Important and Interesting Thesis on Banjo History

[Joel Hooks]

Here is a thesis on banjo history that I can strongly recommend. I think it is very good and raises many good points of discussion.

It is worth the read.

digitalcollections.wesleyan.ed...ctir-3281

Direct download link to the PDF here:

digitalcollections.wesleyan.ed...0File.pdf

[Jody Stecher]

What I have read so far is well-written, mostly well thought out,  and generally accurate about classic banjo but not always accurate about peripheral matters, like plectrum banjos or old-time music. While the thesis is presented as a corrective to unquestioned inaccurate ideas based on ideology,  some of the ideas it presents are also idealogical and reflect the historically unsupportable biases I have found in the thinking of some ABF members when discussing (and dismissing) old-time music, bluegrass, and African-American music.

Perhaps these matters are addressed in the pages I have not yet read. For now I'll point out that  banjo playing  in the American south (including Appalachia but well beyond its borders)  historically had little or nothing to do with bringing people together to make music together. Whatever the old-time revival may have focussed on in its immediately visible portion,the historical fact is that playing  the banjo in the rural south was primarily a solitary pursuit on a solo instrument used primarily for accompanying one's own singing. Playing for dancing was also there,  but if one adds up the written and oral reports it looks like banjo as a vocal accompaniment accounts for most of its use.  This being the case why question the idea that this instrument is well suited for vocal accompaniment?  The idea is based on the empirical fact, not on an ideology or an agenda.    Another fact: while it is true that a portion of today's players of old-time music got attracted because it seemed to satisfy a need for authenticity there are others, and I am one, who got attracted for the same reason we got attracted to classic banjo: We like how it sounds. Some things actually are that simple.

[Tom McArdle]

I came across it a few weeks ago. I found it interesting. I don’t have the background to offer a critique. I did find the interview section very interesting.

 I especially found the comments about the early banjo recordings interesting. I usually find those hard to listen to. To discover that potentially some of that sound was a result of the recording process gives me some comfort. 

[Rob MacKillop]

Tom - yes, there are a few in the classic-banjo world today who are trying to recreate that awful sound that the technology of early recordings gave. It’s a mystery to me.

Mike - I love your post, both for its generosity and its polite insistence not to assume that what might be true for the US is necessarily true anywhere else. 

Jody - lots of good points there. I’m trying to remember what attracted me to the ‘classic’ banjo. I don’t think it was as much the sound as the repertoire. When it comes to sound, I’m confident (not arrogant) enough to know that I would find my own sound within the limits of what an instrument can offer, so what interests me above all is the repertoire. For that, Frank Converse opened the door and invited me in. Once through the door I discovered Cammeyer. That’s all I needed to get stuck in. On reflection, it couldn’t have been the sound first and foremost, as a) I never head anyone play ‘in the flesh’ as it were, and b) only heard bad phone recordings online - not much to whet ones appetite there. But the repertoire proved very attractive. 

[Jody Stecher]

I heard classic banjo live before I heard it on recordings. Also "liking how it sounds" was meant to include enjoying the repertoire.  I enjoyed the experience of listening to this kind of banjo music. However, I don't agree that the sound of banjo on cylinder and 78s is awful if the media are in good condition  or that the recordings are seriously inaccurate.  We have access to recordings of Van Eps made in the 1950s and it is not so very different from what we hear on a clean old recording.  

Rob MacKillop said:

Tom - yes, there are a few in the classic-banjo world today who are trying to recreate that awful sound that the technology of early recordings gave. It’s a mystery to me.

Mike - I love your post, both for its generosity and its polite insistence not to assume that what might be true for the US is necessarily true anywhere else. 

