Question re attitudes towards accompaniment

Zouk23s thread has thrown up a theory in my head, and I was wondering whether I’m on the right track or way way off? So, please feel free to put me straight🙂

So heere’s the theory:

It’s pretty clear that accompaniment is at times frowned upon by some players and there seems to be a bias towards melody players - I read just recently that this is because ITM music can stand alone without accompaniment ie it is is about the melody of the tunes and this is how many prefer to relate to THE MUSIC so accompaniment is seen as a bit of an ‘add on’ and even a distraction by some musicians - although this throws up another question for me since to me ITM is a very rhythmic music and accompaniment often underlines that rhythm so I’m not sure why accompaniment is seen as an ‘add on’ rather than approaching the same thing from just another angle one that has importance in ITM ie rhythm….

Well, back to my little humble theory… I somehow get the impression that in general the more experienced and seasoned a musician the more tolerant he/she becomes towards accompaniment and the more accepting also of what are considered to be ‘lesser’ players - of course I believe that as always there are exceptions to the rule, and so there are those out there whose talent has gone to their head but I’m talking general here based on my experiences which may or may not be a reflection of what’s really going on….

… and the reason for this theory is based on this: The more experienced and seasoned a musician the less likely the musician is put off his tune and the more flexible he/she becomes to also tune and adapt to other players and more challenging situations should the need arise whereas a less musically skilled player can loose his or her tune when sitting for example between two inexperienced bodhran players who happen to play off-beat. So it takes less effort and is less stressful for an experienced musician to ‘play happily on’ while for example a beginner like me would break out in sweat because any minute distraction causes me to crumble. So perhaps tolerance levels towards accompaniment whether bad or good is higher in seasoned musicians then in those who still struggle in varying degrees and maybe one can apply that theory not only to accompaniment but also bad melody players…

So here’s the question: Am I completely barking up the wrong tree here😏?

A very curious beginner’s flute player

No, you are not barking up a wrong tree, sessions are as chock a block with elitist behavior as the other bits of life.

“…accompaniment often underlines that rhythm…”

GOOD accompaniment underlines it
BAD accompaniment undermines it

Sorry - that was irresistable.

Some love it some hate it. Most love it if you stick to your place of carrying the music. Not to belittle it… I am a guitar player. I know my place in the music is to accompany, add something to it, not battle it.

I find most people love it if done well, tastefully. When I say you need to know your place, it’s not like you’re given the Edith Bunker role in the music,as in STIFLE, what i mean is that it has a place, as do the melody instruments.

When you have too many rhythm players, one hitting on the beat WITH the music and another hitting the off beat, it gets chaotic. You’ll quickly recognize the people you can’t play with at the same time, and if you don’t, surely someone will tell you or you will see by their grimaces!

You need to check your ego at the door too. The listeners are listening mainly to the melody player(s). But good backing…. if you stop playing, the listeners suddenly miss it. Paradoxically, with he best backing you almost don’t notice it’s there…. until it stops. You should feel your best about it when you make the melody player shine and sound better. You work behind the scenes, but you do matter if you play rhythm.

My feeling has always been, even though you might get some conficting players at a session at times, it’s just the nature of an open session. If people want only one drum, one guitar or bouzouki, either they can work out a civil way to take turns, or have a gig instead of a session, or a session by invite only in a house. Fiddles can conflict playing the same tunes too, some are a little ahead or behind, this one knows a different setting etc.

Backing is very instinctual. I tell anyone I have taught, right out… you have to be a mindreader. Very few will tell you what key something is in. If they do, they don’t say the key of the one they are going into, or that part B is a different key. The only way to back well, is to learn the tunes in your head and know them as well as the melody players, then you know what’s coming and what to play. When you have the tunes in your head you can then imrpovise a bit, without undermining the music of course.

As an accompanist, I try to keep in mind the Hippocratic oath when I back someone: First, do no harm.

For any bar in a tune -
Some chords are acceptable
Some are only just acceptable
Some are definitely wrong

Aren’t melody players allowed to question if someone plays chords from the third section?
What if you ask the offending accompanist what key they were actually playing in and they don’t know? (One offender was actually a trained music teacher)

A certain technical level (often not achieved by melody players) must be achieved before attempting accompaniment else it isn’t really accompaniment.

