Alex Magee Plays `Canadian Capers`

[Shawn McSweeny]

To help celebrate Canada's 158th birthday today, Alex Magee plays his arrangement of this lively piece, accompanied by Karen Magee. They were recorded at a 1949 concert in New Rochelle, NY. The sound was quite muffled, as if the microphone were placed beneath several heavy overcoats while recording.

A few digital tricks have improved the sound quality somewhat, but transcription remained difficult. Inevitably I got stuck, reached out to the ABF library for whatever they may have for reference, and was stunned to receive an A notation, manuscript transcription of Alex's arrangement !! It is now transposed to C and typeset in both standard notation and TAB.

Incidentally, Alex liked to play as in the photo, sideways on his chair with his right arm draped over its back.

[Jody Stecher]

I would say that the Andy DeJarlis version might be a contender for  the official or real way this tune goes. He may have been the first to record it and Manitoba radio could be heard in the northern USA midwest which seems to be how the tune entered the USA repertoire. Most of the changes it underwent were not for the best. One exception is the way Missouri fiddler Pete McMahon played it. I've attached sound files of both.

About Tony T and Bela F sticking to the melody:  to do that you gotta first know what the melody  actually is. By the time those guys (great banjoists both)  got to hear WBB it was no longer itself. I didn't mean that musicians have been deliberately replacing the melody with arpeggios and scales. I meant that for a half a century they have been thinking that IS the melody. 

Here's how she really goes (attached)

Andy De Jarlis 

[Jody Stecher]

Somehow Ning lost my attachment of Pete McMahon. Here is is again. Maybe,

[Shawn McSweeny]

That was illuminating- the recordings not only define the original melody but illustrate some of the stylistic differences between Canadian and US fiddling - and the melody is already a little different in the second players hands.

This helps illustrate how a popular tune - passed from musician to musician over many years - can  be reshaped/lose itself along the way.

[Trapdoor2]

The folk process at work. Learn the tune 5th or 6th hand and then make it yours. Nobody cared how close they could play to the original until pedants could look it up.

I've backed WBB on guitar so much, I could fall asleep and not lose a beat. I dislike playing it solo clawhammer because it is so notey...but our fiddler loves it. I outline it and let him shine.

Although it is now attributed to De Jarlis, for me, the McMahon version is what I hear in my head.

[Jody Stecher]

I don't agree that nobody cared, Marc. 

The composers of these tunes, some of whom are still alive or recently passed away care(d)  very much that their melodies be played as composed. Differences in expression and style are just about always appreciated and encouraged and changes to the original that improve the tune are applauded by most of the composers I have met.

My personal view is that making a tune one's own by adding beauty or excitement or removing parts that seem too fussy or just unappealing is a very positive development. But dumbing-down a good tune and thinking that's good music is another matter. Simplifying a complex tune for beginners is fine. Good idea. But that's different. 

Long ago I made an offhand comment that has since been quoted and misquoted on the internet as well as understood, half-understood and misunderstood. I said " It's not good because it's traditional. It's traditional because it's good".  I meant that some tunes stand the test of time because of some intrinsic value or appeal while others fade away.   I was applying this to the enormous pool of compositions whose original composers are unknown. But it applies as well to music with known composers. 

On this forum most of us are happy when an able transcriber like Shawn presents what (for instance) Vess Ossman really played. Same for something really close to what he played,  We recognize its veracity as an improvement over over-simplified sheet music. For most (I think) the accuracy is not appreciated for its own sake but because it makes for better-sounding music.  It's the same with fiddle tunes. And banjo tunes. 

Do these opinions make me a pedant? I don't think so.  Some past fiddlers who were far more fussy than I have ever been about how a tune is played:  Kenny Baker, Buddy MacMaster, Clyde Davenport.  Buddy was tolerant and kept his preferences to his own playing but if you played one note "wrong" and Kenny Baker heard it you'd get your head handed to you on a plate.  As for Clyde, anything deviant from his versions was "hippy music".  (Slight exaggeration). 

Trapdoor2 said:

The folk process at work. Learn the tune 5th or 6th hand and then make it yours. Nobody cared how close they could play to the original until pedants could look it up.

I've backed WBB on guitar so much, I could fall asleep and not lose a beat. I dislike playing it solo clawhammer because it is so notey...but our fiddler loves it. I outline it and let him shine.

Although it is now attributed to De Jarlis, for me, the McMahon version is what I hear in my head.

[Jody Stecher]

An afterthought:  I'm remembering the reputation of the older generation of Cape Breton fiddlers and pianists.  I met a few long ago, and others I didn't meet but heard about. They were obsessed with playing what they called the "correct" version of each tune.   It was odd because they swore by the old printed tune books like The Skye Collection, The Athole Collection, Kerr's, Lowe's and a few others. There is a fair amount of overlap of tunes in these books and the versions of these tunes that were in the books differed from each other in ways that were not trivial. And yet the musicians held on to the idea of "correct".  It was peculiar if taken at face value but it pointed in the direction of a good idea: musical beauty can be easily lost in the absence of vigilance.

