Brian, I think Pete meant that "peserving" something implies by definition that its dead. Smoked salmon are no longer living fish, sauerkraut is not living cabbage, etc

quote:

---

Originally posted by DougD

Brian, I think Pete meant that "peserving" something implies by definition that its dead. Smoked salmon are no longer living fish, sauerkraut is not living cabbage, etc

---

Yes, I see.

But Doug, sauerkraut is living dead cabbage...sorta like Shroedinger's Cat...except easier to explain...the cabbage might be dead as a plant, but the little happy microbes that bubble and squeak make it a living dead cabbage. Lol. So...if Old music is like Old cabbage, all we need is a buncha happy microbes to make it teeming and bubbly...and alive, in a different way.

I'm remembering from logic class that analogy is the weakest form of argument...lol.  Have we proved that at least?  I guess the other thing we've known and have proven many times is that it's just really hard to talk about music and make oneself understood.

When I was growing up they used to preserve the extra tomatoes...now that was good. Nothin' in this world like tomato preserves on a buttered biscuit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

I'm remembering from logic class that analogy is the weakest form of argument...lol.  Have we proved that at least?  I guess the other thing we've known and have proven many times is that it's just really hard to talk about music and make oneself understood.

---

What kind of logic class was that? Every great philosopher has used analogies heavily to make arguments. I don't know how you could read Aristotle without analogies, and he was immortalized as THE philosopher by Aquinas. And how would we have the Divided Line and the Allegory of the Cave in Plato without analogy? 
 

Again, to preserve may mean to keep something that's no longer alive from rotting, but when not applied to a body or food, it means to keep something alive, like a tradition. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

if Old music is like Old cabbage, all we need is a buncha happy microbes to make it teeming and bubbly...and alive, in a different way.

---

Peggy, I think WE are the microbes in your analogy!  Makes sense, old time is bigger than all of us, requires us to interact with it for it to be anything at all (push play, draw the bow tec.). Brilliantly delicious sauertunes!

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Violin Beautiful

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

I'm remembering from logic class that analogy is the weakest form of argument...lol.  Have we proved that at least?  I guess the other thing we've known and have proven many times is that it's just really hard to talk about music and make oneself understood.

---

What kind of logic class was that? Every great philosopher has used analogies heavily to make arguments. I don't know how you could read Aristotle without analogies, and he was immortalized as THE philosopher by Aquinas. And how would we have the Divided Line and the Allegory of the Cave in Plato without analogy? 
 

Again, to preserve may mean to keep something that's no longer alive from rotting, but when not applied to a body or food, it means to keep something alive, like a tradition. 

---

I think "being influenced by it" is more accurate. Rather than "preserving it".... Things move on.Also things don't bubble much in Resin. And you can throw all your records in a heep, we dont need filing systems any more. just search for them with modern tech. But you can still love them, and be influenced by them in your own "live" rendition of a tune.

An old Boy who had been through both world wars and reached 110 years old was interviewed, and when asked what was the best thing he had learned in his long life said,  "30 years ago when i was 80, i learned to accept change"

Pete...I think analogy is useful for discussing things and bringing them into a context that people can easily relate to. I'm not knocking it, and always speak in a way to humor myself, at times...but I do distinctly remember in logic class that analogy is a weak form of argument...you need something with more verification to present a strong argument. I was sorta kidding anyway, but as far as I remember from logic, studying philosophy in college...the weakest form of argument is analogy, as useful as it is for discussion. That's all.

Billy...it's great to think of ourselves as the little microbes that keep the tunes bubbling...lol. I do like that idea.

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

Pete...I think analogy is useful for discussing things and bringing them into a context that people can easily relate to. I'm not knocking it, and always speak in a way to humor myself, at times...but I do distinctly remember in logic class that analogy is a weak form of argument...you need something with more verification to present a strong argument. I was sorta kidding anyway, but as far as I remember from logic, studying philosophy in college...the weakest form of argument is analogy, as useful as it is for discussion. That's all.

Billy...it's great to think of ourselves as the little microbes that keep the tunes bubbling...lol. I do like that idea.

