Is Seamus Egan the best flutist of all time?

[Brazenkane]

oh ya....

I still find it surprising that very few people here, by virtue of whom they cited, don't, or better yet Can Not go earlier than the early 70's. Seamus, Kevin C., Harry, Molloy etc....all their favourite players were/are the early guys. Those important historical musicians are the "trunk" of this music.
THEY are the source material of this music...

Many of the players mentioned, as good as they are (and they are good indeed) are the branches or the even the leaves.

go to the source! If you don't know those players are...just ask Kevin Rietman..he's a great source for this kind of thing. Take it away Kev!

[Kevin L. Rietmann]

Ok.
Uh, take it where? There have been some posts written about this subject already, you could consult those, various players were recommended.
The thing I find interesting about older players is their style. Most weren't fiery virtuosos like Egan, but they might have at a tune in a really unique, special way. They were very often very colorful and interesting people as well. Like that note Micho Russell hit in the Fermoy Lasses, about halfway through the first part. What is that, a C#? And then there's this big pause. You'll remember that all your life! It creates an impression. These are rather more subtle types of things than the usual crans rolls triplets hard Ds.
Or Eddie Moloney. Very "chunky" playing, many older players sound like they had a lot of what pipers call "tight" or "close" playing in them, which was described best as "non-legato," using little pauses for phrasing. Eddie is on the "Flute Geezers" website. I could listen to him all day.
Often you hear very breathy tone, a sort of birdsongish effect. Harry Bradley has this going on, it's a marvelous sound that you don't hear much now.
I guess! I only know what I've gotten in the mail, really. Mostly. The world's full of great musicians who don't make CDs, either. There was a post on the Trad Music forum about Regional styles, Peter Laban wrote all this great stuff about all the different players in Clare. You have to be there! The bit on Clare concertina playing in the Fintan Valley book was like that, a real travelogue. Or Caoimhín MacAoidh's book on Donegal fiddle. How many of these players have made records?

[leremarkable]

My father always said "one note rightly or wrongly placed will make all the difference"

[Henke]

Lets have some common sense here, at least some of us older flute players,
(i would'nt pay much attention to some of the younger upstarts anyway),
there is no such thing as the best flute player, all styles of flute playing by good flute players is interesting, and only a knucklehead would come--up with an idea of best flute player.

This is a little bit cocky don't you think old chapp!
"Us older players"
I bow at your feet oh great and most experienced player

But seriously, I do feel a bit sorry for someone who thinks he's too good to hear out and maybe even learn some from another player, even if he happens to be younger.

I do agree with your statement though (the one about no best player of course), strange, cause I not even 20y.o. yet. It just doesn't come out right there because you drop two different opinions that are sort of contrary.

Just my 2c, but of course, I know you won't take notice anyway, because I'm just one of those bloody "younger upstarts".

Cheers

[Brazenkane]

and this too may have been discussed or not;

there seems to be this idea that virtuosity somehow means great music. We have so many players thinking that if they can play flawlessly and fast, that they have somehow "arrived." There is a common misconception that the older players were not virtuostic. I disagree with this, and I believe that those who think that somehow today's players have 'one-up' on the older players, have either A) not done the listening, B) can't hear the difference, C) aren't willing to do the kind of research all their favourite players in fact have done, or D) all the above.

[Cathy Wilde]

and this too may have been discussed or not;

there seems to be this idea that virtuosity somehow means great music. We have so many players thinking that if they can play flawlessly and fast, that they have somehow "arrived." There is a common misconception that the older players were not virtuostic. I disagree with this, and I believe that those who think that somehow today's players have 'one-up' on the older players, have either A) not done the listening, B) can't hear the difference, C) aren't willing to do the kind of research all their favourite players in fact have done, or D) all the above.

What you said, esp. about equating virtuosity to great music. Not that there's anything wrong with virtuosity, but there are multiple ways to skin the musical cat, and the longer I've played, the more I've come to appreciate the wide variety of players and their even wider variety of styles and settings.

I know in my case it was more of a personal evolution, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's that way for many people -- I started out being absolutely wowed by Seamus Egan, and I STILL hear a lot of reasons to say "wow" when I listen to him.