A couple of weeks ago we were having a new monthly session. Only five of us, and then in walks a stranger carrying a guitar and asks if he could join in. Since it was a Sunday and we were on our best behaviour (it being a new session and all) we naturally welcomed him.
Bad mistake. It quickly became obvious that here we had a Guitarist From Hell. His idea of accompanying Irish music was to play rock/jazz as loud as possible, bending every other note and completely ignoring the rhythm (which he probably couldn’t hear anyway because of his own noise). We tried to get him to listen to the rhythm. That failed. We tried to get him to shut up and just listen. That too failed.
Finally, our lead fiddle told him straight that he was Playing The Wrong Chords. That got through to our man for some inexplicable reason, but then he claimed he’d have no trouble in “picking up” Irish music because he had an Irish ancestor some generations back. Five pairs of eyes rolled as one. He stopped playing along with us and retired to the bar in the next room, but not before he grabbed the opportunity to sing some god-awful American ballad that went on nearly for ever.
He was last seen an hour or so later trying to find his way from the bar to the toilet.
At sessions in Bristol during the coming week APBs were issued warning everyone about the GFH.

Vanessa

I think you’re right about the greater ability of experienced melody players to cope with unsolicited and/or unfriendly accompaniment.

The problem is sometimes that the accompanists don’t really want to do anything of the sort - they’re frustrated rock artists or jazzers or whatever. An Irish session is the only place where manners are so refined that they can get away with inflicting their pet horrors on the rest of musical society without reproach or risk of lasting physical harm.

My dream accompanying instrument is a 2-string octave bouzouki tuned to D and played sparingly. I wish….

MYBC

Yes, in general, more experienced players can better cope with distractions and so may be more tolerant of bunglers who botch the rhythm or intonation or the tune itself.

But those same experienced players have worked hard to be able to play the music well, to do it justice, and in doing so, they earn the right to at least occasionally ask for discretion and restraint from people (accompanists and melody players alike) who aren’t yet at their level.

Playing back-up is a dodgy proposition from the get-go. To use some allegory if I may, it’s as if you have a bunch of people working on a painting with some central figure… let’s say a faun, and the back-up guy comes in and begins painting in the background. Now if he’s good, he might paint a lovely mossy forest scene with a gentle light filtering through the conifers. But then he might be better at desert scenes and paint that instead which will raise eyebrows and put some people off. Or perhaps he’ll paint an outer space scene the way a popular band he likes does it… and that might not go down to well either. Then, if he’s like Geoff’s GFH, he’ll paint a background of downtown traffic jams in New York with horns blaring… or maybe Godzilla’s foot stomping down on the adorable defenseless faun.

This video clip says it all. Would that all accompanists were this subtle and effective.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Dr-dxaoz3g

play video

Thanks for that link “jtrout”. A subtle Scottish guitar player - a rare beast indeed ! Tony McManus it was - didn’t see his name mentioned. He’s greatly missed in Scotland since moving to Canada. Their gain is our loss.

There’s still time for Mike Oldfield to write a work for session, whatever else, and tubular bells…

Try this; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTFg_rx1tUY , bloody brilliant

play video

I think sometimes that’s the case, (re; more experienced musicians being more tolerent of those who havn’t been playing as long) but I think the reverse is often true…

say your a relative beginner, and you’re at your first session- chances are, at least a portion of the players there will be “better” then you, and you know it! Therefore, you’ll enjoy it more most likely. I dunno, I always enjoy it when I’m playing with people better then me, it ups my playing several notches I think. and they’ve generaly got better tunes, more tunes, different variations, and better technique. But if I’m playing at a session of all complete beginners- (obviously,) it’s just not gonna be as charged.
SO I think when I was a total beginner, I was ( i hate to say it!) a lot more tolerent of other beginners, because most of ’em were better then me and I loved playing with people who had been playing longer then I had (now whether they felt the the same way twards me is another matter🙂), but…………am I explaining this at all???
and of course skill level isn’t everything and I enjoy going to a beginners session just to hang out with everyone and have a few tunes- gesh, i’m not sure if I explained anything, or if I’ll get a whole lotta angry retorts now…

peace!

