Learning New Settings of Tunes?

[ImNotIrish]

Nice post Jem! I think you're absolutely 'spot-on' about this. Thanks for the thoughts!
Arbo

[peeplj]

it will mess us about learning a new tune that has a similar but slightly different pattern in it to one we already know, for example

Yep!

Also, when you do a variation in one tune, especially at the "turn" between parts of the tune, that is too similar to another tune, and though you started out playing Boys of the Town, you wind up playing the B part of the Kesh or some such...or I do this one a lot, start with the Murrow but wind up playing the Morning Star...

--James

[gorjuswrex]

Kevin,

here's the lnk to my version of Fahy's. I couldn't get Josh's link to work for me.
Arbo

http://www.box.net/shared/gc5van4psp

If you don't have the quicktime player installed I think you will need to download Josh's link, or has something happened to it as I recall you gave some comments on it previously.

[gorjuswrex]

Arbo

I think you gave Larry Nugent as the source of your setting.I don't know his setting so would you say your setting of it 1/ resembles his ,or, 2/ is basically his setting? How closely did you pick out the tune?

[lesl]

Interesting thread. I've always thought the problem is just muscle memory.. or focus, if the trouble is actually remembering how the settings differ (as opposed to how you play them physically). Sometimes I've found it helps to think of a new setting as a different tune entirely. Then you're not quite as likely to expect anything and you can sort of assimilate the new version as its own thing.

That said, I always seem to have trouble with a new setting of a tune I already have. There's an Eddie Kelly jig which I was recently reminded of, I learned it with 2 slightly different second parts from 2 different people originally. At the time I decided I'd play first the one and on the repeat the other - but I could never do it, kept tripping up. Then not long ago, I found out that's the way the tune was originally composed - with 2 different 2nd parts! Hey! Now (7 years later) I can play it!

edit to add - hope someone can post the link to Josh's clip of that Paddy Fahey jig? I have that tune too, not the way Arbo has it, but I also first learned it from the Larry Nugent cd. And, gee, then I had to change the setting of it when discussing it with the Raff.. heh.. that did take me a while!

[gorjuswrex]

here's the link for Josh playing the Fahy Jig

http://homepage.mac.com/joshuadukes/iMo ... ter11.html

[bang]

as it happens, i just researched different versions of this tune.

the Laurence Nugent setting with all Cnats can be heard here:
http://www.myspace.com/thenorthcountrymusic

Catherine McEvoy plays a very nice setting in the first tune of the first set here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh2Z1JY3h9w

Dervish has recorded this. it is the third tune on track 11 of _At the End of the Day_.

both the McEvoy and Dervish settings have Cnats in the 3rd and 4th bars and C#'s elsewhere.

the Laurence Nugent setting is transcribed here:
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/849

the Dervish setting is transcribed here, by the name Matt Hayes':
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display.php/124

enjoy! /dan

[andyras3]

Just listened to CMcE version fantastic playing, but it reminds me that there is a school of thought that the original tune should be maintained, and teachers will go to great pain to get the original tune accross, even thought they have nice 'alternatives' not embellishments or ornaments as such.

I guess i'm in that vein a little.

[mimcgann]

I heard that Patrick Ourceau said that he appreciated playing special settings of familiar tunes with Gearoid OhAllmhurain in different keys so that he wouldn't get them mixed up.

[gorjuswrex]

Arbo

I think you gave Larry Nugent as the source of your setting.I don't know his setting so would you say your setting of it 1/ resembles his ,or, 2/ is basically his setting? How closely did you pick out the tune?

Arbo
Having had a quick listen to the Larry Nugent link given above your setting seems pretty much as his to me,but of course with your style not his.

BTW I am finding it interesting to hear your style develop. It's coming on very well I think. Personally I'm glad you are not using so many low D honks, I felt you were over cooking it but that's just my opinion of course.

[gorjuswrex]

Just listened to CMcE version fantastic playing, but it reminds me that there is a school of thought that the original tune should be maintained, and teachers will go to great pain to get the original tune accross, even thought they have nice 'alternatives' not embellishments or ornaments as such.

I guess i'm in that vein a little.

