A modest proposal...

[DrPhill]

I have been thinking about ITM, and about my uncertainty identifying it.

How would it be if we picked a common tune, and found a selection of accessible renditions (on the web) where we (or the experts) could say which were more or less ITM. Do you think that would be a profitable discussion? We could point to features that distinguished between the versions of the tune. I could imagine it being quite instructive for me, and maybe for others.

Any opinions on this as an exercise?

[benhall.1]

"Which were more or less ITM." I think this is fraught with difficulties, Phill. Firstly, I suppose we'd have to start with a well-known, and unassailably Irish, tune. That's fairly hard to start with. Then, we get into all the stuff about what's Irish or not, in terms of style of playing. (Plus the question as to whether it matters - I've certainly heard stuff that's unmistakably American in terms of the players, and yet which is definitely within a tradition which I, for want of a better term, would class as "ITM".)

Then again, I can't think of anything that would make something more ITM than something else. I could identify which rendition out of several might be "better", I suppose, unless every one of several renditions was equally brilliant, but different.

What I'm struggling to get to is that I reckon there's good music, and not so good music. If it's good and it seems to be recognisably "ITM" then, even though it may well have idiosyncrasies which are not present elsewhere in the tradition, I'm thinking it would be acceptably "ITM".

Have I got hold of the wrong end of this particular stick, Phill?

[Mr.Gumby]

I think you may well be better off listening to good players and find out what shared aesthetic you find between them, what common ground they have. Handing out red pencils to mark who's in and who's out or even who's a good player with a grasp of the music played and who isn't so much up to par will only lead to acrimony.

Bro Steve's transcription page with examples of different styles and a few thoughts on what makes the playing interesting could be a starting point.

[killthemessenger]

Great resource, thanks.

[DrPhill]

The heart of this thread is that ITM is held up as something worth aspiring to, but I have no idea what it is.

"Which were more or less ITM." I think this is fraught with difficulties, Phill. Firstly, I suppose we'd have to start with a well-known, and unassailably Irish, tune. That's fairly hard to start with. Then, we get into all the stuff about what's Irish or not, in terms of style of playing. (Plus the question as to whether it matters - I've certainly heard stuff that's unmistakably American in terms of the players, and yet which is definitely within a tradition which I, for want of a better term, would class as "ITM".)

Then again, I can't think of anything that would make something more ITM than something else. I could identify which rendition out of several might be "better", I suppose, unless every one of several renditions was equally brilliant, but different.

What I'm struggling to get to is that I reckon there's good music, and not so good music. If it's good and it seems to be recognisably "ITM" then, even though it may well have idiosyncrasies which are not present elsewhere in the tradition, I'm thinking it would be acceptably "ITM".

Have I got hold of the wrong end of this particular stick, Phill?

No Ben, as usual you are on the ball. I suspect that ITM is not a well defined concept and that it's definition is very subjective. Lots of posters here have some idea of what ITM is and some posters get very agitated about it, but no-one seems willing to define what it is. I suspect that if we scratch the surface we might find that there is no one definition, and that everyone who 'knows' what ITM is 'knows' something different. Not that there is anything wrong in that - I am all for diversity.

I am not trying to 'flame' or 'troll' or incite argument here. I am just trying to understand something that seems very elusive.
Here are some of the points that I am considering, in order to bring the concept of ITM ito focus in my mind:

• 1: Can a recently composed tune ever be considered ITM?
  2: Can someone with no Irish ancestry truly play ITM?
  3: Can ITM only be learnt from people who are part of the tradition?
  4: If I could play only one tune, which was a slavish exact copy of something by a master of ITM would that be ITM?
  5: Is the list of acceptable variation in ITM fixed, or can it be added to?
  6: Is the list of acceptable ITM instruments fixed, or cann new instruments be added?
  7: If I wrote a program to play music with a the accepted variations, chosen by a style algorithm, could that ever achieve ITM status?