Vanessa - while experienced players may not be as easily thrown off their stride by accompaniment - good, bad or indifferent, I would also say that it is often the very experienced players who have the greatest appreciation for unaccompanied or solo playing. I suspect the majority of competant players who prefer to play unaccompanied, at least some of the time, would also fall into the “more experienced” category.

Yes, Irish dance music is inherently rhythmic and this lies in the melody, not the accompaniment. A good player’s use and interpretation of that rhythm is part of their self expression, and it can be frustrating to feel that your rhythm has been hijacked by an overenthusiastic accompanist with very different ideas. On the other hand it can be a lot of fun to play with an accompanist, and some players prefer it.

As for who tolerates what, that probably has more to do with who is generally friendly and open - or just too polite to say anything.

You should try playing with bad melody players, Kris. Just as well I’m good.

Vannessa, the bias towards melody that you speak of is a misnomer on two accounts:

Firstly (and please don’t dismiss this as merely a technical diversion): melody and harmony are the same thing. Think of it as a string of notes or a stack of notes. It’s as simple as that. Each depend entirely for their effect on the other notes within their and the other’s sequences. And whether these sequences are simultaneous or chronological should not form the basis of a division, as you infer.

Secondly: is the issue of contribution. I like to think of it as cause and effect. There is a lot of guff earlier about the best “accompaniment” being at worst, distracting, and at best, invisible.

This is totally wrong. The best “accompaniment” (you will see why I give it the parenthesise) should be distracting. In the same way that the best music should be distracting. It should be in your face and distract you from the music that you would otherwise be playing if it wasn’t their. It goes to the basis of the concept of ensemble playing. It is about cause and effect, effective contribution, being heard for the quality of the music you are playing and the quality of your music effecting the quality of everyone else’s music.

PJA…. That’s The Amazing Tony McManus! We will be having him and Maeve Donnelly out for a concert at IAANJ 3/30/07….. If you are anywhere near NJ! I think it will be a mob scene with those two!

I cannot wait!!!!! He is considered the world’s best Celtic guitarist by many.

His backing is lovely indeed…. but try having a listen to his tune playing too!

Hi Micheal🙂

I like technical🙂 but I’m just not so good at following or understanding it yet, since I have much to learn still… however I must say it’s very interesting for me to read that melody and harmony is the same thing… so may I ask you, Micheal, what do people mean when they say they don’t like it when people play ‘harmonies’ during sessions? Are they talking about something completely different? Or does harmonies mean second melody line?

Also, I must say your concept re the role of accompaniment is very interesting… it gives me another angle to think about… and the more angles the wider and more informed are people’s choices when forming and shaping opinions… I just wish you wouldn’t dismiss other angles, viewpoints (and people) so readily because the other angles are just as valid as yours, Micheal, and I’m very grateful to all the people here who have taken the time to respond to my thread including you, Micheal🙂

… but here I feel the need to say something: Maybe I’m wrong here but somehow I get that strong feeling that behind your prickly exterior lies in fact a really good and even kind man… I just wish you weren’t so afraid to show it🙂

So may I give you a hug - and I mean a genuine one that comes from the heart 🙂 because the mere fact that you replied to my thread even though I have recently made some rather sharp and cynical remarks about you shows you are a much bigger man than I gave you credit for🙂… yes, I do believe it…. beneath that gruff exterior there is indeed a kind man🙂

llig….. I agree that the best melody should be distracting in the sense of being full of suprises and inovations brought on by a whim. It should be in your face, but just as you can’t have two fiddlers together being in your face at the same time in differently whim-ish ways, I don’t think the backing should be either.

Maybe the backer can tack off and fly at times when the melody is being less full of surprises, but not at the same time for fear they’ll be sounding like they’re on different planets or something…. unless they play together so often they are more in sync with their in your face stuff?

