Nanohedron wrote:
benhall.1 wrote:
The best, most acceptable of either have often, in practice and in my experience, been the loudest.
Best and most acceptable? To whom, and in what situation?
If I were backing up a session of three or four by banging away as loudly as I could, I'm pretty sure the others would soon force-feed me my Gizmo via my nether end.
I ought to nail my colours firmly to the mast, I suppose, as background. I am of the school of thought that holds that any non-melody instrument can never add to the musical experience. The best they can hope to do is not to detract. This is strictly referring to sessions, not gigs.
With that caveat, and another - that I'm only trying to answer Nano's question, and not any others that may arise - it'll probably become apparent where I'm coming from. I think you have to separate out small sessions and bigger sessions. I'm going to take an arbitrary figure of 4 or less melody players to mean "small". Anything more I'm counting, for these purposes, as "bigger".
Firstly, for small sessions. I have, on very rare occasions indeed, enjoyed the contributions of guitarists and bodhrán players in small sessions. They've been exceptional players, and it really is a rare thing. So rare that, on the whole, I'm just much happier, in small sessions, if there's no 'accompaniment' at all. Sorry, Nano.
For bigger sessions, guitarists and bodhrán players can be fun. But they really have to be heard. If there's a dull rumble coming from somewhere in the corner, or the pathetic scraping noise of a thinly hit guitar, then it's just irritating. If you're going to play it, play it like you mean it.
None of the above applies for gigs, or the occasional 'solo' or small group numbers that sometimes occur during the course of an evening's session. In those cases, it's all about the particular performance, and the above may well not apply.