pure drop opinion of martin hayes

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Jul 04, 2004 10:03 pm

djm wrote: Similarly with Martin Hayes' attempts at circulation, he has little or no publicity, and as you noted, plays every bathroom and beerstall that will have him. Chieftains, Planxty, etc. have been highly publicized all along. I don't think you can even compare these two streams of recordings at all; one being heavily commercialized for a wide audience, the other being for the hardy dedicated few.

djm

I could not have put it any better myself.

j dasinger · Post by **j dasinger** » Sun Jul 04, 2004 11:18 pm

DJM, have you ever been to one of Martin's live shows? You ought to go hear him if you haven't. When I saw MH the first time, I had no idea who he was other than some irish fiddler guy. My knowledge of ITM at the time was limited to uillean pipers. Well, all I can say about that show was that he really brought the goods. If I hadn't already been sitting on the ground (outdoor show) I would have been blown out of my chair. Actually, that's probably a bad analogy, as what was great about his playing was the emotion he brought to his performance. His playing was bursting with "personality." Not flashy or "high energy" necessarily. I was actually dumbfounded at the time that a guy playing a solo fiddle could keep me enraptured for an hour and a half. Anyway, I wouldn't trust just hearing the CD's, you have to see him live. If you have and just don't care for his playing, well, fair play to you, we all like different things.

I think the argument about whether he is "pure drop" or not is pretty useless. I mean, why bother? Would that make his music greater? If you don't like his music, would you suddenly like it more if the appointed representatives pronounced it "pure drop?" At the show I saw, he told the audience that he didn't call himself an "irish" musician per se because he pretty much exclusively plays Clare repertoire. So he considers himself a "Clare" musician first and foremost. He may not be pure drop, but I think in 100 years his name will still be mentioned whenever the music of Clare is talked about. I personally don't bother with all the labels. I don't even like ITM, I like great music. I happen to find a lot of great music in the ITM world, but being ITM or "trad" or "Pure Drop" doesn't automatically make it great music. The musician and the performance he or she gives is what makes it great.
james

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:28 am

j dasinger wrote:
. So he considers himself a "Clare" musician first and foremost. He may not be pure drop, but I think in 100 years his name will still be mentioned whenever the music of Clare is talked about. I personally don't bother with all the labels. I don't even like ITM, I like great music. I happen to find a lot of great music in the ITM world, but being ITM or "trad" or "Pure Drop" doesn't automatically make it great music.
james

The majority of Itrad is not Clare tunes so its a mighty small selection he'd be playing, but OC no such exclusions exists. In Clare they embrace anything that is musical, a place where musicians arrive and stay, if they are let do it --- ahem ie if they can play well.

djm · Post by **djm** » Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:45 am

Hi, James. Yes, I have attended one of his concerts, but I hestitate to say I've seen him "live".

Its not just the tunes so much that are Clare, but the way they are played, with only a modicum of ornamentation, and a bent to playing the tunes in a sort of mournful fashion. However, dragging things out as slowly as he does is Martin Hayes style, not Clare style. I agree that when he cranks the speed up and starts playing normally he is a fine player.

djm

colomon · Post by **colomon** » Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:02 am

j dasinger wrote:I think the argument about whether he is "pure drop" or not is pretty useless.

Heck, it's completely useless, because the "pure drop" label itself is useless.

Take Music at Matt Molloy's, to use an example CD that lots of people have. If you listen to track 16, it starts off as a trio (I think) two flutes and one fiddle, then after one time through the second tune, a bunch of other people jump in, including bouzouki and guitar. But if you're not listening carefully for that, what you hear is great music, all the way through the track. It goes from pure drop to not, and who but a pedantic fool cares?

I love the music of Peter Horan. I have recordings of him where it's just his flute and his foot tapping. I have recordings of him as part of the duet with Fred Finn, some where it's just the two of them and some with someone backing them on this or that. I have recordings of him as part of the trio that appears on Music at Matt Molloy's. I have recordings of him as part of the mob scene on Music from the Coleman Country, complete with country-western band and organ in the background. And though I have no recordings of it, I know he played in a ceili band as well.

Now, as a musician, I especially love the solo recordings, because I can listen to what he is playing without anything else in the way. As a listener, I adore the duet recordings, because the two of them were a great team. But all of the recordings are exciting music and capture some aspect of his playing.

The pure drop thing is a shortcut to get you pointed in the right direction -- generally speaking, one good musician playing alone is more true to the tradition than five dudes playing complicated arrangements. But elevating it to a holy thing is just silly.