---

Deduction is considered a stronger argument than analogy. Analogies are useful for drawing connections in conversations, which is what we've been doing. 

I love you fiddle geeks

I had to take so much logic I try to avoid it entirely by this point...try to be totally illogical so I don't have to think about it anymore...lol. Not really...just kidding. I did take a lot of those types of classes though, which always got me some good minimum wage jobs...lol.

Maybe the distinction here is between philosophy and science. Analogy is very useful for discussing things that may be possible. Science is more specific and deals with the probability or the likelihood that something is true. In that sense this discussion is philosophical. Analogy is a useful tool here, and perhaps the strongest.

In the sense that analogy is not the direct employment of facts, it would be less powerful in an argument where quantifiable things were being compared. In a legal discussion or a scientific inquiry, what Peggy described is admittedly more valid. In a discussion of concepts, analogy has greater impact and usefulness. Conceptual or philosophical arguments can be better understood through the use of comparison for the purpose of illustration.

I’m not sure if the discussion originally started as a genuine search for a direct answer or if it was more of an invitation to a larger discussion about the Old Time world, but it has grown into one that considers things such as the identity and future of the genre as well as thoughts on how to maintain or encourage it. I don’t think there’s much of a direct answer to the original question of why there are more people on the banjo forum, other than that more people have simply signed up. As soon as as ask why that is the case we begin speculating and dealing in concept rather than fact, as we don’t have access to any hard data that will explain the problem other than the numbers of subscribers and active members.

I’m enjoying the discussion. There may not be any clear answers to these questions, but I do think it’s good to consider them, especially when Old Time seems to be struggling, at least to some extent.

Since Old Time music is represented equally by both fiddles and banjos, I don't think the original poster was wondering about the music or whether it's endangered. He seemed to be asking why there're fewer of us than them. I think it's because we're more refined. Banjo players don't worry about perfect 5ths or whether or not vibrato is a good thing. They probably don't even know what those things are.

Learning to play fiddle takes a certain gumption, and a belief that you can be better than you are. Fewer people are up to the task. Banjo players are commoners, riffraff. Apparently anybody can play those things.

Still, we need them! But we only need a few. Maybe the top ten percent. The rest can just play with themselves.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Wood

Since Old Time music is represented equally by both fiddles and banjos, I don't think the original poster was wondering about the music or whether it's endangered. He seemed to be asking why there're fewer of us than them. I think it's because we're more refined. Banjo players don't worry about perfect 5ths or whether or not vibrato is a good thing. They probably don't even know what those things are.

Learning to play fiddle takes a certain gumption, and a belief that you can be better than you are. Fewer people are up to the task. Banjo players are commoners, riffraff. Apparently anybody can play those things.

Still, we need them! But we only need a few. Maybe the top ten percent. The rest can just play with themselves.

---

Just returned from a very hot but breezy outdoor gig. To my delight, I visited FHO only to find the conversation continues to wonder (wander?). Then I read this and it brings us back to OP with some solid laughs. Bravo! 

...and we still don't know how to say what kind of music it is we play...lol.

Fiddle music changes. Thats a fact. Anyone think the old timers recorded in the 20's played the tunes EXACTLY like their granpappy did? Who says that those versions are the seminal version of a given tune? I for one, when I learn a new tune, try to make it my own - who wants to blindly parrot another player? I suppose there ARE those who pride themselves on being a human tape recorder, playing a tune with such care and precision. And what about regional stylistic differences? Think those are geographically isolated? How many versions of Soldiers Joy are there? Which one is real old time, which is the imposter? Spend more time playing and less time philosophizing on what you play.

Yes, one of the greatest pleasures of fiddle music is hearing a new tune, learning to play it, and then getting into a long (unending?) process of building and developing it. Old time fiddler Ralph Blizzard said that he never played a tune the same way twice.
That’s it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by wrench13

 I for one, when I learn a new tune, try to make it my own - who wants to blindly parrot another player? 

