dannyboy Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) Does this discussion/debate sound familiar? This is from Rolling Stone Magazine: http://tinyurl.com/nrfd4jy "...But as with any family, there's often disagreement. Purists decry the use of drums while progressive musicians continue to push the boundaries. "There are hardcore people that [think] if you even have a microphone you're way too far out," Del McCoury says with a laugh. "I exaggerate, but you have the hardcore folks. They can listen to whatever they want to but you need variety. You need to have that. You've got to have young people coming in all the time. That's what brings young people in, more progressive sound and variety. I just like variety in music. I think it's a good thing." Most musicians are generally supportive of innovation in the format, but some fans have a more restrictive view. "There's some hardcore traditional fans out there who really think that the best bluegrass ever recorded was in the late Forties, early Fifties and that nobody can really improve on that," says Cardwell. "That's their favorite, and God bless them, they're entitled to that perspective. Part of the reason for these strong feelings is they treasure the music so much. It's more than just a casual interest, almost a passion, a religious fervor. People who just really love bluegrass music treasure it so much that they want to hold onto it very tightly and not let it change because they're afraid if we don’t keep it the same, then it'll disappear in a generation or two." Sounds like us, yes? Edited December 10, 2014 by dannyboy 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 "There's some hardcore traditional fans out there who really think that the best bluegrass ever recorded was in the late Forties, early Fifties and that nobody can really improve on that," says Cardwell. Of course, if those fans can be wrong, then they can also be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Does this discussion/debate sound familiar? This is from Rolling Stone Magazine: http://tinyurl.com/nrfd4jy "...But as with any family, there's often disagreement. Purists decry the use of drums while progressive musicians continue to push the boundaries. "There are hardcore people that [think] if you even have a microphone you're way too far out," Del McCoury says with a laugh. "I exaggerate, but you have the hardcore folks. They can listen to whatever they want to but you need variety. You need to have that. You've got to have young people coming in all the time. That's what brings young people in, more progressive sound and variety. I just like variety in music. I think it's a good thing." Most musicians are generally supportive of innovation in the format, but some fans have a more restrictive view. "There's some hardcore traditional fans out there who really think that the best bluegrass ever recorded was in the late Forties, early Fifties and that nobody can really improve on that," says Cardwell. "That's their favorite, and God bless them, they're entitled to that perspective. Part of the reason for these strong feelings is they treasure the music so much. It's more than just a casual interest, almost a passion, a religious fervor. People who just really love bluegrass music treasure it so much that they want to hold onto it very tightly and not let it change because they're afraid if we don’t keep it the same, then it'll disappear in a generation or two." Sounds like us, yes? can this be pinned? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) I like this quote from the article: "Our music is what we hear. We have a 'big tent' approach to all of that. We feel like if we support all spectrums of the music, then that will help the industry grow. It will help get that music out to wider audiences." So her bluegrass festival welcomes both older and newer styles of music--it doesn't demand that the former be abandoned in favor of the latter. As long as drum corps continues to do that, I bet most of us would be happy enough. Edited December 10, 2014 by N.E. Brigand 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleran Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 The difference being that bluegrass doesn't have a distinct small group of individuals promulgating standards by which each bluegrass group will be judged, via which process all the bluegrass groups would tend towards homogeneity as they played towards that small group's expectations instead of merely playing to the audience of people who want to be entertained. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Matczak Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 The difference being that bluegrass doesn't have a distinct small group of individuals promulgating standards by which each bluegrass group will be judged, via which process all the bluegrass groups would tend towards homogeneity as they played towards that small group's expectations instead of merely playing to the audience of people who want to be entertained. score! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 The difference being that bluegrass doesn't have a distinct small group of individuals promulgating standards by which each bluegrass group will be judged, via which process all the bluegrass groups would tend towards homogeneity as they played towards that small group's expectations instead of merely playing to the audience of people who want to be entertained. who says the new rules wont help entertain? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reeses0316 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 The difference being that bluegrass doesn't have a distinct small group of individuals promulgating standards by which each bluegrass group will be judged, via which process all the bluegrass groups would tend towards homogeneity as they played towards that small group's expectations instead of merely playing to the audience of people who want to be entertained. Is it a direct apples to apples comparison no, but major record labels do have similar control to the small group your describing as to what they think will be entertaining and what will sell, branding, etc. Solo artist and bands are hardly free to produce whatever they want when their under contract. Every corps has a distinct identity under the current system. If anything, corps under the old tick system were more homogenous because the system was restrictive in comparison to what is allowed now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleran Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Scene: SoundStage 1, during filming of group's new Bluegrass video Lead Singer: I am a man of constant sorrow ... Producer: Cut! Hey, Fiddler, you're just standing there playing .... can't you do some squats, or leg kicks while you're doing that? Come on, spice this thing up!!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyboy Posted December 22, 2014 Author Share Posted December 22, 2014 Scene: SoundStage 1, during filming of group's new Bluegrass video Lead Singer: I am a man of constant sorrow ... Producer: Cut! Hey, Fiddler, you're just standing there playing .... can't you do some squats, or leg kicks while you're doing that? Come on, spice this thing up!!!! Ha. See "Lindsey Stirling" on Youtube. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.