Tunes with a life of their own

Tunes with a life of their own

For the first time (so far), Jeremy has informed me that he has been asked to delete one of my tune submissions. The particular tune will be nameless but it was so popular in "my neck of the woods" that I didn’t think about asking permission before I posted it here. I’m afraid that I’ve sometimes been guilty of this, although I always check first if it’s a lesser known tune.

Anyway, this particular tune has been "done to death" in sessions up here and I feel it has a life of its own. It will continue to travel and very few musicians who learn it will ever see a copy of the music. So, in view of this, does it really do any harm to post well known tunes here? We’ve had similar discussions about this sort of thing before but I’d argue (yet again) that it is nigh impossible to control the spread of our kind of music. Of course, if the tunes are recorded or performed live at concerts, the composers should be credited and paid their dues but that’s a different matter.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Well, if the self-explanatory "Suck" can stay, I have a hard time imagining why anything else shouldn’t be acceptable….

Dispense with the suspense John. Which tune was it?

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Rather than cause any more problems for Jeremy, I’ll not mention it here but I’ve sent you an e-mail. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I think it’s worth mentioning why the tune was deleted: it was a specific request from the copyright holder.

A fairly important piece of information that you neglected to mention there, JohnJ.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Sorry Jeremy, I thought that would have been understood and I didn’t want to go into detail about the particular circumstances here. Rather, I was just looking for members views on the fact that so many tunes "travel" regardless of whether they are in copyright or or not.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I understood the situation from John’s post. I also understand the legal requirements Jeremy is under and that this tune will have to travel by foot rather than by first class carriage.

KFG

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I think it’s a bit silly for a composer to order that a tune be deleted. God, what’s the big deal? I think you’d have to be a bit up yourself and stuck-up to want to do that. AU$0.02.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Musicians have to earn their money where they can.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I guess it’s up to folks more active in posting and getting tunes here to say if it does any "harm" to post well-known (or overdone <GG>) tunes here… Redundancy may not be great in terms of server storage…

Of course the copyright owner has every right to ask that the tune be removed, but I don’t really see how the posting here would affect the writers’ revenue stream… Maybe someone can explain that? Oh… wait… was it posted as an MP3, or as an ABC or notation transcription? A recording would make some difference, but I don’t see how a transcription would.
(I have a lot to learn…)

From listening to all the old recordings I can, it seems to me that tunes do have lives of their own, that they are played differently over the years, and certainly differently by different players. Some spawn other tunes from their parts or their wholes… <G> And it’s great how tunes travel from session to session, player to player, and even how some fade from our attention for a long or short time. Some languish in obscurity and then re-emerge…

Thanks,

stv

http://www.cdbaby.com/Culchies

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Of course it’s got nothing to do with the money. Can you honestly imagine the composer of a posted tune thinking to themselves "I’m going to make sure these evil people don’t post my tune on this website so then some magic money will float down from the sky and I’ll be able to pay this month’s power bill".

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

A transcription would make a difference to an artist selling their tunes in dot form. I know that Jay Ungar, for example, sells a lot of copies of Ashokan Farewell, to fiddle students and classical players wanting a "folkish" number, and so forth. It’s a great tune, I say he’s entitled to those dollars and euros and shekels, and if he wanted it struck from the site I’d say it’s his prerogative. Apparently he hasn’t raised this objection, but I imagine the composer in this case is in a similar position, and I think respecting their wishes was the right move, morally speaking. Legally speaking, I don’t know what copyright laws apply to this site, but I suppose that respecting this sort of request is a great way to be sure you’re on the solid ground.
In either case, there’s plenty of great tunes out there. If someone with a valid claim asks us to leave one alone, that won’t cause a shortage.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I like to respect other people’s wishes whenever I can, personally, and of course Jeremy needs to respect that by law anyway. So I don’t see anything to get outraged about, myself.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I’ve posted some copyrighted tunes here over the years and never had any problem tracking down the composer and getting permission (usually with a healthy dose gratefulness for appreciating their music).

But the composer doesn’t always hold the copyright, and other business interests may be less likely to grant permission.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Of *course* you’ve got to respect their wishes, and of *course* it’s good manners to track them down to ask their permission. However, whether they have a copyright on it or not, if it’s a common session tune being played "in the wild" as it were, you’ve gotta wonder what they gain from trying to guard it as private property. Why does everything always have to boil down to money these days?…

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

LOL, "in the wild," Speak for your own sessions, Mark. ๐Ÿ™‚

Why is money at the root of it all? Because the capitalists are winning, have won, in most corners of the world. In a few short generations, we have gone from being starving serfs to citizens of the world to fat, insatiable, lobotomized consumers.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Yeah, and why can’t session music be an antidote to all that instead of just an extension of it? … is what I’m saying.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Hmm, I just think that this is an interesting point that JohnJ has brought up, and the answer’s not as simple as just "musicians have to make money". There are broader philophical issues of "what is ownership" and stuff to take into account as well. I mean, if you write a tune, it’s fair enough to expect that nobody else will try to claim that they wrote it. On the other hand, if you record that tune and "release it into the wild", you’ve got to expect things to happen to your tune eventually, like, it might get recorded by other people who got it as a nameless tune, it might get played in sessions, maybe a bit differently to how you originally intended it, it might get transcribed. I think that with an abstract thing like a tune which can be passed on from person to person w/o information about the composer, it’s wrong to assume that you "own" it. If you want to be that possessive and anal about your compositions, keep them in your own head for your own enjoyment and don’t release them for other people to enjoy. It’s like releasing a cat into your garden and then complaining that there are fewer small birds coming to your bird table for you to enjoy. You have to be aware of the consequences of your own actions.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

You’re getting at the story of a little strathspey I channeled into this world, which crossed the ocean, lost its name, and morphed into another key before catching my attention here as a gan ainm: https://thesession.org/tunes/2042

All I can say is that I agree with you Mark, and it remains perhaps one of my most gratifying experiences, to have one of "my" tunes undergo the folk process and still be able to track it (at least till the leg band fell off and it flew away over the hedgerows for places unknown). The irony is that I now play it far more often in the key it landed in overseas, not the one I originally dreamt it up in.

This gives me an idea for a new thread….