I know what you mean, intensity and originality in both can leave you saying oh wow…. When I said before to know your place is to support the music, I didn’t mean drab and boring and just floating there. I do find when I play with a more in your face musician, as you put it, my backing too gets more in your face…. but hopefully in sync with them.

I play often with Tom Dunne, the box player who also plays fiddle… he has a real intensity on that fiddle, great attack, and I find I play with way more attack when playing with him, more than with a more subtle player. And he is one of the most interesting musicians I know. And brilliant too.

it’s almost too elusive trying to talk about this stuff, it’s hard to put into words and convey properly. The backing really needs to suit the melody player, and be intense with an intense player, subtle with a more subtle player …. but maybe that’s not a rule that should never be broken either. It should all just sound right, period.

There are guitar players from hell, but htere are also melody players from hell!

Hey what?!!
“Nine times out of ten accompaniment just doesn’t hit the spot”
That’s 90%. Wow!! If 90% of the time I felt the music was mush I’d give it up and just stay at home. Thankfully as an accompanist, I feel the exact opposite happens in the sessions I frequent. I feel that 90% of the time, accompaniment provides the “oomph” that pushes the music beyond a simple tune practice meeting. Often, the tune alone suffices. This provides a nice change of atmosphere, volume, and tempo, especially if done as a solo on any instrument. But as the session progresses, backing provides depth and rhythm that simply cannot be provided by melody alone. Why is it so controversial to contend that tasteful backing/accompaniment is a fundamental component of the music and a ‘craic’ing session?

amongst the posts above there seen to be emerging two very different concepts of what is supposed to be taking place at a session:

1. the view among what I take to be chiefly melody players that the session is chiefly a forum for the exposition of their own interpretation of a tune before a group of their peers, some of whom may join in tastefully

2. the view among what I take to be chiefly accompanists that the session is an experiment in group dynamics - more like the “jam session” of jazz legend - a comunal experience entered into by all present, with no particular aim but the production of good music of some kind

how can these two be compatible?

MYBC

MYBC

I should have added that I’m in agreement that multiple backers playing different rhythms is a sure recipe for “aural mud”. In addition, many of the scenarios described above, the “guitarists from hell” and the like, I find similarly abhorrent.
I regret that these GFH’s give us all a bad name.
On the other hand, to me, the music just sounds best with
some form of accompaniment, at a minimum to fill in the bass and rhythm. It’s also probably true that just 1 competent strummer and/or 1 thumper at a time is all that’s needed to provide this in a session.

Here’s the problem with harmonies, at least as far as I see it. The basis of western classical music, and also of pop, is harmony - any melody is actually to some extent incidental, because what is happening is a progression of harmonies (in the case of classical) and just of chord sequences for the most part in the case of pop.

But ITM, and, when you get down to it, an awful lot of ‘folk’ music wherever its origin, is rooted firmly in melody. It’s not harmonically based, and putting chords to it, expecially guitar chords which tend to have all three notes of the triad and often more, leaving no room for ambiguity, actually CHANGES the music, so you are not hearing anything remotely traditional any more, and are likely to experience a very different emotional effect from the music than was the originally intended effect. (I know, btw, that I can be attacked for that last point - what was the ORIGINAL intention? , and all that - but I’m trying, not perhaps very well, to make a point I believe in stongly.)

It basically becomes a differant genre when all the extreme cheesy chord progressions/rythyms have been applied. I prefer to keep it simple and compliment the tune rather than changing the whole context of the tune to some pop song.(die john doyle)

By the way Iris the clip i posted is of alec finn the bouzouki player not tony mcmanus

Oh…. it came up to open with Tony McManus backing Randal Bays on fiddle for me. There were others on the side too, I only went down to the second, with Tony playing melody and Randal backing Tony. Great too. BTW Randal Bays is also a brilliant guitar player, both backup and for tunes. Wonderful.

As for Alec Finn… he is up there at the top of the food chain in backing.

My theory of backing… and I know each guitar player or bouzouki backer can be pretty opinionated…. is you do not fight the music, and to my ears it is almost painful when backers fill in the spaces between notes on the off beat like a bluegrass or old time player. It fits there, but to my ear, not in ITM.