(That said, I don't find Martin Hayes's playing particularly exciting...)

djm · Post by **djm** » Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:32 am

Pure Drop as a label doesn't necessarily mean a solo performance, especially now-a-days. It refers to what the lead instrument is doing. Peter Horan is excellent for sure, and would easily be classified as Pure Drop, whether he is accompanied or not. If he is the lead instrument, then it is what he is playing and how he plays it that counts. Martin Hayes drifts in and out of what could be termed Pure Drop fiddling (maybe just to show that he can), but he doesn't stay there long. I agree that I don't find his personal style too interesting for very long - just my personal tastes, of course.

djm

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:22 am

Mark Cantor wrote:Bloomfield, what's up with your comments about open-mindedness and "then we should change the tradition so he becomes..."? You have a license to psychoanylize? What makes you think my comment was a "call" for anything? It was a good-natured description of what I like, not what you or anyone else should like. I don't care whether you think the way anyone else in the world thinks. And "need for validation"? I thought this was a discussion board. Why the personal attacks, man? Snapshot, shnapshot. I'll choose my words better and use APA style next time I join the Academia here.

Ciao.

Mark C,
sorry if I've offended you. I am not claiming to know any better than the next guy. I didn't think I had attacked you personally, and apologies if I did. I thought this was discussion board, too, and that I was discussing things.

VermifugeTheRed · Post by **VermifugeTheRed** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:50 am

::peeks shyly in:: Sorry to interrupt... ::whispers:: But what's "pure drop" mean...? Sorry, I'm new to this--y'all are the first musicians I've really had any contact with...

----Bonnie

Joseph E. Smith · Post by **Joseph E. Smith** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:18 am

RRRUUUNNN!!!! Bonnie if you value your sanity, run away as fast as you can!!!

I take 'Pure drop' to mean a specific manner of playing (embellisments, speed, Phrasing and so on) pertaining to a certain style or area where a tune originates, and sticking as close as possible to that manner of playing it... keeping the tune or tunes as close to an original setting as one can.

djm · Post by **djm** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:07 pm

Its too late. We have you in our eeevvvilll clutches. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

Pure Drop is a term that is bandied about (sometimes snidely and with nasty overtones) meaning the way just plain folk in Ireland played their own music before it was commerciallized and repackaged for the international market.

Vermi, your other threads and signature point to your preference for the Chieftains and Clancy Brothers/Tommy Makem. These are all very commercialized versions of ITM. Just because there a lots of Irish people who like them too doesn't mean they are actually playing/singing in a style that is true to the music's humble origins, i.e. Pure Drop.

So you get the "purist" camp who disavow anything but Pure Drop. There are those who like the modern distilling of older Pure Drop stuff. Then you get those who want to legitimize what they play or like by calling it Pure Drop but it ain't. And then you get people who like both the older Pure Drop style and the modern commercial styles. This last group are, of course, a bunch of wankers that everybody else is against.

djm

Joseph E. Smith · Post by **Joseph E. Smith** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:34 pm

djm, you forgot the camp I belong to, they're the oafish kind of guys who couldn't give a rat's ass about the arguments for or against pure drop. It is what it is. I like it, and that other 'schmaltzie stuff' too.

On another note, I wouldn't be too worried about what you play at an SCA event. These folks may know attire and weapons, but I haven't met any yet who could describe 'period' music. Play your whistle...without any plastic visible...and make the tunes such that they are your own, and you shouldn't get into trouble....much....

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:37 pm

The Pure Drop is also a name applied to a reel (which is more commonly known as Hand Me Down the Tackle), a bit of a favorite among pipers, I think. Someone once told me they heard the Honeymoon Reel also referred to as The Pure Drop, but I wouldn't know. The Honeymoon Reel, by the way, is a hornpipe and not a reel. All this should tell you a bit about pure drop right there.

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:43 pm

djm wrote:So you get the "purist" camp who disavow anything but Pure Drop.

What are you smoking djm? (Can I have some?).

If someone "disavows anything but Pure Drop," kick them or tell me and I'll kick them. It's never about that, the discussions are always about people wanting to call Riverdance Irish Trad or Sinead O'Connor sean nos and getting offended when someone tells them that, no, that stuff isn't particularly traditional at all.

Cayden · Post by **Cayden** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:34 pm

Bloomfield wrote: The Honeymoon Reel, by the way, is a hornpipe and not a reel. All this should tell you a bit about pure drop right there.

ARe you sure it's not more like .. a fling? :roll:

djm · Post by **djm** » Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:08 pm

Bloom, getcher boots on!

I was not ascribing "purist" to anyone in particular, simply listing the many types of comments one receives when daring to use the term "Pure Drop" to describe a piece of music or style of playing. I like lots of different stuff, too, but I do tend towards the older, non-commercial stuff - just my personal tastes, of course.

But this thread started out asking whether what Martin Hayes does is Pure Drop, and I still would say no, what he does is pure Martin Hayes, and that it should not be attempted to identify his style with the older styles or try to legitimize what he does by calling it Pure Drop. I don't think he does, so why should anyone else?

djm

Chiff and Fipple Forums

pure drop opinion of martin hayes

Who-what-huh??