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Ah yeah I’d forgotten about that! Yeah, well, if you’d gone "that’s MY tune, how dare you post it! I demand that you delete it at once! How dare you take liberties and change the key!" I would have thought you were a bit of a twerp… which is my whole point.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

What, that I’m a bit of a twerp?!
*giggling*

Right. Well, it’s easy for me to let tunes go because I earn a comfortable (read: fat, lobotomized) living from other work. Which is how a lot of the old tunes entered the world, too, unleashed by people who cut peat, layed bricks, dug coal, or repaired cookware. Today we have "professional" "folk" musicians. LOL.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Plus I think that if you want the wild, edgy old wail (not today’s more common polished, professional schmooz), maybe you have to seek a taste of the life the old timers lived. Maybe it’s not about living in the city with the best session scene, or hanging out at Willie Week every year, or taking every workshop, or buying all the latest cds. Maybe it’s about living in a small, lonely village, cut off from the world and on the edge of some vast, unfriendly wilderness (a storm-ridden ocean, say, or trackless wind-scoured mountains) with nothing to pass the time except your instrument, last week’s news from the guy with the donkey cart who passed by this evening, a howling need to declare, "I exist!" and a little musical imagination.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Aargh LOL pls take that back - you know how some yellaboard people have no SOH whatsoever and will think that I am, actually, calling you an actual twerp, and will flame me for it ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"Maybe it’s about living in a small, lonely village, cut off from the world and on the edge of some vast, unfriendly wilderness (a storm-ridden ocean, say, or trackless wind-scoured mountains) with nothing to pass the time except your instrument, last week’s news from the guy with the donkey cart who passed by this evening, a howling need to declare, "I exist!" and a little musical imagination".

Been there done that, and it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. Give me a city with some decent tunes happening any day ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"…if you want the wild, edgy old wail"… just listen to Zina talking ๐Ÿ˜€

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

What was the tune, Happy Birthday?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Yeah, that’s the only one you can play on the anglo, as long as it’s in C major with no complicated sharps or flats.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"Aargh LOL pls take that back - you know how some yellaboard people have no SOH whatsoever and will think that I am, actually, calling you an actual twerp, and will flame me for it"

What - here? surely not. It could NEVER happen here.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Thanks for all your opinions so far. I did actually credit the composer but, perhaps, they were offended because I admitted that it wasn’t one of my favourite tunes. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Of course, the answer is that I/we should always seek permission from a composer or publisher before submitting a tune here. However, when these tunes are already very popular and being played regularly in sessions, I’ve been inclined just to go ahead. After all, even the likes of "Jig of Slurs" is in copyright and has been published in several books. You’ll even get versions of tunes like "Mrs Macleod". While you may know this tune by ear and have transcribed it from memory, some publisher might also claim that this particular setting is from one of their written publications.
On the other hand, the tune in question was popular in *Scottish* sessions but possibly isn’t elsewhere. So, in that sense, I can see an argument for being "protective" and, of course, I do respect the composer’s wish not to have it posted here.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Imagine if every tune, from when copyright started, had been treated this way. I imagine we’d all be f***ed and there’d certainly be no session.org.
What kind of a person copyright’s a trad tune anyway, it just seems a bit sinister and selfish

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Better hope the composer of that tune doesn’t show up at your session JohnJ and also demand that you don’t play the tune publicly… or teach anyone how to play it for that matter. You haven’t gone and posted which session you play at have you? But seriousl, my feeling is dichotomous… I believe people should have the right to put their own name on something and do the copyright thing, but I also think they should remember the spirit in which tunes were/are passed along and down generations. This board strengthens those lineages, it doesn’t destroy them. That, however, may be a topic for a different thread.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I agree with copo24… "copyrighted trad" has the smell of oxymoron to me.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Maybe it’s more of a wafting aroma…

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

WAIT A MINUTE…. it’s not Jim Troy trying to claim ownership of "James and the Giant Peach is it"!

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I think it’s all well and good that if we record someone’s tune and make money out of it, that they should receive royalties. However, trying to stop someone distributing the dots of a simple 32 bar tune is a bit pathetic. If it was Beethovens Ninth Symphony, there would be sense in it because no-one could learn/play it without the dots, therefore the dots are a commodity worth controlling. A 32 bar dance tune can be learned by ear after one hearing by some people, so there is no point in ‘composers’ of this sort of tune being anally retentive about dots in what is essentially an aurally transmitted tradition. Very few of these tunes don’t plagiarise other tunes (wittingly or unwittingly) anyway.
Having said that, might it be because the composer considers the transcription inaccurate? That might be just cause for it to be removed from a board such as this.
As far as the Jay Ungar/Ashokan thing goes, I thiknk what he sells are arrangements for numbers of instruments. The straight notes wee out of the bag long ago(!)
There is a whole different side to this argument also which concerns the tradition. If a ‘composer’ - for all traditional tunes were ‘composed’ by someone, uses the tradition to inform and then inspire a ‘new’ tune, and they then decide that others cannot use the resource that they have created in the way that they used the free resource of the tradition in the first place. Well, it could be argued with some justification that they are actually stealing from the tradition.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I agree that objecting to having the music spread by internet is a bit excessive, as in the long run, it might actually work out best for the composer if they let the dots and ABCs spread around the world, as long as their name was still attached to it. The real money comes when someone records your tunes.
So if I was giving advice to a composer of a tune, I would say, allow it to be posted. However, insist that your name be attached, along with the fact that it is copyrighted, but posted with permission. And give the address people could contact if they want to record it.
An example of this model for internet-assisted commerce: My group got information on "Inisheer" by Tom Walsh from this site, which was posted with his permission. We then tracked him and his record company down and paid for rights so we could put it on a CD. So, Mr. Walsh actually EARNED money by sharing his tune on The Session.
But in the end, if a composer does not want us to post their tune, that is their right, and we should respect their wishes.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Tulloch, I frequent a few different sessions around Edinburgh, up North(of Scotland) and elsewhere, also at folk festivals. These are not always "specifically Irish", although I hope to get invoved in the more Irish ones at Newcastleton this weekend. Anyway, I’ve heard the tune in question quite a lot in different locations and assumed it was fairly common.

