Jump to content
Jambands.ca

Bluegrass: A Theoretical Case Study


shainhouse

Recommended Posts

Very nicely done, Shane! It's not often you see an argumentative strain running through an interview like this, but you've done well to stoke the people's ideas, across a good spread of the spectrum, from the downright conservative to the downright freaky. Carry on!

Grisman sure is looking downright grisled, ain't he? Goota love the look in his eye....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good work Shain, really well done.

My criticisms would be that you seem to be too thesaurousy at times, something that seems new to your writing. I like the surprise words, but I think you might be going that way a bit much at times. And Shake, Rattle & Roll is a Bill Halley tune.

Really though, damn good work. Congratulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JAMBASE: It has been interesting foraging from traditional musician to progressive, trying to lay down some sort of theory to explain the evolution of the style. I feel your band has a lot to say in the future of bluegrass. What are your feelings about bands like yours that are breaking the traditions in bluegrass by improvising and adding other elements to the mix? Are you tainting Bill Monroe's original intentions?

Kaufmann: Well, first and foremost, I don't think that you can use the term "bluegrass" in such a singular way. What you are referring to by using the term in this way is quite literally "Bill Monroe's Bands," because unless Monroe is in the band, it is not bluegrass. Not Flatt and Scruggs, not Ralph Stanley, not anybody else. In addition, I also do not know what is meant really by bands like us, because as far as I am concerned, there is no other band like us. Sure, there are hundreds of bands that use the same instruments that we use. At the end of the day, we're making the music we want to make. We are making the music that comes to us in "real time" - not based on some half-understood and arguable definition of a term

SHAIN GOT TOLD!!!! *snap.*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right on, Shain! I haven't read it yet but look forward to doing so when I get a moment this afternoon.

I did notice though whne copying the story to my hd, and forgive me if it's been moentioned above, I haven't read any comments, but you have mispelled Vassar Clements, as Vasser. Thought you might wnat to fix that if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a long story. To make it short: I was supposed to cover a music showcase ala SxSW in Vegas and couldn't afford to so when I let them know ( a little last minute in their defense ) they got pissed and accused me of only writing for them for free tickets and to meet people which was way off-base, considering I would have been covering the event on my own dime.

Deanne Herman decided on their behalf to give me the cold shoulder.

Journalistic drama?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

We did do some traditional songs, and the acoustic instruments and the lack of the drum kit in our early shows gave the illusion of bluegrass, I guess. Honestly, the difference between then and now is the instrumentation; addition of keyboards, electric mandolin, and standard drum kit, for example. It evolved because everyone wanted to have a bigger sound, perhaps to fill the larger rooms we began to play. Whether it is improvement or not is hard to say - I'm just the guitar player.

-Bill Nershi

This proves theories I'd rather not discuss like the timing of Phish's hiatus and the necessity for SCI to fill bigger rooms.

*cough* Sellouts *cough*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very nice article, shain.

bill monroe encouraging elvis to sing "blue moon" was hilarious!

Del McCoury: I figure that any musician or band has to do what is in their heart - whatever they feel that they can do best or whatever they feel they should do. For me personally, I don't want to stray from what I do. This is the way I like to play my music, and that's the way those guys are too. They play their music the way they feel they want to play it, and I think that we should let them do what's in their heart. I'm all for them, really.

I think Bill would be happy about it. He was never that prejudiced about other people playing bluegrass instruments in a different way. I believe that it made him feel honored, because he knows they are taking certain elements from his music and taking it in a different direction. For example, he told Elvis Presley when he recorded that song "Blue Moon of Kentucky" - he said to Elvis, "If it helps you, I'm all for you to sing it like that," because Elvis was embarrassed to sing the song at the Grande Old Opry with Bill Monroe there. He said "Mr. Monroe, I hope you don't mind the way I sing 'Blue Moon,'" and Bill said, "I don't mind. You take that song and sing it anyway you want to. If it will help you, I'm all for you."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no beef with Jambase, we just had that one "conflict" and since then I've lost the luster to write for them. No offense to them or their contributers. I would gladly write for them, I just don't write as much as I used to, or see as much music worthy of writing about as I used to for that matter. Good call though, I'll be back. I'll cover Lotus in the Hammer and maybe you can slip it back under the proverbial door for me Shainhouse.

All aside, again, great article. Lots of elements, solid theme, great cases. gizam, I need a cup of coffee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

This proves theories I'd rather not discuss like the timing of Phish's hiatus and the necessity for SCI to fill bigger rooms.

*cough* Sellouts *cough*

sounds exactly like what phish did after jerry died. it seemed the next phish show i went to, had the exact same lights, as if they just bought them from GD productions! and all of the sudden its like they got more of a "dead" flow to the majority of their jams. its called "seeing the hole", as i like to call it in horse racing. the jockey just sits and drafts until he sees that split second window of opportunity, and then proceeds takes full advantage to take the spotlight. in this case the "spotlight" is millions of dollars a year in increased revenue. we, as music fans have an ideal place(musically) we want to be, and when that space becomes empty, someone will gladly step up and fill it. theres no problems from me about it, thats just the way it goes. i needed somewhere to go when the dead stopped touring. and hey i loved phish too, so.... i went to phish shows. etc. i go were the music is. i dont call that selling out. i call it filling the demand, with only minor comprimise. sorry for the babble, wake and bake!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see where you're coming from and how phish is a good example, but I have to disagree with you here. I don't think phish really changed their sound to facilitate a newer or expanded audience. They were already selling out MSG for NYE run in 1994. SCI really adulterated their sound and touring style with Phish's impending hiatus, and they didn't have an incredibly unique sound to begin with. Then there's Madison House. Yada Yada. I just think there are a lot more differences in the way phish attracted their crowd post-Dead than how SCI exponentiated their fanbase post-Phish.

Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...