If anyone has any opinions to share, then I would welcome them.

@Mr.Gumby
I suppose that 'marking' some random music on the web might well be unfair to the posters who may not have had such scrutiny in mind when they uploaded. I am willing to post my attempt, though I am sure that it would be at the low end of the range. I would need some more accomplished volunteers to make a meaningful comparison.

Your suggested page does look like an interesting reference. You have always been helpful to me on this forum, and I am sure you are trying so to do again. But I could go and listen to the tracks by the masters and still come away with a 'wrong' notion of what ITM is (believe me I could ). How will I know when I have the 'true' answer? Or are there many true answers? What divides the true answers from the false?

[Edited to get the list format right]

[James_Alto]

I've found the Sessions Discussions very useful:

http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/23176


It does list examples of players in this particular style - and it details some good interviews which explain it without becoming too technical:

http://www.firescribble.net/flute/rafferty5.htm

Mike Rafferty says he doesn't read or write music. In this respect, I'm veering to the view that ITM is more of a 'folk tradition' within Ireland, without its own written vernacular. On a comparative phenomenology, ITM's language, is not adequately encoded in the written sheet music form - thus the inadequacy of the sheet music to convey the spirit of the music (which I why I should stop spending my $$$$ on ITM sheet music books). It is more like a language, which has no adequate written form, except, perhaps, phonetically, as translated to English. We can hear the rudimentary structures of the music, but essentially, it is taught in the aural (listening) hand-me-down tradition, and is destined to shift.

A recently composed tune:

1). can be in the vein of ITM classics
2). can be a contemporary tune, with ITM elements
3). can be 'in the style of ITM classics'

whether it gains acceptability is another thing ... it seems like many 'classics', spend decades, being ornamented and decorated by various players, so much so that it becomes considered as ITM. This is my way of seeing how Scottish and Gaelic, or Breton Gaelic tunes, can freely be incorporated within the ITM literature.

Anyway, I'm off to listen to Matt Molloy's arias

[Kypfer]

The heart of this thread is that ITM is held up as something worth aspiring to, but I have no idea what it is.

... sorry, my take on the matter (opinion, call it what you will) is "Does It Matter?"
Good playing is worth aspiring to. As to trying to define something as potentially nebulous as ITM to give one a target for aspiration ... I think I'll just play tunes I like, in a manner that is within my capabilities, and if one of those tunes falls within the realms of ITM, so be it, but I won't worry about whether I'm playing "correctly" or not, as long as I enjoy what I'm playing

[brewerpaul]

Yeah, what Kypher said...
In every genre of music that I've been a part of (classical, bluegrass, etc) people seem to want to stress whether or not they're playing it "traditionally" or "authentically". When each of those genres were originated, I doubt anyone thought much about how future generations would play the music: they just played it! Why should we do any different? Just enjoy what you're doing. As soon as you pick up your instrument and play a tune, you automatically become a part of that elusive tradition. If enough people show up at trad sessions with saxophones, the sax will become a "traditional" Irish instrument.

[crookedtune]

Ooooooh, I SO don't agree with that. Wish I had time to elaborate, but then, I'd probably ramble endlessly......

As brief as I can say it: Listen to real traditional players, and decide if that's the sound you're after. If so, study them. If not, play what you feel.

[sackbut]

But who defines which are real traditional players, which are unreal traditional players, which are real untraditional players, and which are unreal untraditional players?
Isn't this the point of the OP's modest proposal - he wants audio examples that could be labelled RTP, UTP, RUP etc...

[crookedtune]

I understand. Browsing these forums, and reading elsewhere about Irish music traditions, will quickly point you to a number of players who most people familiar with the genre consider to be "traditional masters".