As for posting the sessions I play at, I’ve got into trouble over this too. A few months back, I was asked to remove a session from the listings here as they wished to "keep it local"! :-|

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I think you’ve all gotten completely carried away. Imagine you’re a composer and you google your name for kicks one day and discover someone has transcribed your tune on the internet complete with a disparaging review and an open discussion on its merits or lack thereof. You think to yourself "Gosh, I’m not entirely comfortable with that!" and send a tactful note to the moderator of said site requesting the tune - YOUR tune - be removed. Not because you’re "evil" or "materialistic" or "selfish" but because it just doesn’t sit right with you to be associated with a bunch foreign knuckleheads who spend all day blathering on and on about the minutae of diddly, and, hey, it’s YOUR TUNE, so who could possibly fault you for wanting to have a say in how and where it is presented?

Then lo and behold, you discover the vast majority of the members of said website DO fault you for wanting to have a say in how your tune is presented, in fact, they are thinking of it as THEIR tune, and thinking of you as "selfish" for continuing to view it as yours.

Shocking behavior folks. I have to say I’m disgusted with you.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Al, you have it spot on, except for the bit about the real money coming from recordings. I can assure you I pay more money to join a copyright society than I receive from them. The only reason I copyright my compositions is that sometimes people record a tune and give no credit. My happiness comes from the idea of a tune being accepted and moulded by the musicians themselves. As has been said already I can’t understand somebody who writes a tune and then stops it being publicised, doesn’t make any sense at all.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Ya Boo to you Kerri,
You should think carefully before you side with this buffoon who seeks to plunder the tradition for his own profit and glory, and make enemies of us ‘foreign knuckleheads’(!)
How do you know this composer is NOT "evil" or "materialistic" or "selfish".
Unless you are on his payroll, and already receiving the tainted fruit of his 32 bars of infamy!
๐Ÿ˜‰

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

You have a very good point there, Kerri, and you’re probably right. However, I’d just wish to state that this particular tune wasn’t "slagged off" by anyone here(unlike some ๐Ÿ˜‰ ), although I did state (honestly) that it wasn’t one of my favourites. It was also added to quite a few tunebooks so it must have been quite popular.

Also, the purpose of this discussion wasn’t to criticise the composer of this tune in particular—though some members have—-but to discuss how tunes do "travel" regardless of copyright restrictions, particularly with our kind of music. That’s another reason why I haven’t named the tune or the composer here. It’s really irrelevant to the purpose of my discussion.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Yeah, but this composer is obviously aware of this site now, knows who he / she is, knows you are talking about him / her and is quite possibly perusing this discussion right now, thinking "Thank god I haven’t let these self-righteous eejits post my tune on their website".

Indulging in long disparaging threads about composers who believe their tunes still belong to them is a sure guarantee that other composers of popular tunes will soon follow suit and ask not to be associated with this site.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Now we know JohnJ is frequently being reprimanded for his unstinting piracy of copyright tunes and his ravaging of perfectly good sessions by making their whereabouts public, should we still be talking to him? Should we have him deleted to maintain our own purity?

hmmm ๐Ÿ˜‰

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I met that Michael Nyman once.
I’m a big fan of his music, but couldn’t get a word in edgeways because all he wanted to do was complain to my companion about some royalties he believed were outstanding on a record he’d produced for him.

Hoping this muddies the water further

etc etc.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"foreign Knuckleheads"
"self-righteous eejits"
Come on Kerri, stop sitting on the fence! Tell us what you really think of us!

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Here now, Mark! I’ll take "old", since that’s a fait accompli, and perhaps "edgy"…oh heck, okay, I’ll accept wild, edgy and old. *smirk*

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

But not the wail?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Oh, and btw, since I don’t know what tune it is, I can’t say whether I think Will’s right and perhaps someone else holds the copyright to the composer’s tune. Actually, I just don’t much care. The music biz is what it is, and it’s always going to collide with the world of trad music, which is diametrically opposed to it in terms of the aims and goals of each, so what’s the use of wailing on about it?

Probably because I have a distinct lack of time to worry about stuff like that just recently. ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

My darling otter, I rarely wail. It’s shriek, stern statement, calm reasoning, or hilarious shouting, but wailing is kept for the very important stuff. ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

That was method acting, Mark. Putting myself completely in the shoes of this poor wee tunesmith and allowing myself to feel completely everything he / she must be feeling about this.

As far as my own personal opinion is concerned only the Americans are foreign knuckleheads and self-righteous eejits. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Yeah? Well, as far as I’m concerned, Ker, *you’re* the foreign knuckleheads and self-righteous eejit! So there! Nyah nyah!

*snort*

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"My darling otter" …
You can wail at me as much as you like, Zina.

And while we’re off topic, did anyone else witness the shenanigans during S.Shannon and F.Gavins set at Glastonbury? Or was it just Jerry H’s rampant imagination? I think he should start a new thread and tell us all about it. It could make a new and radical departure in traditional music, (the presentatiion there of) ….

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Kerri has a good point. Who is anyone to decide how someone else should feel about something that is dear to them. Trying to understand someone elses perspective is difficult and sometime impossible so to just *accept it unconditionally* would be prudent. I used to have a friend in highschool who, when he ate, would only remove food from his lunchbag one piece at a time and then he would hover over it as if afraid someone would steal it out of his mouth. The rest of us used to spread our food out and trade with each other…sometimes quite forcefully and with little dignity or respect (I don’t think I’ve ever tasted my mother’s home made hawiian pudding!)…though none of us minded, he *did*, so thinking back, who could blame the guy for feeling the way he did. Same goes for tunes I guess.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Kerri’s defaming americans…. she’s gonna’ go fly their flag upside down…. ๐Ÿ˜‰ Be careful not to let your true Canadian colours (with a ‘u’) show through. What fun ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Now, now, Zina, no amount of northern finger pointing and name-calling is going to excuse you and your fellow citizens for your taste in presidents.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

LOL — don’t go looking at ME on that one, Ker. The problem with democracy (or at least the process of running a republic) is that at any given time, roughly half the population thinks the other half is total and complete idiots. ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Without giving anything more away, I’d suggest that Will might be correct here about the copyright being owned by somebody else rather than the composer. So his or hers own view may differ on the matter.
Anyway, I wasn’t wanting the discussion to become personal or even about this tune in particular. However(as Kerri has observed), I’ve already "set the cat amongst the pigeons". Sorry about that.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Did I mention that my friend was the kind of person that used to build and rebuild model airplane engines during accouting class. I think he graduated with a 99.8 average… wonder if he ever took up the fiddle and wrote a good tune…..

P.s.

What the hell is "hawaiian pudding"?

