What constitutes right and wrong notes AND chords

[Jim Smith]

Another example is "I'm Walking The Floor Over You", which ET did as a simple three chord song. From what I recall from seeing it in an old song book, this version by Jerry Lee Lewis actually follows the more complex original chord progression: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6fobCRtxM0

[Andy Sandoval]

So what exactly are we sayin here. Is it wrong to learn a song that is not the original version? Almost every song has been redone by someone at some time and usually with a different twist to it, otherwise whats the point. Who's to say which version is the correct version to learn. Sometimes a redone version becomes even more popular and memorable than the original.

[Bo Borland]

Andy,
I think Basil is referring more to the main melody rather than the chord progression and the way original melodies to classic tunes get altered/edited/improvised/forgotten etc.

Ken mentions "The Chair" and while the quote attributed to Jimmy Day could apply here, you can sing the George Strait version melody over either progression (holding the 1 or walking the bass down 1-7-6-5). Likewise you can sing it going from the 1 to the 4 chord or the 1 to the 2m.

Since I never heard the writers version (Dean Dillon & Hank Cochran) I really don't know how either the original melody or progression was written. I also assume that a word or phrase may have been edited to suit the singer. As an example, I always heard the last line of the first verse as "could I toss you out a line" but according to all the online lyrics it's "can I talk you out of a light"
My bad I guess.
I also seem to be playing the progression all wrong as many sites have it listed as the 1 to a 1sus2

I have also heard bands sing the line " I don't know the name of the band.." as "the name of the bands' insert your bands name hereand they're good"

If someone calls calls "I'm So Lonesome I Could Cry" as 3 chord simple in whatever key ... I know not to play all the passing chords I know.

[Nicholai Steindler]

I think this might make a good project for a few dedicated people vs trying to get us all to learn the proper way to play. It is too easy for a generation to not care and forget about it.

I would suggest some videos be made and donated to the Library of Congress and uploaded to google video.

[Dave Boothroyd]

The Folk process is, at heart, the musical version of Chinese Whispers, and it is a very long way from the defined world of Irish and Scottish instrumental playing in competition.
To take one source song as an example, the tale of the two sisters, rivals in love, where one kills the other by pushing her into a mill stream, becomes "Two Sisters" in Ireland, and uptempo bouncy song with no supernatural aspects. In Scotland it is "The Swan Swims Sae Bonny Oh." It's a slow air and at the end a fiddle made from the bones and hair of the victim accuses the murderer. In London, the same story becomes, "The Bows of London", and is a dance tune.
The roots of the melody are the same, the refrain is completely different in each case. There is probably an Appalaichan version somewhere.
It's a folk song- and it has been transmitted from some unknown original by a process of unintentionally inaccurate aural memory involving many listeners and performers. That is why it is truly a folk song. There is not, nor could there ever be, a correct version.
I know that Basil has a prodigious musical memory- but we don't all have that. I was looking in my ideas book recently and came across some early versions of my own songs.
Over time (only six years in fact) I have changed them.
Melody, chords and lyrics are different. And yet I have not written down the changes anywhere. I must logically have believed I was still singing the same song. The songs have evolved, been polished and tuned up so they run more smoothly and more effectively to an audience.
The idea of a once and for all correct version is not always relevant.
If the music has been transmitted in written form from a known composer, I can see that there is a canonical version- though Classical music is still full of Rhapsodies, Fantasias etc. on the themes of other composers.
Where music is totally, as in the case of Traditional folk, or partially in the case of popular music, thrown open to the public, and transmitted aurally, I would argue that variation is natural and inevitable and that the idea of an unchangeable correct version is an unnecessary restriction of creativity.
Cheers
Dave

[Danny Bates]

I know where you're coming from basilh. I can't watch a song get butchered by the wrong chords. I have to get out of the room real quick!

Of course, it depends on the artists interpretation of the song.

