Minstrel Banjo

For enthusiasts of early banjo

This question is directed toward Jim Dalton, and anybody that has knowledge in this area. It seems that Early Music ensembles are able to reconstruct period performances. To the general public, there seems to be much agreement about the general presentation. Do these groups question themselves as much as we do? This music we play here is more recent in our collective memory than music of the Baroque and earlier. What gives them the confidence they have with no recorded examples to hear?

Views: 936

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Here's a chart of all the tunings in the tutors up to 1868:

Wise words Tim, thank you.

It seems that Early Music ensembles are able to reconstruct period performances. To the general public, there seems to be much agreement about the general presentation. Do these groups question themselves as much as we do? This music we play here is more recent in our collective memory than music of the Baroque and earlier. What gives them the confidence they have with no recorded examples to hear?

My mother was passionate about early music, from medieval to Bach.  I remember as a child my mother becoming amazed and beside herself when there became available LP recordings of early music consorts that were using reproductions of period instruments to play early music.  It seemed to me from how she was talking that this was not common then, and my mother was very excited and talked about what a wonderful thing it was.  I recall noting that it sounded more 'scratchy', textured, and slightly out of tune to me than the other records- I was about 5-8 or so.   So I'm thinking that before the late 50's, most musicians playing 'early music' may have simply been playing it on their modern instruments and weren't really thinking too deeply about the accuracy of the sound.  Or maybe they just didn't have all the resources to create period instruments that folks have now?



Strumelia said:

"My mother was passionate about early music, from medieval to Bach.  I remember as a child my mother becoming amazed and beside herself when there became available LP recordings of early music consorts that were using reproductions of period instruments to play early music.  It seemed to me from how she was talking that this was not common then, and my mother was very excited and talked about what a wonderful thing it was.  I recall noting that it sounded more 'scratchy', textured, and slightly out of tune to me than the other records- I was about 5-8 or so.   So I'm thinking that before the late 50's, most musicians playing 'early music' may have simply been playing it on their modern instruments and weren't really thinking too deeply about the accuracy of the sound.  Or maybe they just didn't have all the resources to create period instruments that folks have now?"

They've gotten much better at it after a few decades of both research and practice. People found out, among other things, that they needed to work as hard at playing the early instruments as the pros and virtuosi of modern instruments do.

Let's not confuse tuning for pitch.



Jim Dalton said:

People found out, among other things, that they needed to work as hard at playing the early instruments as the pros and virtuosi of modern instruments do.

Lol!

Thanks for the tunings chart Jim- that's really really helpful to me!

Of course not, Joel.

But notice that there is the minor key tuning (at several different pitches) in Briggs, the weird "Lon Moriss' Jig" tuning in the 1868 Buckley and the fact that several of the tutors include the raised bass tuning.  

Pitch is also an issue but not the main point.



Joel Hooks said:

Let's not confuse tuning for pitch.


A thought about the "double C" type of tuning that Converse heard:

Recall that he said that the African-American player who used it told his audience that he was "throwing the banjo out of tune." That implies at least a couple of things: 1) that he considered it unusual and, more importantly, 2) that his audience would have found it unusual.

My "take away" from this is that the standard arrangement of intervals in the two main pitch levels of the tutors was already recognized as standard at that time.

For reference, here is the Converse quote:

 "He was quite conceited as to his abilities (pardonable in banjo players, I believe), and to impress his listeners with a due appreciation of them, he would announce that such a trifling circumstance as the banjo being out of tune caused him no inconvenience and so, with a seemingly careless fumbling of the pegs, he would disarrange the tuning--”fro de banjo out a’ tune,” he said--but merely pitching the second string a semitone higher."

Carl Anderton said:

There were actually two common tunings during the early minstrel period that are documented.  That doesn't mean that other tunings weren't used; Converse claimed hearing a "double C" type of tuning in the early 1850's.  I think the point is the dearth of documentation in the early minstrel period for the rich variety of banjo tunings that became common later as the clawhammer style evolved out of the minstrel style.

Strumelia said:

John Masciale said:

Tablature in various forms was around at the time the instructors were written.  I believe the fact that they were not written in TAB was done for a conscious choice.  Perhaps it was to lend credence to the fact that the banjo was a serious instrument?  I doubt it.  I think that there was basically 1 tuning for the banjo, whereas today, within one modern instructor I have 4 or 5 tunings.  Reading standard notation with that many tunings can get confusing.  I think modern banjo instructors are written in TAB  to account for the fact that all of these different tunings are used.

That makes a lot of sense John!  Hard to write standard notation for varied tunings. 

But... when there are 1960's recorded or written interviews of  banjo player who were in their 70's and 80's at that time, some born in the 1800's, and they used various tunings since boyhood, talking about how they learned their tunes and learned how to play from their fathers, uncles, and even great uncles, well weren't those people they learned from playing their tunes and using the associated tunings in the 1800's?

I'm genuinely curious as to how it has been established that there was only one commonly used banjo tuning in the minstrel time period?  It doesn't make sense to me that the Hammons of WV for example would have learned their rich repertoire of both fiddle and banjo tunes from their father and uncle, making in depth use of very specific tunings, if it is said there was only one banjo tuning in use around 1860.  I don't mean to cause problems, just that I'm puzzled by a lot of these things.