I think otters are among the most darling creatures on the planet, actually. Can you crack open oysters on your tummy, Mark? ๐Ÿ™‚

Shhhh…

Be vewwy, vewwy qwiet, Johnny J. I’m distracting cats. *smirk*

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Zina, it’s some kind of cottage cheese with shredded carrots and pineapples or something. As I said, don’t think I ever got a taste of it ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

And on the issue of…"Democracy Sucks"…all in favour raise your hand…

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I can’t help but blame you, Zina. I watched the election with disbelief, thinking "Where is Zina? She should be DOING something about this! How can she let this happen? What a foreign knucklehead!" ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Ottery’s recipe for Hawaiian Pudding
(This is copyright, so I don’t want to see it appearing on the BBC Celebrity Chefs website)
First crack open your oysters on your tummy.
Next, find pliable person with opposable thumbs to open can of pineapple.
They eat the pineapple (Otters don’t like pineapple)
Otter eats oysters (yum, yum!)
Otter, temporariliy sated, dreams of dusky maiden wearing only grass skirt, dancing to Frankie Gavin on stage at Glastonbury ….

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Good God, tulloch, I’m not sure I’d ever want to! (taste the pudding, I mean!) Democracy is probably the most viable alternative we’ve come up with, I guess. (Can you tell I feel strongly about that? Me neither.) I read recently that the problem with democracy as it stands today is that we have failed to teach consensus building within the context of democracy, which of course is vital to the process. Heigh ho. There’s always something else, isn’t there?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

ROFL! Kerri, if only I could! But I’d probably have violated many people’s civil rights in the process. Big no-no. *smirk*

LOL — Mark, can I get a pic of you cracking open an oyster?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

That’s hillarious Zina. I think. The source of that publication wasn’t by chance the Cheney Press?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Right, you lot have given me my laughs for the morning. You should see my to-do list, it’s THAT long, must be off to start in on it. I expect to find much hilarity on my return, so get cracking. As it were. So to speak. ;)

P.s.

Tulloch, ask Emily about Dick Cheney being a robot. Now THAT was hilarious! ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Is it unethical to violate the civil rights of a small community intent on the violation of the human rights of a much larger community who don’t get to vote on the subject?

I think not! Strap on your metal corset, Zina. It’s time to go to battle! I want to here your bloodthirsty yodelling war cry all the way from Nunavut!

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I think in Nunavut it’s more like boozethirsty yodelling… apathetic frontier town. Kidding! Kidding! Stop throwing things… I was kidding….sortof.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

True story: a high school geography exam shortly after the creation of Canada’s new territory asked:

"Q: The name of Canada’s newly created territory is:
A: Alluvut
B: Sumuvut
C: Nunavut
D: None of the above"

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

That is hilarious! I love it. Although… I made the crack too quickly before. I was speaking of Iqaluit… which as you know is in Nunuvut.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

LOL, tulloch. That’s exactly how I pictured it.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I particularly like the closing paragraph, Chris. ๐Ÿ˜€

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Well thought out and cogently argued, Chris, and only let down by the last line
๐Ÿ˜‰

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

As a professional writer, I own very few of the copyrights on my own work. In most cases, the publisher or the organization I wrote for holds the copyright. This same situation is common with music. Which is what it sounds like is behind John’s tune submission being yanked.

Under current property and copyright laws, authors and owners have every right to exercise some control over use of their property. I have no problem with that, on a legal basis.

But as a critter who belongs to this big chunk of dirt spinning through space, I’m not persuaded that treating everything as a commodity is the best way to live. Especially when it comes to things like land (the Earth itself), air, water, ideas, and art.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Here I was trying to contribute thoughtfully to an intellectual discussion, and find myself branded (along with many others) as a "foreign knucklehead" and an "eejit." Oh, the pain of it all!!!! ๐Ÿ™‚
Someone up above stated it pretty well, after some of the discussions we have here, we shouldn’t be bad-mouthing someone who would not want to participate in this free for all, either in person, or by having their work posted. I (mostly) enjoy the give and take, but I can understand that there might be valid reasons why someone wouldn’t want to be a part of it.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Philosophically and spiritually, I agree that the idea of Personal Ownership of everything under the sun is ridiculous, but I bet the people who insist that tunes are public property would have a problem if I insisted their homes and cars are public property, started camping out in their living room and joyriding around on a whim. Those of us who are incensed by a composer’s belief that a tune he wrote belongs to him are making an unspoken assertion that it actually belongs to US, which is as misguided as arguing over who owns the water in ten square feet of river.

(Consider it "tough love", Al)

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I’m not incensed about it at all and, as I say, if this is what the composer wishes that’s OK by me.
Nor do I believe the music is public property. It’s clearly not. However, all these tunes are "in my head" now and I’m not able to give them back.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Copy-right.

KFG

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

That has to be a record for Kevin’s lowest word count ever.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Well given that the tune has now been deleted and none of us know what it is I hope none of us repost it at some later date not realising the offence. Not that I post tunes that often (more than once) but I better be careful.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"Yeah, that’s the only one you can play on the anglo, as long as it’s in C major with no complicated sharps or flats."

Dow, I can’t wait till we meet. It will be high noon… a tumble weed will be rolling across the road and you will be facing me at 20 paces. You’ll have your brit-box, me with my Anglo… and the undertaker will be taking your measurements as you wipe the nervous sweat from your brow.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Kerri, in the American West, we say whiskey’s for drinking, and water’s for fighting. We have a huge lawyer-infested industry that does nothing but argue over who owns the water in ten square feet of river (but they use terms like acre-feet and cubic feet per second). ๐Ÿ™‚

Seems to me the people who don’t like composers claiming ownership of tunes they wrote in the tradiitonal vein are misunderstanding the word "traditional." All the old trad tunes were composed by someone. They then underwent the folk process of being tumbled in the great musical polisher for several generations. Some lost their owners in the process, but not all did. Those in the know still give credit where credit is due. It’s not anonymity that makes a tune traditional. And there’s nothing wrong with asserting creative ownership of a tune in the traditional repertoire. That’s the composer’s perogative, even if it’s not their livelihood. New tunes enter the tradition the same way—but these days, people are more awake to the financial advantages of claiming copyright. Some people argue that copy right laws actually *encourage* creativity and dissemination of art and ideas because the creators can release their work with greater confidence that they will be rewarded for it. Who knows, maybe if people were copyrighting their tunes 300 years ago, we’d have "O’Neill’s 10,001 Tunes."