A few starting points would be Mary Bergin, Micho Russell, Paddy Maloney, Sean Potts, Sean Ryan, Willie Clancy, Gavin Whelan and Brid O'Donohue. That's a fairly random list, and there are many, many more I could name. I could also list a large number of good players who are admittedly taking the whistle in new and different directions -- some traditionally-rooted and some not. And that's fine.

I'm not suggesting that good music can't be played outside of "the tradition". What I'm saying is that there IS a tradition, and there are those among us who choose to grow within it to the best of our ability. This requires as much work and study as the aspiring jazz musician, who pretty much HAS to be familiar with the music of prior "masters", such as Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker, Duke Ellington, etc. It just goes with the territory.

[jim stone]

The heart of this thread is that ITM is held up as something worth aspiring to, but I have no idea what it is.

"Which were more or less ITM." I think this is fraught with difficulties, Phill. Firstly, I suppose we'd have to start with a well-known, and unassailably Irish, tune. That's fairly hard to start with. Then, we get into all the stuff about what's Irish or not, in terms of style of playing. (Plus the question as to whether it matters - I've certainly heard stuff that's unmistakably American in terms of the players, and yet which is definitely within a tradition which I, for want of a better term, would class as "ITM".)

Then again, I can't think of anything that would make something more ITM than something else. I could identify which rendition out of several might be "better", I suppose, unless every one of several renditions was equally brilliant, but different.

What I'm struggling to get to is that I reckon there's good music, and not so good music. If it's good and it seems to be recognisably "ITM" then, even though it may well have idiosyncrasies which are not present elsewhere in the tradition, I'm thinking it would be acceptably "ITM".

Have I got hold of the wrong end of this particular stick, Phill?

No Ben, as usual you are on the ball. I suspect that ITM is not a well defined concept and that it's definition is very subjective. Lots of posters here have some idea of what ITM is and some posters get very agitated about it, but no-one seems willing to define what it is. I suspect that if we scratch the surface we might find that there is no one definition, and that everyone who 'knows' what ITM is 'knows' something different. Not that there is anything wrong in that - I am all for diversity.

I am not trying to 'flame' or 'troll' or incite argument here. I am just trying to understand something that seems very elusive.
Here are some of the points that I am considering, in order to bring the concept of ITM ito focus in my mind:

• 1: Can a recently composed tune ever be considered ITM?
  2: Can someone with no Irish ancestry truly play ITM?
  3: Can ITM only be learnt from people who are part of the tradition?
  4: If I could play only one tune, which was a slavish exact copy of something by a master of ITM would that be ITM?
  5: Is the list of acceptable variation in ITM fixed, or can it be added to?
  6: Is the list of acceptable ITM instruments fixed, or cann new instruments be added?
  7: If I wrote a program to play music with a the accepted variations, chosen by a style algorithm, could that ever achieve ITM status?

If anyone has any opinions to share, then I would welcome them.

@Mr.Gumby
I suppose that 'marking' some random music on the web might well be unfair to the posters who may not have had such scrutiny in mind when they uploaded. I am willing to post my attempt, though I am sure that it would be at the low end of the range. I would need some more accomplished volunteers to make a meaningful comparison.

Your suggested page does look like an interesting reference. You have always been helpful to me on this forum, and I am sure you are trying so to do again. But I could go and listen to the tracks by the masters and still come away with a 'wrong' notion of what ITM is (believe me I could ). How will I know when I have the 'true' answer? Or are there many true answers? What divides the true answers from the false?

[Edited to get the list format right]

There is, in philosophy, the (controversial) idea that some words don't have a strict definition.
Rather they denote a 'family resemblance.' The example often given is 'games.'
So there is (according to the family resemblance theory) nothing that all and only games
have in common in virtue of which they are games. Rather there are paradigms of games,
e.g. football, bridge, and then other activities that share some of the features of the
paradigms but not all (a child throwing a ball against a wall and catching it)
and finally activities that are so distant as to be borderline
cases, e.g. war games. There may be no fact of the matter as to whether something
at the border is a game. Resemblance to the paradigm along a number of
respects, more or less, is all you get. So we can't give a strict definition
of 'games,' only point to good examples and say 'and other things like these,
more or less.' And THAT"S how the concept works, which is not a defect in it.
Demanding more precision is a misunderstanding.