Sometimes a fiddle etc. will hit an off beat note as an accent, in which case it’s great to hit it with them, when you know the tune and know it’s coming… but the regular filling in the spaces with boom-chucka off the beat playing makes me crazy, good backing I think leaves the spaces between notes pretty silent because the melody does, and stresses where the melody stresses and doesn’t fly off and do its own thing except for within the confines of the tune. There’s plenty of room to improvise and do interesting things, well beyond the three main chords in a key if you want to, without having to fight the music. Too many Jazz chords also make me insane, but they may fit in a more rock style Irish band just fine…. I like my ITM straight up personally.

In any case, I know some that hate backing or drumming of any kind, and others would never dream of playing without backup. So….. back to this…. if you call for an open session, be prepared to meet all kinds and you can either be nice about it or try to control it, which will upset people. If you want to control it maybe it’s best to have private house sessions and invite those you want. Or if public, have a gig, and invite a few to sit in with you for a few tunes.

The Tommy Peoples CD “Fiddler’s Fancy” is, in my view, an example of how tunes played by a great fiddler can get messed up by a guitar accompanist. Fortunately, in this case, the guitar is on a second audio channel, and there is no feedback between the channels so all you have to do is to switch off the guitar channel and listen to TP as the music intended.
I’d be interested to know if the guitar accompaniment in this case was added later.

At a session I think you have to take what comes - some people play in standard tuning, some prefer DADGAD, some open D, some might play a bouzouki etc etc. And every single person who plays an “accompanying” instrument has a different opinion on what way they like to do it, and everyone else has an opinion on what they like to hear. Whereas Iris dislikes extended chords (so called “jazzy” chords), I really enjoy fitting those kind of chords into the tunes - some people would prefer one or the other of our playing styles.

At the end of the day, the second you pick up an instrument and play a tune on it the tune becomes arranged to a degree, and really all the accompaniment does is increase the complexity of the arrangement, and I doubt anyone is willing to argue that traditionally the music is unarranged - in any case the sound of the dancers’ feet are a kind of accompaniment.

in our session we have a very good regular guitarist who has a good feel for accompaniment and we are all very happy together. In order to deter additional, unwanted, accompanists he takes the simple precaution of urinating around the perimeter of the pub at the beginning of the evening. We find that this nicely keeps out any rogue alpha males.

I think he was just taking the p*ss.

Lot’s of interesting points:

Irisnevins understands it. It’s about being in sinc. It’s about using your ears and responding. It’s about the total enjoyment of the feedback loop that is comuication.

It’s not often you get wee pearls of wisdom here, but this is one of them,
“it’s almost too elusive trying to talk about this stuff, it’s hard to put into words and convey properly. The backing really needs to suit the melody player, and be intense with an intense player, subtle with a more subtle player …. but maybe that’s not a rule that should never be broken either. It should all just sound right, period.”

Then there was an interesting polarisation: A tune player says that 90% of the time, acompaniment doesn’t work. And an accompaninst says 90% of the time it does work. Speaks for itself eh?

Then 1,000,000BC has dificulty reconciling two different kinds of session, and I agree that the simulateous compatability of the two is impossible. But what has not been taken into account is that sessions last many hours, plenty of space for both.

But my favourite is benhall’s spectacular non understanding harmony/melody.

Wow… that’s a really helpful way of summing it all up!

Thanks, Micheal🙂

PS Re the spectacular finish line …. nah… I’ll bite my tongue here… hahaha… hard to break old habits I suppose😉… and anyhow, I still stand by what I said up above🙂

llig:

the sessions I attend take place in the evening between 8:30 and 11:00 ish. The actual musical element of the session (as opposed to the social and alcoholic elemets) takes place in the core time of 9:30 to 11:00. It’s not very long. The problem I touched upon usually arises when visitors of the “lets just have fun” discipline impose themselves on the proceedings. They put people off and the session doesn’t recover.

of course there are no villains or heroes - touchy melodic prima donna visitors can be as much a pain as arhythmic guitarists.

sometimes the session’s corporate personna can freeze out a really talented but “different” visitor.

a psychologist could probably explain it.