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Since the traditional tune composing, playing and passing-on process has forgotten more than the notion of copyright will ever know… is it safe to say what we’re arguing here is that a farily modern notion has come about and begun to impede how tradition historically flows? Do people just resent copyrighting because "that’s just not how is ever was"?

I’m really hoping that made sense.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Wow, Will, what a way to make a living!

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Sorry… cross posted with Will

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Legally speaking, one can’t fault your reasoning Kerri but is it right morally? I have been lucky in that one particular tune I wrote took off almost like a house on fire. I’m still collecting all the variations under various names that have been recorded in one way or another and now I’m wondering whether it would be a good idea to destroy the original and take it out of copyright. It truly belongs in the public domain. But I don’t think I could accept the idea of someone else owning the thing, especially now with CCE trying to own the rights to all trad material. For example, a tune which we know originally came from a particular source now deceased, (although not written by him), becomes the property of an organisation which he had no affiliations with and had nothing to do with the spreading of said tune is a travesty. Why cannot his heirs be entitled to any rights accrued. We, as musicians and singers only borrow the tunes and songs during our lifetime, we ars carriers not owners.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

That is a wonderful way of putting it Ian. Absolutely.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

The question of whether traditional music sits well with the modern concept of artists as custodians of their intellectual property rights underpins this thread all the way through. Underneath the opinionated verbosity and the normal struggle to disagree without falling out is a very real concern. We see ourselves rather romantically as custodians/inheritors of a tradition which would not function the way it does today if all composers of tunes had viewed their creations as potential income. Of course, any tune being played, whether the dots are or aren’t distributed on the session website, will either enter the tradition or not according to it’s merits. In the longer term, the ownership of that tune is a blip in the stream of the tradition. I assume that tunes created by professional musicians in the past were fairly jealously guarded while those musicians were alive as they were part of the tools of their livelihood. Thereโ€™s an interesting aside in Johnny Learyโ€™s book of tunes, where he described how the Chieftains came down and lifted their tunes, and he says ‘Fair play to them’. The Chieftains took those tunes, arranged them, and probably copyrighted the arrangements. I donโ€™t think they attapted to copyright the original tunes.
However there is a feeling that we don’t want anything to do with the current culture of copyrighting everything. We donโ€™t want the music to be named and owned, because the next thing that will happen is that Michael Jackson or Sony will come along and buy the rights, and steal it from us. Thatโ€™s why composers who consider themselves as artists rather than artisans within the tradition are regarded with some suspicion.
Sorry to add even more verbosity(!)
Mark
I hasten to point out that I’m not having a pop at whoever asked Jeremy to remove their composition from this site. I don’t know who they are, what the composition was, or why they wanted it removed.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

(I’d like to point out here that the word ‘attapted’ in the post above has a patent pending, so please do not attempt to use it.)

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

This is a very interesting point, and i also don’t know enough about this site or the copytright laws involved. What I do know is that the nature of tunes is to travel. People will learn them regardless of copyright laws. I think the line is at the dots. Printing and "selling" the tune, or hadning it out in dot form without due payment to the composer would not be something I would be comfortable with.

I hope this clears up well.

—Nomi

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Its not the tongadale is it? I’ve just logged on here, done a search for the tongadale and it ain’t on the site, but it is in google as being here. If it is, its a shame, cos its a good tune.

Whatever tune it is, surely it is inconsistent with the implied ethic of an aural folk musical tradition for a composer to enforce a copyright like that. Unless a version stinks of course! I can understand a publisher enforcing a copyright, but if you are into trad, then surely you can’t complain about the way the tune gets passed around, unless the copyright exist purely because you think that the dots should never be scrawled for any trad tune - the latter would at least be consistent.

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Copyright laws are out of context with traditional music. Traditional music is created to share, and commercial music is created for personal, and in many cases, corporate profits — two separate motives. Traditional artists would prefer to be recognized for their intellectual property, but commercial artists and their representatives are more concerned with the bottom line. These two concepts will find it difficult to meet without some conflict.

Having said that, the only reason I could imagine someone being concerned over a copyright regarding sheet music would be if they intended to publish a book of their own compositions. For this reason I hesitate to transcribe tunes for this site out of Paddy Oโ€™Brienโ€™s book, or Charlie Lennonโ€™s, Sean Ryanโ€™s, etc. Perhaps this is what the issue in this case was about.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

The tune in question is not traditional. It is a new work.

My hypothetical anceint Greek poem would not belong to the people simply because I wrote it in a tradtional *style.* The language used to express art does not effect the original qualities of the work protected under copyright.

My musical compositions do not belong to the people because I have chosen to write them in the styles of blues, country, romantic classical, baroque or…Irish.

Yes, the *style* is traditional and belongs to the people, which is why I was free to write them. The individual work is not and does not. I know I keep saying this, but as the current conversation illustrates it is a very important distinction.

The tale of Princess Aurora is traditional. Disney’s Sleeping Beauty is not.

If anyone wants to play my works, go right ahead (people do, Lord only know why). If anyone wants to publish them, you are obliged to ask, and I am within my rights to say no. They are not traditional.

Will, there are important social and legal differences between the book industry, the magazine/newspaper industry, the song industry, and the "tunes industry." It is also improtant to understand that the copyright on a published instantiation of a work is a seperate copyright from that on the work itself.

When Random House publishes a novel they own the copyright on the *book*, but do not typically own the copyright on the work, which is retained by the author, who licensed them printing and distribution rights. Magazine articles/Dummies books are typically works for hire and/or sold outright, and thus the rights on the work are owned by the person/company who footed the bill.

With music the rights for the work, print publication, publishing, distribution, performance and sound recording are all seperate legal rights. An author my license the rights to any one of these without effecting any of his other rights.

Tunes are not typically written for hire or sold outright for print publication. They are written for personal satisfaction and usually only have their rights transfered to another legal entity when recorded for a major label. The record industry is, shall we say, "rapacious." The larger record companies own their own publishing houses and bundle a requirement to sell all rights to a work into the recording contract, but such

For most tunes full rights are retained by the author. It is only those that have been recorded on an "artist unfriendly" label that are typically owned by some other entity and that entity is usually printed on the CD label.

By context I gather that does not apply to the specific tune in question.

KFG

Posted by .

P.s.