I wonder if anybody knows the real words to "Sittin' on top of the world"

Here's three examples.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqeW7-tm ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FmQ-mXGt_I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sS5jSbV0Vg

[Roual Ranes]

I work with a guy sometimes that does "Last Letter". He said he wanted it straight but started walking his bass string through the minor chord changes. I just followed him with one string. If he has caught on yet he hasn't said anything.
Do we need to punish Fats for doing "Blueberry Hill" different from Gene Autry? ??

[Bill McCloskey]

In competitions worldwide the stars of Accordion, Fiddle, Mandolin, Button Continental Accordion and many other instruments are judged in their respective competitions for the attributes I outlined in my original post above.

This reminds me of a story about when my son was about 14. He had been playing mandolin for about a year, was extremely talented on it, had played on stage with David Grisman and had spent a week studying with him at his camp, had been written up in the paper, was playing jazz mandolin weekly, and had a teacher that was blown away with his skill and who was teaching him Irish playing. We went to a local Irish competition. My son played and was clearly the best player in the room. But because he did not play in the exact method that the judges were looking for, he took 3rd place and the first place winner was a kid who could barely play at all. The audience was so surprised that the mother of the kid who won actually came over to us saying she was surprised because clearly my son played better than her son.

We never went back to another competition. I felt then and I fell now that competitions have little to do with music making and what is proper in a contest setting, is not necessarily interesting playing.

[Alan Brookes]

...I wonder if anybody knows the real words to "Sittin' on top of the world" ...

That one's easy to answer... "No".
The song started out as a blues number sometime before the war. Blues singers swap verses between songs and mix everything up. Most of the time no-one knows who originated them. Bob Wills used to pick up blues numbers and adapt them to his own style. So right now the number has become a blues standard and a country standard.

[Per Berner]

I have a live DVD with Willie Nelson, where he does a bunch of his old standards. If I hadn't been familiar with the lyrics, I never could have guessed what songs he was doing. Not a single note in their right place, where he originally intended them to be...

[Bob Simons]

With all due respect, I think you are all making a conceptual error that is extremely limiting qnd I believe crippling to steel guitarists (from what I read on the forum. )

I would suggest that there is no wrong way to play steel guitar or to arrange a tune. You may like what is played alot or little, it may be artful or inept in your view, the tune may be quoted, referred to, or simply used as a point of departure, but unless the aim is specifically to quote verbatim and the quote is inaccurate, there is no right or wrong.

Is the steel guitar now limited to replicating like a piano player trying to render Chopin in a concert hall? (Piano is used for other things as well, you know.) Maybe we need a licensing authority for the right to play pedal steel with minimum requirements of fidelity to the best, good, bad, or indifferent...perhaps we should submit proposed chord substitutions to a review board of 80+ year old expert steel guitar players...

In short, the arrangement may be to your taste or not. That is all.

[basilh]

Interesting point of view Bob, not that I agree, but that's what discussion is all about.

Oh yes, can you point out to me where in my initial post I SPECIFICALLY referred to the Steel Guitar, I was under the impression I was discussing music performances in general.

you say

I would suggest that there is no wrong way to play steel guitar

So, what is your definition of the word "PLAY" ?

[Bob Simons]

"play" -make a sound with it with a musical purpose.

I am simply saying that unless my specific goal is to copy, there is my way and your way, but no wrong way. If you don't like it, don't come back and listen next time.

Actually I get irritated when people here in KC constantly play Miles Davis' "All BLues" in the wrong time and invariably misunderstand and misquote the last four bars turning the tune from art to "bar blues" junk...so I understand your point of view....

[Brian Henry]

During my academic studies at the University of London this question was raised in a classical music appreciation class. The consensus was that music was purely art.

Later on during private encounters with the lat great Jeff Newman he tended to agree. In other words there are no rules. For example you could say there are rules and that sound without a certain pitch and a certain tempo is just noise. However in making these rules (science) you are in fact reducing some music to noise. I think that music is an art like painting, and the beauty is in the ear of the beholder. It is an art! No rules!!