MYBC

I sympathise, I can see where only one and a half hours might make people a bit jittery to cram in what they want (we typically play for four hours, which is a lot of tunes). But the basic premise remains, it’s about being in sinc, and that means being in sinc with everyone. If anyone imposes their particular discipline at the expence of others, there will be losers.

“lets have fun” so whats wrong with that concept. I don’t think our musical forefathers had such an earnest attitude, they played for the love of it and to hell with all this elitism, sure music is to be enjoyed, it brings all types of people together and maybe we could all learn to be a bit more tolerant of each other instead of critising. So its not perfectly in tune, so the bodhran is a bit loud, so the flute is out of tune, so what! We’re all not making CDs or doing gigs for money, lets enjoy our music!

Yesterday afternoon I heard two very famous Irish musicians in concert. Afterwards, I mentioned to the guitarist that I was rushing off to my weekly session. He said he enjoys going to sessions, but not for the quality of the music. If he wants good music, he’ll invite a few carefully chosen musicians over to his house to play. He said that if you get ten minutes of good music happening during a session, you’re lucky.

Furthermore, you shouldn’t expect a high level of music at a session. After all, it’s a bunch of people, possibly not much more than strangers, trying to play together on the fly. We compare it to recordings of bands that have worked hard for years to develop their sound. So if the goal of making great music at a session is nearly unattainable, it makes more sense to view it as a chance to socialize and just play for fun.

In the last paragraph, I was gradually shifting from what this guitarist actually said to my own conclusion. The rest is just me. If you think you’re session is making great music, try recording it and listening to it at home. I’ll bet it doesn’t hold up very well in the light of the day. I think our perception of the quality of the music we’re making is colored by the fun we’re having while making it. When we realize that it isn’t all that great, we start looking for others to blame rather than chalking it up to having set an impossible goal.

Do some sessions make better music than others? Sure.
Do some sessions have more fun than others? Sure.
Can it be more fun to make better music? Sure, but not necessarily.

Molly

I put the reference to fun in quotes because the experience of fun is a very subjective thing. I understand what you’re saying about inclusivity and largely agree with you - but where I live session time’s too precious to be (as I in a sour moment might see it) squandered on indulging people.

I make no claims in respect of my own playing - but I do want it to improve a bit. I can’t believe that any really good ITM players developed their techniques without a lot of hard work. Being earnest about it goes with the turf.

Regards

MYBC

True, Molly, and a lot is tolerated at sessions that wouldn’t be acceptable if you were making professional recordings; and it IS all about having fun. The tricky part is trying to figure out where exactly one person’s “fun” interferes with another person’s fun. I’ve been in sessions where we’re all having a great time until some lame guitar, bodhran, or screaming out-of-tune whistle player comes along and starts to have their own “fun” with our session. These folks rarely realize that they are session killers, and often they’re very nice people otherwise. I think one of the reasons we come here and discuss this sort of thing is with the hope that these nice people might read what we’re saying and have a chance to think a bit about the effect their participation might have on a session. I don’t think anyone wants to shut people out, but rather just ask people to be a little more sensitive about how and when they join a session.

Lighten up
A session is just that, not a performance or a rehearsal. Some of us are happy to join in when we can and be part of the session. Maybe others can tolerate that now and then, we know where we are in the pecking order…..

So let me see if I understand you, fluteslad. Since a session isn’t on a stage and it’s not a “band” then it’s open for people at any level to come along and join in regardless of the effect they might have on the music? And the fun that the people in the session are having doesn’t matter and isn’t as important as the fun the less experienced people who want to join in might have. Do you really think that’s fair to the people in the session? Do you ever think of tolerating their desire to play enjoyable music with other experienced musicians, or is it only the newbies that deserve to be tolerated?

I expect a very high standard when I go out to the pub. Not all night though, I also expect degrees of mediocre and the odd degree of utter sh*te. But I would be very disappointed indeed if I went out and didn’t hear something absolutely top notch. And part of the reason we almost always get a decent slab of top notch is because we police it. And I will never apologise for this. It is not open for people at any level to come along and join in regardless of the effect they might have on the music.