The internet is more dangerous than we realise. This thread gave me one of those early morning interrupted can’t get back to sleep episodes thinking about tune versions etc. You know you can't get the stupid thoughts out of your head and get back to sleep.I wouldn't mind if I had been at work but it was 2am and I had to get up at 5am. Be warned.

Read the next section at your peril.

To become an accected version of a tune I would think the versions would have to come from someone well known or well respected within the ITM community. If we are nobodies, should we limit ourselves to playing versions that have become ‘know variations of a tune. I would think the important thing is having a good feel, understanding etc for the music. If someone has these qualities and enough musicality I would say it would be valid for them to create their own version. They could even become a legend in their own back yard and that’s as much as most of us can dream of. Personally I’m happy to play various settings of a tune and am happy to use some of my own variations within it. I’ve never tried inventing my own version of a tune. By setting I mean the tune retains it’s basic structure, it’s skeleton. It is recognisable as the same tune played with variations in phrasings but the phrases fit around the same structure.Often two setting could be played together in a duo and work. By version I mean the tune is changed so it’s almost a new tune. It has elements of it’s parent but other parts that are more than variations on the melody.Two versions often would not work as a duo. For example I’d would say that the tune known as Christy Barry’s lark in the morning is a new version of the tune not just a different setting.

Now how dangerous is that. It’s like one of those emails we get saying something like:

sectusin at your perel. Peel I’m happy .I’m happy .so it’s almost a new tune. It has elements of it’s other parts parent but that are more than variation on the melony. For example I’d would say that the tune known as Christy Barry’s lark in the put in your payment.Congratulations $100000.00 is your share for acting as the agent.


It’s like one of those emails but much less useful.


HELP

YOU WERE WARNED.

Have a peaceful sleep tonight.

[ImNotIrish]

Arbo

I think you gave Larry Nugent as the source of your setting.I don't know his setting so would you say your setting of it 1/ resembles his ,or, 2/ is basically his setting? How closely did you pick out the tune?

Arbo
Having had a quick listen to the Larry Nugent link given above your setting seems pretty much as his to me,but of course with your style not his.

BTW I am finding it interesting to hear your style develop. It's coming on very well I think. Personally I'm glad you are not using so many low D honks, I felt you were over cooking it but that's just my opinion of course.

When I picked up the Fahy tune, it was after listening to Larry's version over and over again while driving home from a weekend trip. I think I got home and took out my flute and played it pretty much as I do now. I didn't bother trying to learn it note for note (which is obvious after looking over the tune transcription). I never actually wanted to get every nuance of Larry's playing (not that I could anyway), but I did take note of a couple of things he did that caught my ear. Am I doing Larry and the music, a disservice by not learning it note by note , inflection by.... etc?
Arbo

[Cathy Wilde]

If I'm working on a new setting for a tune I'll record myself playing it and then listen to that for a while instead of the original. It's painful -- as listening to myself always is -- but it seems to help (and of course, it's instructive). Often there's some sort of cross-pollenation between the two settings but I don't know if that's a major sin, especially if I'm borrowing from someone good.

I'm still trying to figure out the Rainy Day/Boil the Breakfast Early crossover. I must have totally different versions, not just setttings, 'cos they're in two different modes (and keys)! Now, the Rainy Day and The Corner House, however .....

[Cathy Wilde]

Am I doing Larry and the music, a disservice by not learning it note by note , inflection by.... etc?
Arbo

You could do worse than borrow from Larry. As for the "disservice" question, I think that's between you and your god. I can never learn things inflection for inflection because I'm 1) not clever enough to pick all the nuance up and 2) too lazy to substitute dogged revision for cleverness.

HOWEVER, I do try, in my lame fashion -- but because I want to learn from people like Larry Nugent, etc.

If nothing else, it's definitely informed my listening!

As for leaving one beaten track or another, I think that's how new settings are born. Whether they're "good" or "not-so-good" settings is up to time and popularity, which is the result of many things, including being playable by enough people for the setting to spread.

[andyras3]

It’s like one of those emails but much less useful.


HELP

YOU WERE WARNED.

Have a peaceful sleep tonight.

Hi Kevin LOL I thought that was a real thread stopper