Re: [Musicians] Musicians Digest, Vol 6, Issue 4

On Aug 3, 2015, at 6:42 PM, Emily Addison via Musicians <musicians(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: FWIW, what seems to be the same recording is available from Amazon for $0.89 here http://www.amazon.com/Rumboldts-Fathers-Esau-Paynes-Tune/dp/B0029U6YAY and there's also a free 30-second sample of the Rumboldt's part. (By the way, Emily, were you able to play video you originally asked about at 1.25x speed, as I suggested in one of my earlier messages? If so, did you find the phrasing just as deceptive as it was at the original slow tempo.) In my earlier message, I mentioned three recordings of the tune: 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DkJQ9xNGuU (the video Emily originally asked about, played by the Dardanelles; about 93 or 94 BPM) 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rx_E3qeZAfQ (played by Christina Smith and Jean Hewson, also available from Amazon at the URL cited earlier; about 165 BPM) 3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCnFlmrN1mk (crooked version played by STEP fiddlers; about 147 BPM) I have some questions for anyone who cares to answer, and especially for any of you who found the phrasing in the Dardanelles' version to be so obvious that you wonder why anyone else could have difficulty with it. * Which do you suppose came first: straight versions such as the ones in the Dardanelles and Smith/Hewson videos (which, by the way, sound quite similar to me except for the very different tempos and some details of how the ends of phrases are punctuated), or the crooked version in the STEP fiddlers video? * If the STEP fiddlers' version is derived from a straight version, can you identify what someone might have been hearing in the straight version that would get them to folk-process it into a crooked version (perhaps without even realizing that they weren't transmitting aural tradition accurately)? * If the straight versions are derived from a crooked version, can you identify anything in them that might hint at their crooked ancestry? I'm not asking these as vague rhetorical questions about tunes in general. In particular, I think it's entirely possible for a tune to exist in straight and crooked versions where the straight version doesn't seem at all suggest that there could be crooked version floating around. I'm really interested in what anyone has to say regarding specific features of these recordings of Jim Rumboldt's Tune. One other question, especially for those who instantly heard the Dardanelles' version in 4-beat and 8-beat groupings: * As you listen to the part from about 0:05 to 0:25--that is, the first 32 beats (16 bars) after the intro--can you get yourself to hear each 8-beat chunk as 3 beats + 3 beats + 2 beats instead of as 4+4? While I don't have trouble hearing that part of the tune as (4+4)+(4+4)+..., I find that I can also get myself to hear as (3+3+2)+(3+3+2)+... I'm speculating that if someone's initial reaction to the opening notes were to hear them as 3+3, then they might get started down a path of thinking the tune is sort of like a slip-jig but keeps going crooked. And developing that mental expectation might make it hard to lock on to the 4-beat chunks. --Jim