And Gary Martin is missing something very important about the essence of music with his: “If you think you’re session is making great music, try recording it and listening to it at home. I’ll bet it doesn’t hold up very well in the light of the day. I think our perception of the quality of the music we’re making is coloured by the fun we’re having while making it.”

The quality of music you are making IS defined by the fun you are having making it. And the cold light of day should bear no relevance what so ever. (Though fun, of course, does not mean laughing at silly tunes or seeing how fast you can play or daft things like that. It’s about enjoying the beauty and variety of it all, the drive, the pathos, the intimate, the unison, the surprises, the knowledge, the understanding and the sheer beauty of it.)

Michael - I’ve just got back and picked up on your comments. Thank you for saying my “non-understanding” was your favourite. I’ve clearly arrived!

Still, I doubt I’m the only one who can distinguish melody from harmony …

And probably not the only one who can distinguish men from women, and still have no comprehension of the human race

What about you, Micheal? Are you as mystified by the human race as most of us mortals are?

I most certainly am… 🙂

llig, ph.button, thanks.

nobody can (or does) object to lack of experience or technique, or to unintentional lapses of pitch or intonation, at any of the sessions I attend. We encourage visitors and beginners (esp kids) and I’ve never heard anyone be asked to shut up or leave, or even be frowned at for that matter.

however it is truly objectionable when people take over an ITM session and impose their views - about music and behaviour - on all present.

the only civilised response is to stop playing. The fun lovers don’t care or don’t notice, and the rest of us have had a wasted evening.

it’s not about elitism, its about taste and manners.

MYBC

The irony is that I’m much more welcoming to new-comers than you’d think based on my comments on a thread like this. But the new-comers I encourage aren’t forcing themselves on the session -- the session embraces them instead. That’s the difference.

PB
You neglected the words ‘when we can’. I don’t join in unless I know a tune and can play it at speed and reasonably well. I ‘tolerate’ (or enjoy), quite happily, listening to other more competent musicians playing all the tunes I don’t know or can’t play.
But if I don’t join in occasionally, how am I ever going to be competent?

True flutesalad how on earth are you going to learn if you cannot join in and play with other more competent musicians. There is simply too much elitism in Irish Traditional music. It is up to teachers of music to emphasise to their pupils that they should listen initially to sessions, then find their level or start their own session and progress from there. Most of us know where we will fit in and are happy to sit in the background and absorb the music and join in if we know the tune very well. Of course there are always those who haven’t a clue and will try to join in anywhere. But I think they are the exceptions and most people are simply too shy and awestruck to impose themselves on better players. But amongst those better players there is such a sense of superiority that one would be very brave indeed to venture to join in to their elite sessions. And as I always say, you can go to Gurteen and no matter what your level be invited in by Peter Horan et al to their sessions. Mind you, they do control the session, you join in, you do not take over, and thats fine with me.

Gary… right, I think people expect too much from a session if they’re going to get bent out of shape with the music not being perfect. I like sessions, the chatter, the social life… It’s really my main (ha ha ONLY!) social life to tell the truth. I had the nicest time a few weeks back at a session with a fair amount of beginners, the way it was run, where everyone got to play something, high end or not was great. It seemed not at all competitive, no one felt bad. If it weren’t so far away I’d go more often. Really nice bunch of people. So what if the music wasn’t completely high end all the time, but you know a good amount of the time it was. it had it’s own sound and it was a happy nice sound.

Gary… you know I record our sessions and make CDs, I do it to support the party, the free food, the expenses, getting a great guest host out each time. You may have heard them, the CDs are very good….. but they are very heavily edited, LOL!! We try to get everyone included. I take the players‘ feelings seriously and edit out mistakes on peoples’ solos. Then they get to hear an MP3 and get final approval if they wish. We sell a lot of them because they are great tune learning aids for people…. common session tunes played in a session atmosphere….. people ignore the mikes after the beginning, and my promise that nothing gets on that embarrasses anyone and they can hear the track first. People like that…. hey,where else can they say they recorded with some of the great musicians and be telling the truth!