[Alan Brookes]

References have been made to Classical Music, and the assumption that there is no leeway. If that were the case then the same piece played by two different orchestras would sound identical, but they don't. There is often a difference in meter and pitch and the balance between instruments. That's not counting variations which have been written by one composer onto the works of another.
In the genre in which I am mainly interested, which they call by the vague term "Early Music", but usually refers to the pre-Baroque period, there was a lot of improvisation. In fact the bass part was very rarely written out: it was merely indicated as "basso continuo", which means the player of the bass part, which could be any instrument, was expected to improvise.

Knowing that my Hawaiian playing breaks all the rules, I am aptly calling the album I'm working on...

[Gary Meixner]

Basil,

When I first read through this thread I thought no way am going to get involved in this one. Later I thought this is just too provocative to leave alone.

First off I would say that this is the type of subject that is best discussed over a couple bottles of good single malt scotch. My current favorite, of the ones I can afford, is Ardbeg. On first taste it was like I was sucking on a band-aid while burning wet leaves, but it soon occurred to me, "Hey, I like this stuff - a lot" and now my description would much more flattering.

I have had the same experience with many performers interpretation of some of my favorite songs. I agree there are some melodies that are perfect and to change a note would be a huge mistake, but every so often I am stopped dead in my tracks by a performance that strayed very far from the original but did the song justice.

Playing the wrong chords is a different story. No matter how talented you are it is going to be hard to convince me that a B major works when you are playing, "Settin' the Woods On Fire" and the whole band is laying down a solid C major. Still I am willing to stay open to the idea - sort of.

My point is no one, not you, or me or the Dean of Berkley School of Music can tell exactly what the writer's feelings and intentions were when they wrote a particular piece of music. All we really know is how it speaks to us personally. If we choose to perform a tune and take liberties with any aspect of it is our job to sell the listener on our interpretation. The original version will probably still live on despite hacks like me looking to customize it.

Not to sound wishy-washy there are times when the melody is the melody and don't mess with it. Likewise the chords are the chords and leave that Bmin7b5 out of there - I don't care if it fits.

Basil, I greatly admire your (and many others on this forum) talent and insight. I have read your posts both here and on the HSGA forum for sometime now. I know you to be a lover of music, as I am and can only hope to some day be as accomplished as you are.

Gary Meixner

[Dave Burr]

Interesting discussion. I'm not really sure which way I lean on it though. Firstly, I think one should use good judgement when going to Youtube for instruction on "anything". It's frustrating to see how many folks out there misrepresent the true melodies of songs we know and love... I truly think they don't know any better in many cases.... so, I right it off as just that.

However, there are cases where the original music as documented via sheet music has been "tweaked" or completely overhauled... and achieved some degree of success in the latter form. I think of the Patsy Cline version of Faded Love... Granted she held true to the general melody of the lyrics, but I wonder what Bob Wills thought when her version never modulated? I can think of several different arrangements of that song that don't hold true to the original.

Some artists are notorious for taking "liberty" with, not only their own arangements, but changing up melodies to songs that have traditional arrangements that have become standard. Darrell Scott, a singer/songwriter from Nashville, comes to mind. He certainly has a right to do anything he wants with his own songs... however, I can think of one particular case I think he came up with a better melody for someone elses song. Granted it was live and "in the moment".

I don't really know how to say "when" it's ok... What I do know is when I enjoy the results, it ok for me and when I think it sucks, it's not ok for me.

Thanks for the topic Basil. I really do enjoy reading your thoughts and always learn something from your posts.

[basilh]

The name of Patsy Cline and the mention of alterations being beneficial brings to mind Patsy Cline and ....

Written by Willie Nelson as a medium tempo, it was called "Crazy", which Cline originally hated. Her first session recording was a disaster, and Cline claimed that the song was too difficult to sing. She tried to record "Crazy" like its demo recording, which featured Nelson's idiosyncratic style, but had a tough time recording it not only because of the demo, but also because she found the high notes hard to sing due to injured ribs from her car accident. The day in the studio at Decca resulted in a head-on fight between Cline and Bradley.