I find it somewhat amusing that on this forum, of all forums, people are complaining that they can’t publish the dots and that they must learn the tune through the aural tradition.

No one has ever said you can’t learn and play it.

KFG

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Crikey Kevin but you do love to lecture. ๐Ÿ™‚

I’m aware of those distinctions—I’ve been doing the writerly thing a long time. Just thought I’d introduce those ideas into the discussion for context, not direct analogy. Mostly as a way of saying that not everyone who makes a living off their intellectual property is so sensitive about ownership. It’s possible to earn your keep *and* give something to the world at large.

Reminds me of Buckminster Fuller who failed at many jobs until he finally thought not in terms of "How can I earn money?" but "What does the world need?" landed on the need for affordable, earth-friendly housing, and came up with the geodome house.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Around here I am rivaled only by yourself. ๐Ÿ™‚

And I made my post in much the same spirit as your own, to introduce concepts into the general discussion.

By the way, it’s even possible to earn your keep, give something to the world and retain rights. I’ve got a tune that anybody can do just about anything noncommercial they want with under a Creative Commons License and expect to release some recordings under the same. I’ve also been known to write Free Software.

Bucky was a sweety. I miss him.

KFG

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

LOL, the pulpit is yours.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

When I finally go down to the gazebo to play out in the open fresh air… if anyone sues me for palying a tune that isn’t mine…. I’m phoning KFG, Harmon and Associates to bail me out.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I’m wondering if someone would like to lecture on the idea of copyleft….

There may be an honourary Doctorate in it for the best address…..

and go….

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I bought some sheets of Jay Unger’s "Ashokan Farewell" after several folks I like to play with had crashes with different versions. I got the guitar, fiddle, harp and ensemble sheets from him, and I was glad to do it, and to use them. (Fun tune…)

It’s becoming a truism in contemporary pop music (but perhaps not a direct analogy to this situation), that if you have enough downloads of your tunes, free, from your website, you are doing enough right to name your own terms for a pretty large distribution deal thru the major distributors (not necessarily the Major Labels), and folks from Roots/Americana to HipHop are doing that successfully. It seems that there are lots of ways that ‘free music’ supports sales of music. I have studio clients who have done pretty well this way, but I haven’t done it myself. (I’m not prepared for THAT much success… LOL!!!!!!)

Also in American pop music, if a tune is really popular, all the cover bands in backwaters like Indiana play it in the bars, and folks can learn campfire versions of it, and I know that that supports sales, at least of recordings.

Copyleft! Hooray! I love it!

stv

http:cdbaby.com/Culchies

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Yes, but how many suburbs full of geodesic domes do you see?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Ah, but Zina, the point is that they are invisible. They’re everywhere. I have 23 of them in my kitchen, though I may have miscounted. They’re all over East Durham. Keep an eye out for them, but don’t expect to see them. Just like the mosquitoes.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I just typed a really long post but it’s vanished. Ah well, all I was basically saying was, I was totally disagreeing with Kerri and telling her that with her car/joyriding analogy she’s trying to compare - and apply the same rules to - 2 completely different things. For starters, a car is a material possession that you pay money for. A tune is not. Someone could come and nick your car or burn your house down and you’d never see it again. On the other hand, someone could take your tune and do whatever they liked to it, but in your head it would still be exactly the same. Nobody could change it unless they operated on your brain. Secondly, why does a tune have to be "owned" at all. Why does everything automatically have to be about money and possessions and "owning" things? If the tune is not owned by its composer, why do we have to say that it follows that it must be owned by someone else, like "us"? Isn’t a tune more abstract than that? Why can’t it just be something that can’t be owned? Why does everything in this world have to be defined in terms of it being "owned" by someone? We’re an arrogant lot, aren’t we?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

The undertaker’s just about finished with yur pinewood box, Dow… you gunna play that brit-box contraption, or is it just decorating yur knee? (chews on a sprig of straw as another tumbleweed rolls by)

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

(Pulls out a pistol, quick as lightning, and *BANG*! shoots the anglo player dead). "Looks like you could make better use of the box than I can old man".

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

missed me… ha ha… put yur pop-gun away… now… play the biox and we’ll see who can use complicated sharps or flats the best.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Damn. (Pulls out uzi and sprays irritating bearded anglo player, riddling him with bullets Hollywood-style until he is lying on the ground thoroughly dead. Vultures mew forlornly overhead). "Hah. Did you really think I brought you out to the desert to play concertina?!"

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Vultures mew?

Need to update my zoology knowledge…

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Aha, well they do in Hollywood movies - have you noticed? In real life I think only buzzards mew, I’m not sure. Anyway I shouldn’t have killed Jack. There was no need to cheat because I’d win anyway. Anglos don’t stand a chance when it comes to messing around with complicated sharps and flats. I hope he was wearing a bullet proof vest, or maybe he’s like those people in that film where they dodge the bullets, the Matrix that’s it.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I have to totally disagree with KFG. To say a style is of the people, but that a tune is not is, in the true sense of the word, absurd. The actual substance of a style is in fact the tunes, no more, no less, so it is absolutely and totally impossible to philosophically extracate the tunes from the style. However, there are individuals who do not come from the back ground in which a style has context, i.e. they are not Irish, or are not instilled with a deeper understanding of traditional music and where it has come from. Those who are from that back ground and write Irish tunes would never lay claim to them in such a contrary manner. However, those from outwith the traditional context, which is probably betrayed by a writing of tunes in so many contrasting styles (contray, classical, romantic, blues, irish), may indeed write tunes in an Irish style and lay such claim to them, but then that in itself negates its true (irish) style, because it ceases to have that spirit and ethic in which the style (and tunes that make up that style) came to exist. Such compositions must therefore be recognised for what they actually are… …which is prostitution.

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

You’re a hard man, Jamie!

"foreign Knuckleheads"
"self-righteous eejits"
"Prostitutes"

… the compliments are piling up!

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Greetings Jamie,

I have to say I am more in agreement with your philosophy in general however to say one is prostituting by merely composing a tune in a particular style, albeit not in the tradition as such has been in traditional Irish music, may be a bit unfair. I understand your defining โ€œStyleโ€ to include the selfless and generous sharing of the gift one has been given, however to my way of thinking this is the tradition of the music not necessarily the style.

To use your analogy would lead me to believe that if I seek payment for playing the music I too am guilty of prostitution. I donโ€™t see where playing a gig and accepting payment for such is any different than an itinerant of days gone by accepting shelter and a meal for having provided some dance music or song about events of far away places.