Are you going to make it back here this year… hopefully the timing will be good for our session at IAANJ. Hope you can make it. It’s one of the best parties going down here.

Knowing Gary Martin, I would not say he misses anything about the music. If someone doesn’t get what he is saying, it is because they are not paying attention properly.

One thing that I think everyone needs is a sense of when to be silent. Not every tune needs every person to play along, whether they are melody players or accompanists. Learning this, and leaving space from time to time for other musicians to fill (and getting your own space also) adds to the variety of the proceedings and the enjoyment. Often, what could be irritating when applied to every tune or set, turns out not to be irritating when done in moderation.

Thanks, Iris. Thanks, Al. I think what Michael is doing is broadening (or perhaps changing) the definition of “quality” to the point where he can agree with me while making it look like he doesn’t! The magic that happens at sessions (and sometimes gets captured on recordings - still haven’t heard any of yours, Iris 🙂 ) I suspect is usually lost on those who haven’t experienced it first hand, either as a participant (in sessions, not necessarily that particular one) or as an active listener who understands what to expect.

I’d love to get back to your session, Iris. I’ll be around Thanksgiving weekend, but I think there’s no session that weekend. E-mail me if I’m wrong about that.

Flutesalad, Go back and look at what Molly said and my response to her. Your comment came directly after mine. Please put your comments in the context they arrived in and you’ll see why I asked you for clarification.

More than one accompanist either swamps the set or reduces it to its lowest common denominator of old timey I, IV V chords. On rare occasions, invariably with another accompanist who has bothered to learn the tunes, a lot of tunes, there’s a great synergy. Rarely. VERY rarely. Losing my patience with folks who dive right in thinking they’ve “got the code down”. On occasion, I’ve done that myself. Nope. Quickest way to suck the sole out of the ceol.

Fish or foot?

I am a little puzzled reading this. As a total newbieI had assumed that the chords would be as sacrosanct as the melodies. Obviously every accompaniment player MUST play
the same chords or you have chaos.

But there is an interesting thought that I always put to my students that is worth mentioning here. Any given melody has a limited number of chords which will fit with it whereas any chord sequence has an infinite number Of melodies that will fit on top Of it. Any competent keyboard player should easily be able to total change the character of a melody by putting different chords under it.sometimes very different chords but when you do use different chords the graces perhaps have to reflect the chords and if unorthodox and unpredicted chords are used I cannot see how the melody players can be expected to,cope with this in an unrehearsed environment. The character of a tune can be chang3d far more by inappropriate although technically correct chords than by someone breathing in the wrong place or not using appropriate graces.

Stephen, the chords are not as sacrosanct as the melody in this music. It’s been said more than once here that Irish trad is the reverse of Western music styles like Jazz , where the chords are fixed and the melody is improvised. In Irish trad, the melody line is fixed (more or less, so people can play it in unison), and the chords are improvised by an accompanist.

Not just improvised, but often intentionally ambiguous, like dropping the thirds to avoid making too strong a harmonic statement, allowing the melody players to establish the implied harmony. It’s why many sessions have an informal rule of having only one guitar player at a time, to avoid the clash of improvised chord choices and timing between two or more guitar players.

The problem is , a tunesmith needs to learn these traditional patterns , maybe hundreds of tunes a thousand perhaps but a guitar player just needs half a dozen chords and they can, if sensitive enough get away with all sorts of ‘ variations’ .
Guitar players should learn to play tunes and the right patterns for a few hundred tunes …..

“a guitar player just needs half a dozen chords”…..

and a melody player just needs (perhaps) ten notes.

It’s surely how you put the chords together, just as it’s how you put the notes together.

This old thread has one of my favourite responses from one of my favourite players.

“You need to check your ego at the door too. The listeners are listening mainly to the melody player(s). But good backing…. if you stop playing, the listeners suddenly miss it. Paradoxically, with he best backing you almost don’t notice it’s there…. until it stops. You should feel your best about it when you make the melody player shine and sound better. You work behind the scenes, but you do matter if you play rhythm.”