I heard it different than McCartney played it, and it threw the band off. I learned the run the right way, but I still hear it the wrong way til this day!!!

It's interesting that you bring up Evening Prayer Blues because I hear that one different than it actually is as well, and it caused me cat fits learning it!

Having said that, I bring my classical training into Bluegrass and I brought it into rock when I played that ... note-for-note. If I don't play it like it was envisioned by the artist I've failed ...

Exactly the opposite ... I hate improvisation with a passion. I'm a perfectionist by nature and that's why I was in a Beatles tribute band as a young rocker; note-for note or I'm not interested. But that's what's so frustrating about this problem, because I hear it differently than it really is ...

What you bring up is very interesting to me. I think that - mostly in popular music - people hear "their piece" in a certain way. That is why we have large variations in the versions of musical pieces.

I would like to sum up your "problem" before I will try to make my point.
- When you´d like to play a musical piece a musical idea is being formed in your mind about how to play the piece.
- You might find out the musical piece is being played differently by the source from which you hear the piece.
- You learn the musical piece as played by the source that inspired you to play the piece, yet you still have your musical idea in mind of how you´d play the piece. This frustrates you.
- You are not interested in improvising. You are a perfectionist.

If you look at the multitude of different reditions of certain musical pieces you will surely admit that there is the same multitude of different approaches to a musical piece. Take the Bach cello pieces for example. The primier examples that come to my mind are the renditions of Casals, Fournier and Tortelier. Three undisputed masters of the cello play the same piece entirely different.

Let´s take a step further. Let´s take a look at "Evening Prayer Blues". This piece - seemingly simple - has attracted quite some interest due to the following facts (in my opinion): Most people might have picked the piece up from the "Masters Of Bluegrass" LP (or the respective Bear Family CD box) by Bill Monroe. It is a version with Bill Monroe and Jesse McReynolds (if I´m not mistaken) playing "twin mandolin". On "the original EPB-thread" on this forum Evan Rilley (I think) posted a link to "the original" recording by DeFord Bayley who wrote the number. I also have an Alan Bibey version on CD and know of about 15 or so versions on youtube and other media. If I focus on the relatively clean Alan Bibey version as opposed to the twin mandolin Monroe version I notice a multitude of differences in rythm, timing, notes etc. And I fail to find out which the Monroe part on the recording might be. I therefore strongly doubt, that one is able to play the tune note for note the way Bill Monroe might have intended it to be played.

This brings up another point. Classical music - for example at times of Nicolo Pagannini, Mozart et al - incorporated a place to improvise over the piece of music. Over the time classicaly trained musicians decided rather not to improvise causing classical music to sound different only through tempo, accentuation, dynamics, (instrumentation) etc. and not through improvisiation.

Bluegrass, and from what I can read from your posts it is also bluegrass that you are interested in nowadays, is a highly improvisational music. It seems that therefore a frustration in itself arises when you are trying to pin down "the" version. Just think of Bill Monroe who recorded Dusty Miller entirely different three times over (at least). Mind you, the tune is the same, yet the feel of the tune, the attac, the sound, some of the notes played are different. I would be hard pressed to claim that one version is the only legitimate version.

Let´s step one step further. To understand bluegrass (or any other type of music) it is elementary to learn the musical language. Once you´ve accomplished that, you will find out if what you hear in your head fits the music or if it strikes a wrong chord in your mind. If the latter is the case you will find that the way you hear things in your head will change until the piece is on line with the musical language the type of music is spoken in. If it´s the former, you´re able to play your idea of a musical piece in perfect harmony with the musical language that the piece is spoken in. If you have not yet mastered the musical language you will find that what you hear in your head does not fit with the musical language. (Try to listen to the mandolin on the Stanley Bros. early Mercury sessions. Whoever played mandolin there tried to play 50ies Monroe and gloriously failed [to my mind]).

Limiting yourself to only playing what someone else has already played before to me is using crutches while you´re able to win any marathon. You are unable to play anything as good as Jimmy Geaudreau, Jack Tottle, Norman Blake, Mike Compton, Mike Marshal etc. because you are not them. I know how to play the Clarence White guitar part on the "Muleskinner" record version of "Dark Hollow". I´ve been told that I´m pretty good at it (that note for note thing). Yet when I absolutely nail it, I feel like I´m walking in someone elses shoes. I would not want to wear anybody else´s clothes, shoes, comb etc.

