Waltzes With Flutes

[Peter Duggan]

I don't understand what you are saying here, but it's interesting. Will you please explain?
It seems to trade on the ambiguity I mentioned, but perhaps I miss your point.

I'm saying that waltz cannot 'be defined in terms of the intrinsic (or more intrinsic) property of being music in 3/4 time'. Otherwise so can mazurka, polska, minuet, polonaise, ländler, bolero and goodness knows what else when there's plenty of 3/4 music (some of it much slower and not danceable at all) that can never be any of them no matter how hard you try!

[jim stone]

I don't understand what you are saying here, but it's interesting. Will you please explain?
It seems to trade on the ambiguity I mentioned, but perhaps I miss your point.

I'm saying that waltz cannot 'be defined in terms of the intrinsic (or more intrinsic) property of being music in 3/4 time'. Otherwise so can mazurka, polska, minuet, polonaise, ländler, bolero and goodness knows what else when there's plenty of 3/4 music (some of it much slower and not danceable at all) that can never be any of them no matter how hard you try!

Still not sure I understand you (especially the second sentence), but thanks.

[Gordon]

Man, are we overthinking this.

True waltzes were written to accompany a specific dance, during a specific time period where waltzes were waltzed. The rhythm hadn't just been invented - the dance had. Many modern 'waltzes' were written to be played in waltz time, but few were written with the expectation that the listeners would begin properly waltzing. I'm sure that's true of The Doors' Wintertime Love, which I've waltzed to while high, but that's another story. O'Carolan wrote tunes that can - and often are - played as waltzes, in spite of when he wrote them. Enough Guinness, and people waltz to them, so they're waltzes. I've heard marches played as polkas (2/4), and visa-versa - the original rhythms of any tune can be shifted around - happens all the time with traditional tunes. If a hornpipe is played as a reel (Fischer's, anyone), is it still a hornpipe. Nope, it's a reel now. The Gypsy Kings do a great cover of Hotel California, Spanish style. Hoedowns are rap music for white folks. Add a reggae beat to, well, almost anything, and you've got more smoke in the air than LA on a summer's day.

What the hell was I talking about?

[Peter Duggan]

Still not sure I understand you (especially the second sentence), but thanks.

One more try, Jim...

You appear to be arguing that, if a piece of bronze can be defined as a piece of bronze because it's a piece of bronze, a waltz can be defined as a waltz because it's in 3/4. But, while all pieces of bronze are pieces of bronze, not all 3/4 music is (or can be) waltzes. That's all!

Man, are we overthinking this.

Not convinced, Gordon...

Enough Guinness, and people waltz to them, so they're waltzes.

While that might work for your fairly 'safe' examples, it just doesn't hold true for 3/4 as a whole unless you permit far greater distortions of original tempo, feel/style and intent.

[jim stone]

So, if I may follow Gordon on this idea, suppose that tunes just like modern waltzes rhythmically and tempo-wise
had been played for a long time before anybody thought up the dance, The Waltz. And in fact these older tunes
were never danced to. The question might be asked, 'Were they waltzes?' The answer seems to be that in
a way they were and in another way they weren't. The way they were is that they had the rhythm and tempo
and whatever else structurally is included in modern waltzes; the way they weren't is that they weren't
used for waltzing. So we might say that they were waltzes in a way but not true waltzes.

We might define 'waltz' in terms of a certain musical structure, tempo, whatever (maybe 3/4 time is necessary
but insufficient); also we might define it so that, in addition, the tune is often used to waltz to. Then the term is
ambiguous, and we have things sorted out. In one sense of the word, O'Carolan's tunes were 'waltzes,' in another they
were not. I submit this is basically what we've done.

[Peter Duggan]

We might define 'waltz' in terms of a certain musical structure, tempo, whatever (maybe 3/4 time is necessary but insufficient);

Much better, Jim!

also we might define it so that, in addition, the tune is often used to waltz to.

Yep, we might, but (as Gordon also appears to acknowledge) it's not a prerequisite when you really can have 'listening' waltzes too.

[Nanohedron]

I think there are roughly two camps talking past each other here. We have, let us call them, the "functionalists" (a mazurka danced as a waltz qualifies as a waltz, a hornpipe played as a reel qualifies as a reel), and the "structuralists" (a mazurka danced by waltzers remains a mazurka, a hornpipe remains a hornpipe by virtue of its phrasing no matter how much caffeine you feed it).

Now admittedly, I'm definitely a structuralist by nature. But as I've said before, that hasn't stopped me from operating as a functionalist. I don't see real basis for controversy except insofar as sides form and each insists on rejecting the other view out of hand. It is entirely true that just about any 3/4 tune can serve, or be coaxed to fit, the waltz category in terms of playing for dancers. Same with hornpipes for reels. Function doesn't negate the validity or usefulness of a structuralist view, however. Nor does structuralism occupy a postion beyond seeking to know how the structure of a tune makes it what it is; those of us describing why a 3/4 planxty isn't a waltz may know what we're talking about, but that doesn't put us in a position to dictate that you can't use it as one, much as we might like to keep our own boundaries tidy. Neither does using it as a waltz render utterly moot its being actually a planxty. I think we'd all agree on that, however grudgingly. Jim asked why a 3/4 planxty isn't a waltz, and the respondents provided. It's nothing more than that.

