Musical identity can be a hard thing to find

It's taken me a long time to learn what I like like playing.

It's taken the inclings of a stylistic position on all this folk stuff - or rather deciding that such a position is pretty pointless as what I find valuble is making my music fun and engaging. Instead of thinking "I like English and Irish tunes" I'm prefering "I like this kind of phrasing by this player in this tune here". It would be nice if it coalesced into some kind recognisable style, it's a lot easier to find an audience!

But as this stuff has to be memorised and evolved and if I'm doing it for myself then I have to really like the stuff, really like all the qualities of the stuff I'm creating. Otherwise why I do want to live it, to burn it into me?

I decided that I'm happy with my music as long as it is well developed, distinct, possesses a certain clarity and it has a little bit of magic. That's how I like the music I choose to listen to, and the people I interact with too. More importantly, that is the music that I see audiences react best to. It doesn't matter what it is - it has to have a very clear "ness".

If you fall outside of a tradition then you have to realise you're playing a popularity game of some degree. It's been pretty obvious that the desire to make stuff my own way is a bit too strong for me to exist only as a "Classical Harpist" or "Irish Harper" or perhaps any stylistic tradition. I still value them hugely both for their aesthetic appeal and the extreme skill involved in each. I will still play music from those traditions, but if I tried to place my identity inside them I would feel false.

Evolution of tune styles

Most of our traditional dance tunes are anonymous - whenever tunes are labelled "trad" this means that a, they are recognised as part of our aural tradition; b, no one has claimed them as their own, c, they are free to use, part of our shared tradition. However someone must have written them at some point and somewhere. What are the inspirations for these tunes, and why is there such a strong sense that a tune is "English" or "Irish"?

An idea that I've come across is that tunes reflect the landscape and the language / accent of the local population. While I like this idea a lot, I think only a little but likely that tunes do reflect the pace and common rhythms in our spoken language. Perhaps in some distant way tunes might reflect the way we experience the landscape, but it has to come back to the human experience.

I think that performance practise has a lot to do with where tunes feel like they come from. It's very possible to take an Irish jig, play it half to 2/3rds speed with a bit more swing and make it feel like a morris tune. If there are different dances used in each country then different ways of playing the tune will evolve with them.

I think the biggest factor is that isolated musics will evolve in their own direction and tiny intial differences will grow to much bigger ones. Musical performance practises are iterative - I hear what you do and make a tiny adjustment, so does the fiddler next door, so does the flute player etc...etc... We play together and come back towards a more unified style and then the tiny incremental changes start again, layers upon layers of revisiting blowing tiny changes into huge ones. Physicists would say: sensitive dependancy on initial conditions.

Maybe there really wasn't much of a difference between the styles initially but over years different sounds have evolved? You can certainly find early tunes, often slip jigs or single jigs, that are present in both English and Irish traditions and are old tunes in both. The next question that presents itself is what in our social history fostered the development of tunes in each area and why did those players not meet?

Also, now as more and more traditional players travel to learn from each other and hear recordings from all over, is our style becoming more unified?

English vs Irish styles part 1

There's so much to think about for this... there will be differences at various layers of the music. I'm going to analyse what I hear and try to take it apart. I hope that through making conscious observations I can target my attention more closely on different features. At the same time I just have to listen and listen and listen again - I will not get an instinctive ability with the different through conscious listening. It is an unconscious skill I am building.

Things that I know are different between Irish & English:

• numbers of notes within a tune
  
• length of phrases
• phrases even or irregular?
• jerky or flowing
• common modes and chords used
• rhythmic patterns - more on this below
  
• ornamentation
• mood evoked or energy summoned up
  

Things that are different just within the rhythm aspect:

• speed
• different rhythmic patterns (best thought of grouped in dances)
• "swing"
• placement of emphasis within beat - to the back or the front?
• does the rhythm sit back or push forward?
• how a tune grooves

Even now I am sure that I will remember and summon up a particular set of rhythmic patterns most easily through recalling emotive ideas - that particular rhythmic pattern will evoke this emotional response best remembered via this image. Oh the complexity of finding language tags for memories that have no words...

A folk sound world

I love the mix of a folkie or trad sound world. It's like organic food - not as instant hit sweet as over-processed pop or as totally smooth as Classical; way more satisfying than both. Real instruments making real sounds.

There is a place for loads of timbre differences - roughness, raspy sounds, nasal, reedy. There's also a lot of sweetness, resonance, warmth.

I also like the feel you get from such personal interpretations of melodies, both the momentum of a good tune and the floating space, the touching gesture of a slow air. Yum yum.

Classical vs Folk

Classical vs folk - two firmly established methods of playing music, each with a passionate following that their way is the right way.

I started by messing about on other people's pianos when I was 5, and fascinated, gradually started exploring sound and deciphering the strange code that is score. So started a love affair- I studied classical music until my A Levels, loving it but still feeling slightly at odds. I decided I wanted to be a full-time musician at 16 but couldn't see how I would do it as a classical musician.

Luckily I went to university to study early music, ditched the score and music came back to life. I also picked up a harp for the first time aged 18 and found my vocation. Since then I've not looked back and now work full-time as a musician and teacher.

I see Classical vs Folk as a result of two different methods - Classical by eye, by score, a very conscious learning; Folk by ear, by heart, often unconcious.

For me the biggest difference comes from the use of score or learning a tune by heart.

Score provides a map to coordinate hundreds of people at once. Grand structures, explorations in sound by one person only - the feted and revered composer. The musicians, the players are merely mouth pieces even though they may be glorious mouth pieces. Perhaps a handful of soloists are revered as great 'interpreters' along with the conductors who provide the link between score and players.

Folk on the other hand is by ear, by heart, jump for the rhythm, a simple melody and even simpler structures, the coordination of only a few at once but with such close, tight rhythm. Instead of big architecture you have personal and intimate gestures - each player following the subtle subtle changes of rhythm and timing, following the groove. Folk music is shape and dancing, and in fact the rhythm of the tunes comes from the dances themselves.

Perhaps the choice of by ear or by score is all down the the mind of player - how do you most easily take in musical patterns? Frequently I find my visual world too much - complicated and busy. Reading and writing are not always easy. However I have no problem remembering a melody and hearing it in detail. I find if I have to use a score I have to concentrate on that so hard and in such an abstract way, my connection, my sense of touch with the sound is compromised.

Many of the classical musicians I've met have a very strong affinity with score, clearly they have no problems with a visual flow of information, it does not impair their sense of shaping or their physical connection with their instrument.

Despite the great divide between classical and folk methods and my own personal preference, I think that each has much to learn from the other. Score is a crucial tool for conscious analysis and making details clear, and in order to give a good musical performance every musician must listen to the shapes they are creating. I believe that all good musicians end up at the same place - with music that they are shaping as they play it that falls easily beneath their fingers. It's just we get there in different ways.