However, Seamus's playing turned out to be the beginning of a path for me; one I started following after Solas and Dervish, etc. got me curious about where this playing came from.

Since then I've fallen in love with the geezers -- the likes of Eddie Maloney, James Murray, Peter Horan, Paddy Carty, Garry Shannon (a 'young' guy! Zoiks!), Josie McDermott, and of course my personal fave, Patsy Hanly -- among others. Now I'm more awed by Colm O'Donnell than Seamus Egan or even Larry Nugent. Again, they're great, but there's something about the wonderfully complex simplicity of what I call "the old style" .... ala sometimes the notes people leave out ....

Of course, maybe it's just because I'm getting older but for me, this process has been directly aligned with the length of time I've been playing and trying to get inside the tunes, etc.

So I guess I think it's sometimes a matter OF time -- the longer you spend at this particular sawmill, the more curious you get about how others may play a tune, where their playing may have come from, who influenced them, etc. It's fascinating.

I suppose it's like that with lots of stuff. The longer you do it, the deeper into it you get.

But I do owe Seamus (even though Liam Kelly was my true #1 even in those days; what a class player) a debt for luring me into this maze in the first place.

And heck, they're ALL better than I'll ever be!

BUT. If you ever hear me rhapsodizing about Irish Music For 101 Strings or something, smack the daylights out of me. PLEASE.

p.s. GUILTY SECRET: I actually like the Kilfenora Ceili Band.

[bradhurley]

Nicely said, Cathy!

For me, the older I get the more I appreciate players who focus on melody and melodic variation rather than ornamentation. Ornamentation is what catches our ear when we first start listening to Irish traditional music, because ornamentation is impressive. But ornamentation in and of itself is no great shakes. Ornamentation is like adjectives and punctuation in a sentence, whereas melody represents the essential words, the ones without which the sentence would lose its meaning.

When you hear Irish musicians say "lovely!" when they listen to another musician playing, 9 times out of 10 it's because of a melodic turn or variation that the player used, not because he or she threw in a roll or a triplet or a crann.

I'm not saying that I favor players who don't use much ornamentation. I just think there's a big difference between players who focus primarily on ornamentation and those who focus primarily on melody.

[Brazenkane]

I think it all amounts to what floats your boat. There aresome pure drop guys who beleive that what Seamus, Liam, Shannon etc are doing is not REALLY traditional music.

My musical mentor (Dublin Fiddler James Kelly) has a great yardstick by which he likes to measure his music...one that I now use too. If Peter Horan, Eddie Maloney, Jim McGowan or any of the heads were sitting in the same room you were playing in... and they were listening to YOU ALONE; would they say "lovely?" after you finished..or, would they get up to go get a pint in the middle of your tune?

it's a heavy idea to consider, but one that for me, for the way I'd like to approach the tradition...is an important one.

All the guys I mentioned earlier are truely great players! We can all learn something from what they've accomplished. They love and LIVE the music just as much as anybody. Those who are trying to make a living being a musician are sacrificing on a much different level, and amatuers will never fully appreciate what that entails. My hat is off to all of them all.

It comes down to where you're headed musically and what your reference points are. There is certainly nothing wrong with making Seamus Egan or any of the other modern guys your template. If your music says something, people 'll listen. That said, you might ask yourself what is it your trying to say with your music? Where is your source of music coming from?

hmmmmmmmmmm

[AaronMalcomb]

All of this being said... I have note-for-note transcriptions of Egan, McGoldrick and Finnegan if anybody's interested...












Just kidding of course.

[Kevin L. Rietmann]

That's a good system, thinking of ______ listening to your every note. Or not. The "traditional learning process" I think is mostly a good musician listening to your efforts and telling you what sucks - maybe they wouldn't put it that way, but you know. What's not quite fitting. It's hard to tell how you're playing while in the process of doing so.
The tape recorder helps a bit. I never hear anything I like with that though! Musicians I like and respect have said things like "Lovely!" or "Was that you, or an old record?" (on the phone) so I figure I'm doing something right.