Jody - lots of good points there. I’m trying to remember what attracted me to the ‘classic’ banjo. I don’t think it was as much the sound as the repertoire. When it comes to sound, I’m confident (not arrogant) enough to know that I would find my own sound within the limits of what an instrument can offer, so what interests me above all is the repertoire. For that, Frank Converse opened the door and invited me in. Once through the door I discovered Cammeyer. That’s all I needed to get stuck in. On reflection, it couldn’t have been the sound first and foremost, as a) I never head anyone play ‘in the flesh’ as it were, and b) only heard bad phone recordings online - not much to whet ones appetite there. But the repertoire proved very attractive. 

[Jody Stecher]

Ha!!!  I just got to page 60 and 61 and the author, using similar terms that I did, discusses being attracted to banjo music simply because you like it.  Good On You, Ethan!   Yes, sometimes it is that simple.

[Joel Hooks]

Re the term.  While the ABF is often criticized, let's not forget that they were there, i.e. they lived through the subject we are discussing.  Members included Harry Denton (of Brooks and Denton), Alfred Farland, Harry C. Browne, Shirley and Cliff Spaulding, Fannie Heinlein,  Fred Stewart (eldest son of Swaim Stewart), Bill Bowen, Frank Bradbury, Paul Cadwell, Van Eps, the list goes on and on.

So, I mean, why would we doubt their creditability if they were the ones doing it on the front lines.

As far as the term "classic banjo", well, it was just called "banjo playing" until they/we were forced to give it a name.

 

Mike Bostock said:

Thanks for sharing the link Joel. I've just read Ethan's MA thesis and my initial response is interest to see the existence of less considered (I would argue completely overlooked) banjo narratives getting a mention. However, given the cross-cultural and culturally-specific aspects of the historic period under discussion Ethan's cultural perspective is exclusively American in that it is concerned with relationships only between prevailing American banjo narratives.  I understand how that may lead to overstating the importance of the banjo in a British context. I do need to point up that, though once popular, the banjo was never a 'dominant' musical form in late 19th and early 20th century Britain.

If I have an initial critique it is that the term 'classic banjo' is throughout used as a coherent entity reinforced by the conjunction with the term 'classic tradition'. In fact we know that the 'genre' description is of modern (American 1950's) origin and there is currently no evidence for a consensus or a self-referencing 'group' basis in the historic period it refers to. This modern origin is highly relevant and the possible reason(s) for this late-flowering genesis really has to be engaged with to put the retrospective application of the term into true context rather than leaving the uninitiated reader in the dark as to this fact.

But hats off...hopefully we are starting to see the discussion emerging. I support any effort to make this happen.

[Tom McArdle]

Rob - Yes, the repertoire is what attracted me to classic banjo. Thank you for sharing some beautiful examples of it!

I recognize that tastes differ. When I first heard some of those recordings I was tempted to reconsider classic banjo as a pursuit. While it’s great that many love that sound, I have no desire to sound like that. Maybe my taste will change.  Thankfully I realized that I don’t have to play in that style, so I’m going to keep going.

Jody - I am attracted to some banjo music. For me it’s more that I am attracted to music played on the banjo, at this point.

And yes, sometimes it is that simple.

[Tom McArdle]

Joel - I appreciate how clear and open your statements about classic banjo have been. My understanding is that while there are certain parameters to stay within, there is a lot of room for freedom, too.

One thing I took from the interviews in that paper was a desire for the art form to grow and evolve, without losing its roots.

 I once heard about the dynamic that can occur in flamenco circles: the tension between the desire to

preserve tradition, and the impetus to move things forward.

It seems to me that most traditions came about because of something that had evolved. Jazz seems like a classic example.

It would be great if the preservation and innovation could happily coexist.

[Jody Stecher]

Relevant to the question of whether early recordings of banjo sounded accurate: Motivated by Chris Ware's post about an archive of the earliest Van Eps recordings,  I just now compared the sound of Van Eps playing Blaze Away, recorded in 1902 with his late 1950s recording of St Louis Rag. Both can be heard on the Original Recordings page of this website.  To my ears the piano sounds far better on the later recording than the accompanist(s) do on the old cylinder. I can't even tell for sure what is being played for accompaniment. But the sound of the banjo is very much the same. We have to ignore the sound of the echoey room which is evident in the spoken announcement but to me it sounds pretty similar.  The later recording reproduces the noise of snapping strings very well, and that is a mixed blessing but on the old recording the banjo sounds like a banjo and Van Eps playing the banjo sounds like..... Van Eps playing the banjo.