I think the notion of 'ITM' works this way. There are some paradigm cases, e.g. what
you would hear at a good session in a pub in Ireland, Mike Rafferty's stuff, people playing
jigs, reels, hornpipes on CDs at more or less session speed, without lots of interpretation or radically new settings.
Then there is stuff that departs somewhat, but not an awful lot, from the paradigm,
e.g. someone like Martin Hayes, who is putting old tunes in very different settings.
Is it ITM? Well, there may be no fact of the matter, only that it diverges in some
significant ways, but not in others, from the paradigm.

So I think your questions are perhaps too demanding of an idea that really isn't supposed
to be strictly definable. But that doesn't mean the idea is empty.
The point is to know the paradigms well enough, as I expect
most of us do, and then to understand in what respect music that diverges somewhat from
the paradigms so diverges. Of course the paradigms can gradually shift, and so
can the idea of ITM.

Also, Aristotle said that, when you don't know what to do in a morally difficult situation,
it can help to ask the 'old guys,' the experienced people who have been through
the sort of thing you're doing. Analogously, if you want to know what ITM is, ask the old guys,
the accomplished people who play the music (some of whom are here).
But don't ask for definitions, ask for examples.

Finally I think ITM is of extraordinary value, though I find it very difficult and it isn't what I
enjoy most. Because there is something there that truly matters, and the musicians
I most respect and appreciate, including ones who are 'off the paradigm,'
have been through it and would not be as good as they are if they
hadn't been. It is also the best way I know to master the instruments
I play.

[crookedtune]

1: Can a recently composed tune ever be considered ITM?
2: Can someone with no Irish ancestry truly play ITM?
3: Can ITM only be learnt from people who are part of the tradition?
4: If I could play only one tune, which was a slavish exact copy of something by a master of ITM would that be ITM?
5: Is the list of acceptable variation in ITM fixed, or can it be added to?
6: Is the list of acceptable ITM instruments fixed, or cann new instruments be added?
7: If I wrote a program to play music with a the accepted variations, chosen by a style algorithm, could that ever achieve ITM status?

FWIW, the subjective answers I would give are:\
1: Yes
2: Yes
3: Yes, since by achieving actual competence, they have BECOME part of the tradition.
4: No, it would be parroting.
5: Variable, as all living traditions are.
6: Variable, as all living traditions are.
7: No, automated music is an oxymoron.

[cboody]

Remember where Swift's modest proposal got him.....

http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html

Somehow I think the Irish folks would respond the same way to this idea. Defining ITM is a bit like defining Jazz (If you have to ask you'll never know).

[Mr.Gumby]

You know Phil, there are no clean cut answers to questions like 'where do I place ornamentation', 'what speed has a tune', 'what is in tradition and what isn't'.

Tradition is a concept of the mind, a broad church that doesn't hand out membership cards or badges. 'Handing down', community, continuity between past present and future, a shared sense of aesthetic, they all play a vital, defining, part.

I think it's utterly simplistic to say;

As soon as you pick up your instrument and play a tune, you automatically become a part of that elusive tradition.

because the statement ignores all those elements.

I recommended Bro Steve's transcription page because it gives you a glimpse of a variety of traditional players playing different styles with a few comments that may, or may not, give another glimpse of what is going on in the playing, a view of the nuts and bolts if you like and their function.

Understanding music, this or any other, and looking beyond the surface takes some time and experience. I think the question of what is and what isn't 'traditional' isn't maybe the most helpful question to begin with. Approaching the aesthetic and understanding what (this) music is about (learning to recognise who are the good players and understanding why they are) is a far more satisfying way to gaining insight.