Cline recorded the song the next week in one take, a version completely different from the demo. It became a classic and, ultimately, Cline's signature song—and the one for which she remains best known. In late 1961, the song was an immediate country pop crossover hit, and also constituted her biggest pop hit, making the Top 10. Loretta Lynn later reported that the night Cline premiered "Crazy" at the Grand Ole Opry, she received three standing ovations.

"Crazy" was a hit on three different charts in late 1961 and early 1962—the Hot Country Songs list (No. 2), the US Hot 100 list (No. 9), and the Adult Contemporary list (also No. 2). An album released that November entitled Patsy Cline Showcase featured Cline's two hits of 1961.

Now, the question is easy as to which version is the definitive version, even Willie would admit that it was improved by changing the tempo and altering a note or two, as well as the phrasing.
I'm also convinced that Crazy as an example of variation being given latitude and acceptance, is the exception that shows what enlightened and EXPERIENCED modification can do..

[Alan Brookes]

Don't forget that Eddie Cochran's hit "C'mon Everybody" was originally recorded as "Let's Get Together" and got nowhere. He changed the words and it became a hit. Likewise, Buddy Holly's "Peggy Sue" was written as "Betty Lou".

A subject that hasn't been mentioned is that of censorship. When Bill Haley recorded the original words of "Shake, Rattle and Roll" they wouldn't release it. He had to write a complete set of new words which weren't so "provocative", and the hit version is really tame compared to the original.

[Alan Brookes]

...I wonder if anybody knows the real words to "Sittin' on top of the world"
Here's three examples...

Danny, you missed out the Alan Brookes version.
http://www.7161.com/css_track.cfm?track ... k_id=19119

[Leonard G. Robertson]

I heard "Faded Love" was written in modulated version to accomodate most singers having limited voice range, but Patsy could do it in one key.

[Bill McCloskey]

One interesting example is Bob Dylan, who not only changed the melodies and chords (slightly) of traditional tunes and copywrited them as his own, but went on to change the melodies and chords to his own tunes many times over the life of his career, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.

[basilh]

So it seems that there is a lot of support for changing the actual notes of the melody.

To me incorrect or altered notes are wrong and I can't understand the reasoning behind altering an established melody, or words, which are often wrong on many recordings. To me it appears the artist is being either lazy and not diligent enough, OR is lacking a producer with taste.

As an example, here is a tune that I would consider played incorrectly, listen to the third note in the second bar of the melody, there are deviations also at the end of the first 8 bars of the actual tune.

Click HERE


Just in case my terminology suffers from the "Trans-Atlantic Syndrome" .. I refer to the tune or melody, as what happens after the "intro" which by tradition has always been an "Obbligato" and self determined part, usually a clever altered quote of the last 4 or 8 bars of the "Melody".. or improvisation around the chord structure of the last 4 or 8.

[Dave Burr]

Now, the question is easy as to which version is the definitive version, even Willie would admit that it was improved by changing the tempo and altering a note or two, as well as the phrasing.
I'm also convinced that Crazy as an example of variation being given latitude and acceptance, is the exception that shows what enlightened and EXPERIENCED modification can do..

Good point Basil. On the other hand, look at what Willie did to Johnny Bush's classic "Whiskey River". He turned a perfectly good Texas shuffle into a raucous, bluesy, loosey goosey, out of time romp. While I personally don't think Willie made a favorable improvement to the song, I'm sure Johnny Bush laughed all the way to the bank.... and continues to. However, to me and many folks from Texas, Johnny Bush's original version of "Whiskey River" is still the definitive. (note: it also contains one of the best steel breaks ever by Weldon)
http://users.interlinks.net/rebel/steel ... yriver.mp3

Fun topic and much food for thought.

[Ransom Beers]

I will chime in here for just a bit. When I asked Johnny if he liked the way Willie done his song he replied"I don't care how he does it just as long as he keeps sending the royalty checks."