There were two related things under discussion: whether old banjo recordings sound accurate and whether they sound good. The first comparison was a test of accuracy. I then compared two recordings of the same piece, Silver Heels, done in 1919 and the late 50s. Which sounded *better* to me. The earlier one sounds better to me. There is more high end on the newer recording and that is where Banjo Noises reside. 

[Richard William Ineson]

There was a vogue some years ago for plastic parrots mounted on a perch which were often found hanging over the bar in local public houses. These plastic parrots had a recording device within them which made short recordings of snippets of the conversations of the customers which caused great amusement at the time. I found that the cheap recording devices which were used in these parrots replicated the sound of the the early cylinder recordings of Ossman, when I bought one of these parrots to amuse my young daughters. Does anybody know what the recording device in these parrots was/is?

[Richard William Ineson]

Jody, Like you, I heard classic banjo live before I heard it on recordings. There was a temporary resurgence of interest in traditional jazz in the UK in the late 50s and early 60s, I used to go to see the various bands  such as Acker Bilk, Kenny Ball etc. at the City Hall in Sheffield and our local bands in the pubs and other venues. Acker Bilk had a banjo player called Roy James who could really play the banjo and I was fascinated  by his chordal accompaniment and his solo playing. His banjo tone was very good, unlike the awful dugga, dugga, dugga, racket, most of the 'trad' banjoists produced, akin to somebody strumming a lavatory seat strung with heavy duty rubber bands. I wanted to emulate Roy James and went to see the only banjo teacher in Sheffield who advertised in the B.M.G. magazine. He was unacquainted with 'trad' jazz, Roy James, Acker Bilk and probably anything else that had happened in the banjo world since about 1925, but he got his banjo ( Bernard Sheaff's, Cammeyer Vibrante zither banjo) out and played Grimshaw's 'A Banjo Vamp' at maximum ffffff volume, for me. I was amazed, at one hearing, I was captivated by the sound of the finger style banjo. I went on to take lessons from him for a couple of years and  picked up on plectrum playing  by just doing it with any 'trad' band that would have me.

Jody Stecher said:

I heard classic banjo live before I heard it on recordings. Also "liking how it sounds" was meant to include enjoying the repertoire.  I enjoyed the experience of listening to this kind of banjo music. However, I don't agree that the sound of banjo on cylinder and 78s is awful if the media are in good condition  or that the recordings are seriously inaccurate.  We have access to recordings of Van Eps made in the 1950s and it is not so very different from what we hear on a clean old recording.  

Rob MacKillop said:

Tom - yes, there are a few in the classic-banjo world today who are trying to recreate that awful sound that the technology of early recordings gave. It’s a mystery to me.

Mike - I love your post, both for its generosity and its polite insistence not to assume that what might be true for the US is necessarily true anywhere else. 

Jody - lots of good points there. I’m trying to remember what attracted me to the ‘classic’ banjo. I don’t think it was as much the sound as the repertoire. When it comes to sound, I’m confident (not arrogant) enough to know that I would find my own sound within the limits of what an instrument can offer, so what interests me above all is the repertoire. For that, Frank Converse opened the door and invited me in. Once through the door I discovered Cammeyer. That’s all I needed to get stuck in. On reflection, it couldn’t have been the sound first and foremost, as a) I never head anyone play ‘in the flesh’ as it were, and b) only heard bad phone recordings online - not much to whet ones appetite there. But the repertoire proved very attractive. 

[thereallyniceman]

Perhaps Ossman and FVE had one?... but it seems unlikely ;-)

You could make your own... it seems straight forward enough!