---

You are right, versions of tunes will vary. My personal problem with this is in knowing when my own creative impulses are truly at work when I start by playing a new tune my own way. I think that the advice to never copy, and to make a tune your own can be an excuse for a mediocre player (me?) to simply play melodic lines as you always do, basically following your own well worn ruts. It makes practicing easier because you don't have to memorize lines, you just have to get the contours. Instead, I try to improve by honoring the quirks that make the piece I am learning interesting in the first place. With the internet there are a great many sources for most tunes. I'll pick one and learn its note choices and phrasing, and in doing so improve my abilities and add to my own bag of tricks for jamming and improvising. There is great value to me in learning another's way of doing a tune to start with. Once I have it down I can let some of it go, if I want, or not.

I'm no tape recorder merely repeating other players. I couldn't do that if I tried. But I try to learn what they're doing when I learn a tune. I was a "good" but lazy guitar player in my youth, playing everything my own way. Then I started "copying" more music when I started playing other instruments later in life, and it helped me a lot. Maybe not necessarily so for everybody, but something to think about when analyzing one's own playing.

Tho me it's kind of strange ( for lack of a better word) seeing it only took 8 postings after the initial question, for the assumption popping up it was all about OT banjo and/or fiddle.

In my world, the place where a fiddle really shines would be in a (somewhat progressive) Bluegrass band. I know that I never will reach that level anymore ( lagging 50+ years behind my mandolin- and banjoplaying), but yet, that is what attracts me and really floats my boat. I'm not learning a tune, I'm learning a break to a tune or song for that matter... Then the real work starts, learning the various back up parts....

I learned so much from 22+ years at the Banjo Hangout and I never would have been the player I'm now or, for example, being able setting up an instrument to it's peak. A long, but satisfying way...

In spite of having picked up valuable ideas over here (I'm still grateful for those!), it's not the same.

I feel FHO is simply too focussed at one group (OT/folk) and as such, sometimes weeks will pass until I see something that tickles my curiousity. On the BHO, that would be at least every other day.... Look at the difference in the 'Playing the banjo' or 'Playing the fiddle' categories. I once suggested adding different kind of style forums, analog to BHO, to this 'playing' header, but: 'no, we don't need that....'

This fully explains to me the difference in numbers of participants.

Please note that this is just an observation, no criticism.

To be sure, my thoughts on this topic might already be there in this thread, but one of the most glorious aspects of Old Time Fiddling is its adherence to oral tradition. Putting it another way, OT Fiddling hearkens back to a world that existed before cultures learned to write, and...in keeping with this...artistic utterances gained the ability to became largely frozen in time. Sure, we try to play the tunes exactly the way they were played, way back when, but of course we can't and we aren't.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lonesome Fiddler

To be sure, my thoughts on this topic might already be there in this thread, but one of the most glorious aspects of Old Time Fiddling is its adherence to oral tradition. Putting it another way, OT Fiddling hearkens back to a world that existed before cultures learned to write, and...in keeping with this...artistic utterances gained the ability to became largely frozen in time. Sure, we try to play the tunes exactly the way they were played, way back when, but of course we can't and we aren't.

---

This is exactly what I meant....

Fiddling? It must be Old Time by default....

Or has something been lost in translation? Remember, I'm not a native speaker.

Edit: I my earlier posting I wrote 8 answers/reactions, that should have been 7.... 

quote:

---

 

---

This is exactly what I meant....

Fiddling? It must be Old Time by default....

Or has something been lost in translation? Remember, I'm not a native speaker.

---

You have a point. I think there was more variety in players and styles on the hangout years ago. I miss that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Wood

quote:

---

 

---

This is exactly what I meant....

Fiddling? It must be Old Time by default....

Or has something been lost in translation? Remember, I'm not a native speaker.

---

You have a point. I think there was more variety in players and styles on the hangout years ago. I miss that.

---

My question would be: 'Why?'

quote:

---

Originally posted by RB-1My question would be: 'Why?'

---

The forums here aren't divided by styles. On Banjo Hangout there are several categories listed. As people come across Fiddle Hangout some might not stay because they don't see a place for them. I think a few categories by style would be in order. Why has it never been done?