Traditional vs. Modern playing

[gallant_murray]

Sorry. I just thought the original name was part of the misunderstanding. I'm not trying to compare the two pipers; I'm just interested in opinions about the different styles. I should have stated that more clearly from the very beginning.

[billh]

I think there's more going on in the comparison and discussion than just "two styles". If the clips were of relative contemporaries (of one another), who had gained similar levels of consensus esteem, then the discussion might be one of 'styles'.

(I can't think of a more apt comparison to offer, or a useful metaphor, without treading on someone's toes !)

[BzzzzT]

No offense taken. I am the one jumping the gun and I apologize. I think when we all feel passionate about something we all tend to get overly serious about it. Music is about communication, fun, and is an ART. I think many times we forget art is subjective. When we all get overly serious and worked up it ceases to become enjoyable. In every period of history the old farts get worked up when a new player comes along with a new take on things. People cry that the tradition is being disregarded. This is all part of music evolution. Some will hold steadfast to the past and some will try some new directions or reinterpret the tradition. We have a legacy to look back on and I don't think we are in any danger of losing it.

As far as Seamus and McSherry I enjoy them both.

I can't help but think this thread is pejorative in nature given the recent thread. Both are excellent pipers. I don't see the point of casting votes, except to put forward some implied disapproval or prove some subjective point that is better left to conversation.

I'm sorry that you misunderstood me. I'm not a piper so I don't frequent the piping board. I haven't read 'the recent thread' you speak of. I was just interested in what the general opinion was regarding modern piping vs. traditional piping. The point was to share opinions. Both are indeed excellent pipers, just like Planxty and East Wind were both great groups with very different styles. The poll isn't about who is the better piper, but which style you (and everyone else) prefer. If that is offensive, I apologize.

[boxguy]

I cant beleive you are trying to compare 2 things that are so different. The only thing that they have in common is that they are complete masters aat the styles they have chosen to invent.
They have both helped piping music evolve.
If I wanted to play like one of them it would without a doubt be McSherry. Ennis isalso amazing.
I think these kinds of discussions can do more harm than good.
Its like trying to compare Matt Molloy and Micho Russell.

[Cayden]

I think it's quite missing the point saying either 'chose to invent' their style of playing. These things are part of a continuity, they don't appear out of thin air.

[boxguy]

My meaning of this is that both of them have come up with their own way of playing the instrument which is not a clone of a previous piper. In no way would I be a believer that they "appeared out of thin air"- that couldnt make sence!

[Joseph E. Smith]

My meaning of this is that both of them have come up with their own way of playing the instrument which is not a clone of a previous piper.

I do not think it is possible to be a clone of another piper, meaning, not being in another piper's head it isn't possible to play exactly like them. Even the mighty David Power, as close to Ennis in his approach to piping as I have yet heard (brilliant piping IMHO), is not a clone of Ennis... and that is a good thing.

I have a hunch, that somewhere back down the road a few years, Mr. McSherry was likely listening to Ennis or Clancy et. al., when he was figuring his chanter out as a beginner. Point being, piping is a tradition that is passed on from one piper to the next. What McSherry (and Ennis before him) is doing, is continuing that tradition and the inevitable result being that (whether intentionally or not) a piece of himself is showing through... getting more pronounced as the years click forward.

That being said, I have a difficult time trying to get my brain around the need for a comparisson between new and old pipers, it is a continuance of playing and one that will remain strong with any luck or fixed dilligence.

[oliver]

I think the best way to know if there's clones among pipers is to listen to a lot of them without knowing who's playing and try to guess. You may be surprised ! This is also a good way to know what experience you've got (at least in listening), and if you can identify each piper playing without a mistake, then you know where you are, don't you ? How many of you have ever done this ?