Having said this, not all think of the music in the same way. To some it is a product much like any other product. I know what my philosophy is concerning these differences however I am here to say that I neither possess, or wish to have the responsibilities that would come with possessing, the wisdom necessary to know which philosophies are absolutely right.

Great discussion, thank you JohnJ for its initiation.

Peace,
Ed

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

It is prostitution because it is the restricted selling of a tune in an Irish style to an interested audience, which is not your particular and peculiar interest (because your interest lies in country, classical, blues and Irish), and in a manner which is not consistent with the implied ethic of the aural tradition i.e. free to those who can learn well by ear and who have both the interest, motivation and effort so to do.

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I don’t know how accurate they are, but I’ve read accounts of traveling musicians in Ireland in the 1800s being very protective of their repertoire—being careful not to play a tune too many times lest someone memorize it and "steal" it from them. I was taught that generosity is an essential element of this tradition, but I suspect (since we’re dealing with our own species here), that other character traits have also long been part of the tradition, whether we savor them or not.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Wow… Dow’s brit-box sounds just like an uzi… yuk! I’m sure glad I play an Anglo instead — at least an Anglo sounds like a musical instrument. No wonder they’re so much more popular.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Will, I think being secretive about repertoire might have been going on back in the day when there wasn’t as many tunes to go around. ๐Ÿ˜‰ (jk)

But I do remember hearing from one of the headliners that came over for the Celtic Festival here in the mid 90s, that people who were top recording artists in Ireland were very protective of much of the material they intended to record. Evidently some disputes broke out between them regarding what was considered to be hijacked or stolen material.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

That was true Will but I’ve come across several musicians and singers who told me they got a good percentage of their repertoire by listening at the keyhole, the local repertoire they already had, but a travelling musician that had a circuit of one year would appear roughly at the same time every year and so the youngsters that weren’t allowed in the room set aside listened anyway. This happened certainly up until the 40’s.
Even the people inside listening were mentally agile enough to memorise a few tunes or songs. I heard also that some of the best of the travellers always kept some pieces for themselves unless they happened to hear really good players in which case they leaked out anyway. But there are always exceptions to the rule, John Doherty for example could go through his entire repertoire and once told me that many of his settings remained with him because most of his patrons thought he was a good fiddler but too Scottish……….

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Interesting, Ian. The stories I’ve seen were in the same context you mention—the legnths local players would go to to lift a tune or two from the traveling master.

We live in a remarkable time, when we have a parade of traveling masters (i.e., touring musicians) most of whom gladly give lessons and workshops and typically encourage the use of recording devices so we can all learn their tunes.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

It seems to me that the abc file, image file (music notation) and computer generated audio file would fall outside the scope of the tradition. Having those files removed seems to me, to follow to the letter, the tradition. The Internet itself, is not part of the tradition. Thus we will need to learn the tune aurally.

What surprises me is that we seem to hold these musicians/artists to a higher plane so to speak than we expect of ourselves. I am referring to the desire to eek out a living from their/our work. It is my most humble opinion, that there seems to be an sense of entitlement working here. I sense the attitude that we have a right to expect anyone teaching, playing, or composing this music giving, without any responsibility on our part. I respect anyoneโ€™s desire to earn their crust of bread. I refuse to believe that anyone should be expected to take a vow of poverty so to speak, simply because of my idea of what the tradition means/involves. I actually feel good about helping to support the musicians I respect and enjoy listening to, simply by buying their recordings, books etc. and going to their concerts. If/when I get a chance to meet & listen to you, the pints will be on me.

Deb.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

This has become the thread with a life of its own… ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"encourage the use of recording devices so we can all learn their tunes."

Or at least the ones they’ve either recorded already, or don’t intend to record. I still think they might be reticent about sharing material for up-coming projects.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Nice analogy Will, things don’t really change do they? It’s just the way we look at them.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

"I don’t know how accurate they are, but I’ve read accounts of traveling musicians in Ireland in the 1800s being very protective of their repertoire—being careful not to play a tune too many times lest someone memorize it and "steal" it from them."

This is one of the oldest of Irish musical traditions. It goes back at least to the traveling harpers and the "harper duel" which was based on how many tunes you knew. In fact it’s likely that the concept of "ownership" of tunes is an Irish invention and is the core reason *why* Irish music is an aural tradition, there is an innate cultural aversion to dots and teaching and "tune collecting" is so prevelant. Dots and teaching violate the "copyright" on tunes. I once wrote a long post about this in an "Ostrich Feathers" thread, but the Gods at it before it got posted.

By the way, I’m not at all sure why having received direct aural transmission (my blues comes directly from its inventors or those they personally taught) of more than one musical tradition denigrates any or all of them. The idea that one isn’t in the blues tradition, even though you learned blues from Spider or Lightnin’, because you also play Irish music is ludicrous and rather smacks of bigotry.

As for being a prostitute, it’s true that I perform for money, as did all the great pipers and harpers, but by that definition all business is prostitution and you likely earn your living by it without giving it a thought.

As for the tunes themselves I’ve never made a dime from any of them and, to date, have never sought to.

Thus I am just a slut like yourself (analogies can be double edged swords) giving it away for free to literally anyone who solicits me. If, however, someone else seeks to prostitute themselves using my lubricants I may well reserve the right to expect to be paid for them. They’re perfectly free to make their own if they don’t wish to use mine, and will likely create superior product.

As for the actual claim of "ownership", that is a matter of law entirely outside of my control. Copyright is legally innate, and one must explicitly and formally renounce one’s sole right to copy if one does not desire it. Hence ideas like "copyleft" and the Creative Commons.

Personally I’m in full agreement with Thomas Jefferson that copyright and patents are infringements on the right to free speach Nonetheless he came to see the social value of them, if the infringment were not allowed to go too far.

In its current form copyright is innate in the work and lasts for the life of the author plus 50 years (with local variations on the theme. America has expanded that to plus 70 years).

In its original form it had to be explicitly filed for and lasted for 14 years, renewable for another 14 if the *author* (not his "agent" or some other business entity) were still alive.

Thust authors were allowed to allow their works to go directly into the public domain, but could only restrict them from doing so for a maximum of 28 years.