[glinjack]

Henke wrote
This is a little bit cocky don't you think old chapp!
"Us older players"
I bow at your feet oh great and most experienced player

what i said was "i would'nt listen to SOME of the younger---------------"
that does'nt mean all young flute players, i actually have met and played with some fantastic young flute players now and againn,
If i can explain myself somewhat better, and get more to the point, what really turns me off is hearing some (not all) young flute players, and i might also add some young violin players trying to mix jazz and bluegrass with traditional irish music, the end result of coarse is crapp, unless of coarse you are one of those people who does'nt understand what good or bad music is,
Now i listen off and on to jazz, and i like it, i have also listened to some great bluegrass players, but when you find a bunch of idiots trying to create what they call "modern trad" " celtic rock" "irish grass" and god only knows how many more names we will hear in the future, maybe
"cow sh*t" would be a better name for their nonsense,
Why try to ruin a great music that has been handed down through the years without any major interference, or look at the great composers of traditional music over the years, even the composers of late like the great Paddy O brien RIP, i dont hear any jazz or bluegrass in his compositions,
Maybe instead of asking about greatest players, we should be asking who is ruining our traditional music.

[Wormdiet]

If i can explain myself somewhat better, and get more to the point, what really turns me off is hearing some (not all) young flute players, and i might also add some young violin players trying to mix jazz and bluegrass with traditional irish music, the end result of coarse is crapp, unless of coarse you are one of those people who does'nt understand what good or bad music is,
Now i listen off and on to jazz, and i like it, i have also listened to some great bluegrass players, but when you find a bunch of idiots trying to create what they call "modern trad" " celtic rock" "irish grass" and god only knows how many more names we will hear in the future, maybe
"cow sh*t" would be a better name for their nonsense,

Why is fusion a bad thing? I've heard some wonderful, nay, FANTASTIC music that is a blend of Irish with other stuff.

Granted it's not "traditional" but does that mean a) it's "crapp" or b) people feel the need to belittle it for some other reason?

Or am I incapable of discerning good music from bad?

It all boils down to personal preference, and just because one set has the "traditional" label does not make it inherently superior. In the end, good music is good music no matter how one describes it or how early or recently it has been composed.

[edited for grammar. Futilely, probably.]

[Brazenkane]

nah it's ridiculous to point fingers. that holier than thou sh*t is very easy to pick up on and everyone I know wants to stay clear of that nonsense. One of the things I think it AMAZING is how trad. Irish melodies can actually support their treatment in a rock/ afro celt or whatever setting. it speaks volumes for the melodies. they are structurally perfect ...period. Put distorted guitars behind them and they never crumble...even if the pure drop audience will!!! Truely amazing.

I think if everyone worries about themselves we'll certainly be much better of.

agus anois ...oiche mhaith!

k

[glinjack]

And before we say good night, who gives anyone the right to change
the great traditional music that our forefathers bestowed on us. After all, maybe some people don't understand what the word 'tradition' means.
We run a lovely sessiun down here in the valley, every two weeks we raise the roof with heavy duty macho trad. a couple of weeks ago two self described modern musicians arrived and within an hour the place was practically empty, obviously they wont be back, i wonder where they will go next week with their Fusion.

[neilC]

and this too may have been discussed or not;

there seems to be this idea that virtuosity somehow means great music. We have so many players thinking that if they can play flawlessly and fast, that they have somehow "arrived." There is a common misconception that the older players were not virtuostic. I disagree with this, and I believe that those who think that somehow today's players have 'one-up' on the older players, have either A) not done the listening, B) can't hear the difference, C) aren't willing to do the kind of research all their favourite players in fact have done, or D) all the above.

joining this discussion a bit late....
I've always tended to love to listen to and play fast and technical. But I think it can often leave an audience cold. There might be approval of the 'wow isn't he clever' variety, but not of the 'you've really moved me' variety. I personally find it impossible to be objective and listen to other players as if I had never played, and that's another reason why 'best' is so subjective. Someone who doesn't play the flute (or better still someone who doesn't play anything) might be a better judge of who plays in a way that is most emotionally or aesthetically pleasing. And the 'best of the best' can do both technical and emotionally connecting, at the same time. That's what I want to do when I grow up

Neil