Don´t get me wrong. But when you´re a perfectionist I think that it is necessary to shake off any limitations by trying to play like somebody else.

[Bertram Henze]

I'm puzzled - this is the first time I hear someone complain about de facto interpretation. I am not talking about improvisation, just interpretation. But then, I play ITM, where notation exists only as a guideline, if at all. But I apply the same principles to Händel and Bach - in the rare occasions I play their music , that is. The main objective is to make the music work on my instrument, i.e. to be playable and to sound good. I think that's legal. And classic composers did it, too:



Oh, and asking merely for information: if the original music isn't perfect in the first place, how is strictly adhering to it a perfectionist's pleasure?

[Brent Hutto]

Fortunately I am unable to share M-Mick's problem as note-for-note mimicry is not among my musical goals.

I have trouble hearing anything other than the "standard" version of a tune in my head. But on the occasions where I do hear one thing and the original version is something else, I would play what I hear in my head every single time. Most of my other musical efforts are simply killing time in between those fortunate moments when I hear my own, unique version of a tune and am able to actually play it. It's a good thing!

P.S. I appreciate a well-covered pop song as much as anyone. There's a guy we go out of our way to hear every Wednesday who sings and plays guitar and does popular song covers from all different eras. He has an uncanny ability to capture "just like the original" even when the original recording was three guys singing backed up by a string section, keyboards and drums. He can still get to what sounds like a note-for-note rendition of the song with just a guitar and a harmonizer box. That's a gift that I appreciate as a listener. But it isn't what motivates me to pick up the mandolin every morning.

[JeffD]

It my case its when I have had my head in a narrow range of music for too long, that I start hearing and playing the iconic phrases rather than the individual notes. I have to shake loose and get into another genre to hear the notes again.

[Randi Gormley]

I think grassrootsphilosopher makes a good point: the original musicians probably didn't play the same piece exactly the same way every time they played it. Certainly with ITM there's always some modification if just because of the instrument itself, but I've heard the same musician -- including the composer -- play a well-known piece off the standard. Some of it was inadvertent (their mind wandered, say) and some was just them playing around, but a couple have even admitted they just play the piece the way they feel at the time. But that's ITM. I once had a workshop teacher suggest a modification to a well-known tune because playing an F-natural "sounded more Irish" than the f-sharp that was written, and he was right.
A tribute band, of course, is different, since there are experts in the audience who will catch a different chord; but I wouldn't discourage any one from playing a "variation" the second time around of a tune just to keep things interesting. You just have to alert your bandmates is all.

[Brent Hutto]

I was learning a Northeast Scotland style tune from a transcription of Paul Anderson's playing. I became convinced one of the little grace notes that was transcribed as a C-natural sounded better as C-sharp (or was it the other way 'round). So I sent him an E-mail.

He generously replied that I should play any note I like in that spot and it would sound great there as long as it was played cleanly, crisply and perfectly in time. Wise advice, no doubt.

[Joel Glassman]

>I hate improvisation with a passion.
>I'm a perfectionist by nature...

If you don't improvise, do you only
play other people's solos-or do you write
original solos?

[grassrootphilosopher]

Fortunately I am unable to share M-Mick's problem as note-for-note mimicry is not among my musical goals.

I have trouble hearing anything other than the "standard" version of a tune in my head. But on the occasions where I do hear one thing and the original version is something else, I would play what I hear in my head every single time. Most of my other musical efforts are simply killing time in between those fortunate moments when I hear my own, unique version of a tune and am able to actually play it. It's a good thing!

P.S. I appreciate a well-covered pop song as much as anyone. There's a guy we go out of our way to hear every Wednesday who sings and plays guitar and does popular song covers from all different eras. He has an uncanny ability to capture "just like the original" even when the original recording was three guys singing backed up by a string section, keyboards and drums. He can still get to what sounds like a note-for-note rendition of the song with just a guitar and a harmonizer box. That's a gift that I appreciate as a listener. But it isn't what motivates me to pick up the mandolin every morning.