I think that that system is well in keeping with traditional music. It is very close to the system my government promised me I would be living under when I was a teenager (they had doubled the time lengths to 28+28, which I think is excessive), but since that time they keep moving the goalposts so that, effectively, nothing ever enters the public domain anymore.

Kerri, you confusing the abstract analogy of "Intellectual Property" which is a business school derived phrase, not a legally derived one, with actual property. Property is that which you can be deprived of. When someone takes your car without your permission it is theft because you are denied the use of your car. If someone *copies* your car you are denied nothing and no theft has occured.

My short post (and hardly a record for me. I have made posts containg a single symbol, although I haven’t done that here yet) was to emphasis what the legal concept is by emphasising its construction. Copyright is not ownership. It is a *right* to *copy.* One cannot steal a copyright (its an abstract legal concept), you infringe upon it, and tradtionally such an infingement has been a simple civil matter, not a criminal one. All you can get for such an infringement is some money, which you must explicitly file for with the courts, whereas in the case of the car the state itself claims precedence and can send the thief to jail, even if he tries to pay for it after the fact.

Al, you beat me to it. That was the post I had intended to write when I came here today. ๐Ÿ™‚

Deb, I’m with you.

KFG

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I suppose that’s possible Jack, but maybe they’d teach a tune from an upcoming relase just to tease people into buying the cd.

What I’ve noticed at lessons and workshops is the teachers usually try to come up with a tune that none of the students knows, to level the playing field. Less often, they might pick a tune *everyone* knows so they can walk through how they come up with phrasing, variations, etc., even on some old war horse. And I’ve yet to meet a touring professional who didn’t have an almost limitless store of tunes to choose from for teaching.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Hmmm…I tend to think that the dots and other forms of writing the tunes down *are* all parts of the tradition—people (and nnot just collectors but players) have been doing that with these very tunes for generations, centuries even. because And since it’s a living tradition, maybe the Internet is becoming part of it too. There may be some odd side effects from that, but with sites like this, maybe cyberspace is just anothe way for the tradition to flourish. It supplements the face to face heart of the music, but doesn’t replace it.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Done is a rather different idea than accepted. Take prostitution, for instance. I imagine there would be a hue and cry if anyone deigned to suggest that prostitution were an "Irish Tradition" just because "it’s done."

Dots and teaching are a "new" tradition of only 300 years standing, still fighting for accpetabiltiy.

If this were not so I wouldn’t have had to write so many posts advocating dots and teaching.

KFG

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

KFG, If someone composes a tune, the normal way is to copyright it and send it on it’s way, but what do you think about the idea of selling it for a nominal fee, half a eurocent for example. (I’d prefer a traditional value like a farthing, but that would probably be illegal unfortunately). Other than perhaps having to pay taxes on the profits, would that get round the whole problem of copyright?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

In fact what about selling it for a cup of tea, sod the money?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Dots of one form or another have been accepted by some in the tradition for at least 300 years. There will always be luddites who resist improvements in our understanding. I’m sure 300 years from now there will still be players priding themselves on their lack of musical edufication, burying their fiddles in rosin, soaking their flutes in Guinness, and smoking unfiltered cigarettes. Just because some people persist in self-destructive habits doesn’t mean that contrarily good ideas aren’t well accepted among other members of the tribe.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I actually tend not to define what is or is not part of the tradition. I was playing a Devilโ€™s Advocate when suggesting that the abcs, sheet music, midi files or Internet, are not part of the tradition. I simply donโ€™t think you can hold onto those parts of a tradition you enjoy, while at the same time, expect the tradition to grow with the times, i.e. public domain vs copyright.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

What’s intersting is that today, we have people who share this musical tradition in very old, time-honored ways—sitting in the neighbor’s kitchen and itching out a few tunes. And we have people who share this musical tradition in radically new ways—tapping at their keyboards to each other across the time zones. And a range of behaviors and adaptations in between. I too would be hard pressed to draw a line in the sand and say one approach is traditional and another is not. But I’m happy to have the variety available to choose from and even experiment with.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

ITIM (Irish Traditional Internet Music)

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

LOL.

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Seems like a logical evolution from ETM (Electric TM).

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Incredible, hope I am still able in 20 years or so.

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Thanks for posting that link Bob. I particularly liked: "But who did? The answer isn’t always clear. Seeger said he was once told by Joseph Shabalala of the South African vocal group Ladysmith Black Mambazo that when the word "traditional" is used, "it means the money stays in New York."

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Insofar as I’m concerned, I prostitute myself daily in order to make the daily bread. ๐Ÿ™‚

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I’m the opposite—I use baked goods to win the ladies….
;o)

Posted .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I’m opposite—I baked ladies to win the goods. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

The narrow point I was making has been conveniently subverted or avoided. Performance was never the issue and the techinical aspects irrelevant to the underlying motive of the individual objecting to their tune being "copied" or written publically as dots.

Prositution: the second (i.e. non sexual) OED definition is to "sell unworthily", so not all business is prostitution at all, and does not absolutely imply for financial gain either. As an aside, as a doctor, though essentially selling my skill, I hope I don’t do so unworthily!! Furthemore, there is no reason why an implied ethic has to concur with the historical primacy which is being appealed for. As such, while I personally prefer learning tunes by ear, I think that sharing tunes electronically is not inconsistent.

Posted by .

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Dr. Jamie, dear, I hope you DO have a sense of humor in there somewhere… ;)

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

Pardon me for attempting to revive a happily dwindled thread, Jamie, but how is it you reckon your skills are worth paying potentially ruinous fees for while still believing the skills of a musician ought to be accessible to all for free?

Re: Tunes with a life of their own

I do not think charging ruinous fees is appropriate and indeed, I am opposed to private practice and think that healthcare should be free to all at the point of delivery irrespective of ones ability to pay taxes. If you don’t like the American system, vote in some more left wing politicians and stop spending your money on things like NASA, wars, arms and intelligence.

As for musicians, I have never stated that the skills of a musician should be accessible for free. I said that if someone writes a composition in an Irish style (presumably for an Irish traditional audience), then they should expect it to be spread or copied in a manner according to the general ethic of ITM.

On an alternative note, I actually believe that the saturation of popular and rock music, and perhaps even ITM, demands a radical cheapening of recorded music and a big increase in price for performance. Performance is where its at.

Oh, and I do have a sense of humour sometimes….. Just not when someone is getting off the hook having talked a load of rubbish.

Posted by .