Which brings me to the Pete McMahan version of WBB (sorry about my McMahon typo),  It is detailed and beautiful and surprising and highly ornamented and melodically sound, It is nothing like what I've usually heard from most players. Earlier today I drew up a banjo notation of the Andy De Jarlis version. It transfers easily from fiddle to banjo. I might add a banjo-ism or two but note-for-note works.  The McMahan version is another kettle of fish. It has to be played an octave higher than the De Jarlis version if I keep the key of D. The only way to get in the lower octave is to play it in F or G. Not what I want to do. Some of the fiddle-specific ornaments are not easily replicated on banjo and they don't actually sound particularly nice when played.  So I think I will banjo-ize it more.  I agree that when accompanying a fiddler on *this* tune in this version(whether using clawhammer technique or another way) sticking to the outline makes for better music. It can get cluttered otherwise.

[Joel Hooks]

I only asked because I am not in the old time world.  While it could be age related changes to my hearing, I find the sound of the “fiddle” extremely unpleasant (and I really can’t remember a time that I liked it, and I even played one for a while).  Honestly, I’m not going to listen to fiddle players if I can avoid it.

[Jody Stecher]

Definitely don't listen to the sound files I posted then as both players have somewhat "edgy" tone.

I'll post the banjo arrangement of the Andy De Jarlis version soon so you can read it and hear it on the banjo. It may not be the original but it seems to be the oldest recorded version. It may be of Métis origin and the first part seems to be derived from Speed The Plow, a tune in A major of "Old World" origin, probably English. 

The differences in tone between fiddle players due to both setup of the instrument and the skill and/or aesthetics of the player is as noticeable as the differences in the sound of a bluegrass banjo, a gourd banjo, a Weaver set up for classic playing and an Ome plectrum banjo with steel strings and a tight clear plastic head. 

However there are limits or parameters to the differences. The music of a violin/ fiddle, at least in the days before synthetic materials existed,  is obtained by rubbing sticky pine pitch on the tail of a horse which is dragged across the entrails of a goat or sheep. 

Joel Hooks said:

I only asked because I am not in the old time world.  While it could be age related changes to my hearing, I find the sound of the “fiddle” extremely unpleasant (and I really can’t remember a time that I liked it, and I even played one for a while).  Honestly, I’m not going to listen to fiddle players if I can avoid it.

[Jody Stecher]

In the near future I will post tidied-up scores, tab, and sound files for banjo arrangements of the two versions of WBB we've been discussing.

For the purpose of illuminating and furthering this ongoing discussion today I have  attached  the sheet music  of three versions of WBB scored for banjo. There is the midwestern Canadian version, the midwestern American version and a literal transposition an octave lower than fiddle of the midwestern version that includes notes below the range of the banjo. This is included to make comparison of the two versions easy. The Canadian version goes no lower than D so most of it fits easily on the lower banjo frets. I had to move the Missouri version up an octave to present the full melody and that's ok but it makes comparison of the two versions a bit harder.

[Trapdoor2]

De Jarlis' tune was published in a tunebook by him in 1957. It is available in notation here: https://tunearch.org/wiki/Annotation:Whiskey_before_Breakfast

My point was not to complain about pedantry. It has its place, and in my areas of expertise... often guilty. You can be a pedant without being an (insert unallowed ************ epithet). We're in a new age of research. Everyone is an expert.

The folk process is chaotic, and the publishing end tends to look the other way when researching copyright ownership/composership of folk music. "Traditional" was the usual "source" for any folk music where the composer or copyright owner was not easily and quickly found, whether it was new or old. Often, if the copyright was found, the piece would not be included...because of fees.

Today, anyone with a home computer (or smartphone) can find the Ur tune and thesis are written about tune families, trees, etc.

Frankly, I use the following phrase to guide me: "...we don't care what momma don't 'low, we'll pick the Banjo anyhow..."

Miz Diane doesn't like repetitive noises...like banjo playing. She doesn't really hear the tune; all she hears is the constant flow of picking.

[Joel Hooks]

Regarding me and the fiddle, I hate to make broad generalizations about tone but when I hear a fiddle player there tends to be a certain goal that my hearing finds unpleasant.

However, I love the sound of a "violin" played by a "violinist" and I often listen to various interpretations of Paganini's music played by violinists. I used to think that it was a matter of the violinist tendency to drill down and focus on pure and smooth tone from their instrument. But that is not being fair to fiddle players.

Someone once told me that they could pick the "classically trained violinist" (whatever that means) out of an old time jam, to which I responded, "that is because they sound good". Again, that is unfair as obviously many people enjoy and strive for the "fiddle" tone. And I am glad for them.

[Austin]

What program did you use for this beautiful engraving?