Paul -- I wasn't implying in any way that the double C type tuning is dissonant -- nor do I think that either Converse or his subject were implying that. I think the story shows that the double C was UNUSUAL.

The guy was engaging in some busking behavior Not unlike a busker in Ireland who will (I have heard) play in the key of A flat (or something) on a key of D tinwhistle to impress the audience. It wors if there are enough around who know the usual way to play...

That is a valuable line of thinking Paul. Seeing notation to a somewhat unbroken aural tradition vs. cold reading of old notation. You have to really open your mind to the possibilities of the written page. That is part of my defense of not ragging on the tutors too hard. This community should be looking broad and wide....sometimes we have a pretty narrow view with our experimentation.

I like to play the old songs, a great many of which are covered in the tutors, in an ensemble setting which in my case means singing along to banjo, fiddle, and percussion accompaniment. I've been doing this a while and I used to question the the accuracy to a period performance a lot more than I do now. Its not that I've become complacent its just that I've seen what works over the years. Taking a song from the tutors, learning the lyrics and then playing it a lot with fiddle and tambo we arrive at an arrangement that sounds good and seems to entertain our audience. Later, after working up one of these songs I will sometimes hear other bands doing the same song, sometimes they sound similar, other times the arrangements end up being very different. Like Tim said we're trying to reconstruct the beast from a few bones. Thinking a bit more about it, I have greater performance confidence in the songs I've worked up from the tutors as opposed to ones where I've tried to come up with a good banjo part from a piano score. Dave Culgan



Jim Dalton said:


A thought about the "double C" type of tuning that Converse heard:

Recall that he said that the African-American player who used it told his audience that he was "throwing the banjo out of tune." That implies at least a couple of things: 1) that he considered it unusual and, more importantly, 2) that his audience would have found it unusual....

I think it only implies that he knew that audience (white/urban/sophisticated?) was not used to retuning or seeing/hearing other tunings being used...that he knew they might consider it unusual.  But it really just sounds like typical musican performer 'retuning patter' so commonly used to fill up the time when retuning.  As an example, if I were performing in front of a crowd of bluegrass fans (bluegrass banjo uses the standard G tuning almost exclusively), and I went to retune into a spooky sawmill tuning or to play Reuben's Train or something, I might make exactly the same comment to keep the audience amused while I retuned - that I was now 'throwing the banjo out of tune'.  That would certainly elicit a chuckle.   Plus, I would also enjoy thus teasing the bluegrass banjo players in the audience as well, knowing full well that they can only play in one tuning.   Oldtime musician Bruce Molsky often makes such subtle amusing comments to audiences too while he retunes, like 'Now I'm going to play the fiddle the way it's not supposed to be played...'  etc....and the audience laughs along.

For reference, here is the Converse quote:

 "He was quite conceited as to his abilities (pardonable in banjo players, I believe), and to impress his listeners with a due appreciation of them, he would announce that such a trifling circumstance as the banjo being out of tune caused him no inconvenience and so, with a seemingly careless fumbling of the pegs, he would disarrange the tuning--”fro de banjo out a’ tune,” he said--but merely pitching the second string a semitone higher."

Strumelia--

I have jumped into this particular hornet's nest before--I strongly feel there had to have been a parallel group of banjo players learning by ear, as were all the original white minstrel guys.  There is a book by Cece (Cecelia) Conway about the development of regional styles in the Appalachians that explores the development of early styles and repertoire.  It's called something like "African Banjo Echoes in the Appalachians."  It's a really well researched book and I believe it's still in print.--Rob Morrison

Strumelia said:

One point I sometimes wonder about is this-

The tutors were written in standard music notation.  Obviously then, they were aimed at an audience of banjo students who could read sheet music.

Today, most banjo 'tutors'/books are written in banjo TAB, because 'most' banjo students today don't read standard notation.

Doesn't the general population today have a higher degree of education than was true in the 1860's?

I wonder what percentage of total banjo players players back then actually read sheet music and standard notation?    Do you think a higher percentage of them read music in those days as opposed to today?   I personally suspect that larger numbers of banjo players learned/played by ear or in person back then rather than bought and studied banjo tutor books and/or took formal lessons in urban environments.  Hard to know.

What we do know is that the tutors were aimed at an audience that was educated enough to read music and hopefully well heeled enough to take lessons.  To me that represents one segment of all players, as is also true today.

All this suggests to me merely that it would be wise to view the tutors as representing a certain portion or category of banjo playing audience at the time, and that it might make sense to assume there were also other regional styles also active then, but not documented in the formal way that has enabled us to see surviving instructional method books.  After all, we do know there have been many distinct regional American styles of banjo playing existing right up until recently, as demonstrated in recordings like Mike Seeger's Southern Banjo Sounds and Black Banjo Songsters and others.  I feel it may be all too easy to come to view the tutors as representing the whole picture of how banjos were played at the time.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

About

John Masciale created this Ning Network.

© 2024   Created by John Masciale.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service