I´d like to shoot in a different direction now.

I think that musical education is elementary. (I guess I said that before) I do hear things (not in that way...). I am able to hear differences in the way that pieces are played. Some ways of playing a musical piece is more beautiful than another. Sometimes a piece is "spoilt" by someone who plays it so beautifully that I will be forever unable to play it that beautiful. That´s when I quit playing a piece. Sometimes a piece will provide such a challenge to me to play it that I´ll go for it or go broke. The piece that I´m thinking about (one of them) is "Evening Prayer Blues". There is so much in it! I´ve wrecked people just to back me up with it (another may be Tennesse Blues with the original chord changes!).

It is allways good and sometimes vital to know how music was/is constructed. I referred to the early Stanley bros. Mercury sessions not because of a whim. I meant to lead you there. I find the "Monroe style" mandolin so out of place, played so wrong that I was shaking my head yesterday when I listened to it. I think it is necessary to understand what you play. Sometimes it means that you have to study the original until you have it down pat. That´s what you do, Mick, right? And there´s no harm in it. But is that all? Is that really all?

I came to the point when I found out that my way of hearing music is - sometimes - just as good as anybody else´s. I was in an internationally aclaimed music store the other day and played "Wiskey Before Breakfast" on a beautiful vintage guitar, a very beautiful vintage guitar! The luthier that owns the shop, who is a very accomplished guitarist himself even though he would rather die than admit it asked me if what I played was my own take of the tune. That´s when you notice that you can induce a way of hearing into other people. (In this case we both spoke the same musical language) I wouldn´t have been able to get there without knowing the development of the lead acoustic guitar starting from Mother Maybelle via George Shuffler, Doc Watson, Norman Blake, Tony Rice etc. But it´s my music all the way.

I find this topic so interesting because I ask myself if it is really worth while to sound like somebody else. You go out and check on the multitude of guitar pickers. The majority sounds like Tony Rice clones. Why, I ask myself? This happens much less in mandolin circles (even though I´ve been told that I´ve got my Monroe down right).

As an afterthought I would like to mention that it is a never reached goal to fully master a - musical - language. Be as lyrical as you get. I´m trying dang hard.

[farmerjones]

it's awful. Abolutely awful. I'm guilty of it too. I'll spend years learning a tune because of the "unlearning" the cr@p that's not supposed to be there.

I don't help myself the way i should. I try to learn very intricate hornpipes. (strike one) I don't record them. (strike two) I don't play with the sourse player often enough(strike three). So i fill in the don't know areas with fluff, until i hear the tune again.
I also have a survival mode of learning things quickly. Like Jeff, by phrases. I try to "skin" a tune down to bare bones. Maybe down to simply the chord changes. Bad, bad, bad. Well, it's a good way to have every @#$% tune sound like the next.

But as the years go by, picking up easy stuff is easy. And if somebody suggests a change, i challenge myself to be able to change it quickly. I think it may be just part of practicing the craft. If you realize the problem, then work on it, you're miles ahead of somebody that's stubborn for stubborn sake. A good Journeyman can play it as recorded by twelve different artists, then be able to improvize on it for hours too. Peace

[Mandolin Mick]

Joel,

I can improvise and I do my own arrangements when I take a hymn and set it to Bluegrass. But, when I learn a recorded Bluegrass song, I learn the solo note-for-note. I just have no desire to jam, or write my own material, etc. I take the classical approach of structure as opposed to the jazz approach of syncopation. But, I know how to do it. When I used to play bass in bands in my youth, I did my own arrangements.

[Mandolin Mick]

Grassrootsphilosopher,

Thanx for your lengthy and thoughtful reply!!! I know that I'm ecentric in this area of life. But, it's who I am. I can write, improvise, etc., but just have no desire to do it. If I pull off Monroe's or McReynold's chops I feel satisfied and pleased with myself. Like I said in my last post, I do my own arrangements with hymns.

I should mention, for clarity, that because of the hearing problems I developed about 16 years ago, I rarely ever play with other musicians anymore. I play solo mandolin and it forces me to be better than if I leaned on other musicians.

Here's a picture of me with said McReynolds ...