[Cayden]

I don't know, some years ago I copied some recordings I had for years and knew as 'Seamus Ennis playing a B set' for Pat Mitchell for inclusion in 'the book'. The choice of tunes was partly unusual, Miss Wallace for example, and partly more usual Ennis material, The Gander in the Pratie Hole, Munster Buttermilk. While copying I noticed some unusual features I hadn't noticed before, an un-typical crann for example, slightly different rhythms. I had some doubts and sent the stuff to Pat with a question mark, saying I wasn't so sure now as I was fifteen years before when Ifirst heard that tape it was indeed Ennis playing, that in some places it was almost (but maybe not quite) possible it was a young Robbie Hannan 'doing' Ennis tunes.

Pat got back to me saying he too noticed the un-typical elements, had some doubts and that JOBM didn't think it was Ennis at all.

Some months later he sent word he had discovered it WAS Ennis after all, playing Brother Gildas' B set.

As you sometimes do playing a set you've heard often before in the hands of someone else, Ennis adapted to the pipes by playing some of Gildas' tunes, incorporating, I assume, some of Gildas' way of playing.

Which shows that it's very hard to be really sure of what you're listening to sometimes, even for very close listeners.

[oliver]

it's very hard to be really sure of what you're listening to sometimes, even for very close listeners.

This is exactly what I meant.

[PJ]

I've always thought that Neil Mulligan's style is very close to Ennis's, more so than any other living piper. No doubt this is helped by Neil's choice of a C# set on many of his recordings.

I don't hear too much of Seamus Ennis's style is David Powers piping, although I've not heard his new CD yet. I'd be more inclided to say Tommy Reck, but I've not listened to very many Reck recordings.

[Cayden]

It's good practice and good fun though. During the winter Ronan Browne conducted one of his listening classes here for an audience with some very skilled listeners. We, as a group, did quite well actually

Tommy Munnelly (and his wife Annette working in tandem) for example managed to identify any recording of any singer, identifying the person, the where when and by whom the recording was made in most cases. Quite an impressive feat.

It showed the value of listening and listening in detail to as many as possible.


Tom also told a story that night of how he worked in UCD long ago and shared or had an office next door from Breandan Breathnach's. There was a press in the office that held a collection of cylinder recordings, the famous ones. A lot of pipers would drop in over time, visiting, conspiring and all that. The collection also had a few blank cylinders, Pat Mitchell came in one day with the pipes and recorded 'Blue Suede Shoes' on one of the blanks, in the style of Mici 'Cumba' and placed it in the collection. Tom said 'we never heard back on that one, yet'

[oliver]

You know almost all contemporary pipers claim the Ennis influence on their own playing. Nevertheless I think it's sometimes difficult to really notice it, except in Mulligan's playing, as PJ pointed out, as it's easy to recognise Doran in Keenan's playing.
So to which extent do you think this influence really shows ?

[Eldarion]

Well its one thing to acknowledge an influence and another to actually sound similar to the person. I think that Ennis has influenced all the pipers after him in such an insidious (maybe there is a better word) way that uilleann piping aesthetic as it is the trend today is to a huge extent some sort of "Ennis derived" piping. I think its difficult to notice because it has already been taken for granted and accepted as the norm even though people may be unaware of it.

Yes I am generalising and making very sweeping remarks. But when I listen to pipers pre-Ennis, Ennis' contemporaries and post-Ennis I can see a very clear trend of Ennis' sound/aesthetic spreading to just about every piper after him. In pretty much the same as how the very tight staccato way of piping was the piping aesthetic in the early 20th C, Ennis' piping aesthetic has become the way to go today and any piper that is considered good in our times will have adopted the Ennis sound in piping to varying extents.

[PJ]

... it's easy to recognise Doran in Keenan's playing.

Without going entirely off-topic, I don't really agree that Paddy Keenan sounds like Johnny Doran, but there's not enough of Doran's music remaining to make a proper comparison. Seamus Ennis mentions the similarity in the slieve notes of Paddy's first album. However, Ennis had a much better chance to listen to Doran than the rest of us, since we're all limited to the one recording session that Doran participated in.