The whole structuralist view rests on function, too. This is not a paradox. Take Irish highlands, for example: you can know what they are by their phrasing. If you've played one for people dancing the highland and paid attention, you know how the structure of a highland mirrors the dance itself. Yet you can use it for dancers when they want a reel. Personally I would add "in a pinch", because it's an awkward fit for my money, but if the job gets done and everyone's happy, fine. But to me it's still a highland. I don't see any ill in acknowledging that, whatever you do with it.

[I.D.10-t]

It'd funny you mention hornpipe, because historically I thought hornpipes were sometimes derived from 3/4 tunes. I wonder if historically tunes were reused and modified than they are now.

[Nanohedron]

It'd funny you mention hornpipe, because historically I thought hornpipes were sometimes derived from 3/4 tunes. I wonder if historically tunes were reused and modified than they are now.

Well, I have to admit I'm talking about Irish hornpipes as we know them now. IIRC, the English tradition does in fact include some 3/4 tunes. I don't know much about that, though. As for reused and modified, of course that must have been going on in the past just as we are doing even today.

[I.D.10-t]

My understanding was that the time signature was changed from 3/4 to 2/4 or 4/4.

Haven't found much on this, all I have to go on is page 73 of The Whistler's Pocket Companion.

A hornpipe is a step dance originally written in triple meter which changed to 4/4 or 2/4.

[Nanohedron]

My understanding was that the time signature was changed from 3/4 to 2/4 or 4/4.

You may be right. I vaguely seem to recall something along those lines myself; that would have been info gotten from someone who also plays the older types; again, those I heard were supposedly English tunes, and early ones according to her. Imagine my confusion when I first heard them.

[benhall.1]

My understanding was that the time signature was changed from 3/4 to 2/4 or 4/4.

Haven't found much on this, all I have to go on is page 73 of The Whistler's Pocket Companion.

A hornpipe is a step dance originally written in triple meter which changed to 4/4 or 2/4.

I think they're referring there to it being in a meter which includes triplets, ie something like a 6/8 or 12/8 time. Though there are, as Nano vaguely recalls, hornpipes in the English tradition in 'three in a bar' (paraphrasing how Nano put it). However, they're usually written out in 3/2 time, rather than 3/4. Mind you, once upon a time - look up 'hornpipe' in Wiki - there were hornpipes in 9/8.

[Nanohedron]

Right; thanks, Ben. Like I said, my recollection was pretty vague. I seem to recall the 9/8 thing, too, now. All very confusing to this lad of the modern era.

[Gordon]

So, if I may follow Gordon on this idea, suppose that tunes just like modern waltzes rhythmically and tempo-wise
had been played for a long time before anybody thought up the dance, The Waltz. And in fact these older tunes
were never danced to. The question might be asked, 'Were they waltzes?' The answer seems to be that in
a way they were and in another way they weren't. The way they were is that they had the rhythm and tempo
and whatever else structurally is included in modern waltzes; the way they weren't is that they weren't
used for waltzing. So we might say that they were waltzes in a way but not true waltzes.

We might define 'waltz' in terms of a certain musical structure, tempo, whatever (maybe 3/4 time is necessary
but insufficient); also we might define it so that, in addition, the tune is often used to waltz to. Then the term is
ambiguous, and we have things sorted out. In one sense of the word, O'Carolan's tunes were 'waltzes,' in another they
were not. I submit this is basically what we've done.

Yes, Jim, you followed me, and without roadmaps or hallucinogens!

We're overthinking things, Peter, particularly regarding trad tunes, which aren't always played in a traditional way - there are very rigid reasons why one tune is called something, and not something else, but tunes are often reworked to be something else, or written as a performance piece and not as a dance tune, or played too quickly for their original purpose, etc. So, when someone calls for a waltz, and the band plays an O'Carolyn as a waltz... Just go with it.

[Peter Duggan]

We're overthinking things, Peter, particularly regarding trad tunes

Aye, that'll be because I'm looking at them from a more pan-musical viewpoint (from where 3/4 can never be synonymous with waltz). Not (to use Nano's words) 'rejecting the other view out of hand' when I'm not against appropriate adaptations either (so there's probably more common ground here than you think), but simply saying Jim's most simplistic definition was too simplistic when there's so much 3/4 music far further removed from waltzability than anything mentioned here.

Think it works equally well (maybe better with the top Ds) on my Copley keyless flute, but afraid I was just more comfortable playing whistle for a quick demo!

Anyway, seeing this was also a flute thread, I've dared to make and put up a flute version of mine that's not striking me as too atrocious at this time of night (1:00am here) despite some feeling that the flute tone/vibrancy hasn't quite been caught by my kitchen recording. Whether or not I'll still be able to stand it in the morning's another matter, but it's here for now...

http://www.petestack.com/music/audio/sadie2.mp3