Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: modern vs traditional
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
Arash
Posts: 4495
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
|
 RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
the only thing i can add to this thread, is that the more time passes by, the more different styles and different guitarists and cantaors are added in my favourites list. both, traditional and modern.
it was a time, where i only could listen to some particular cante style and voices (only a few), but recently something happened (i don't know what), and i am beginning to like voices and styles which i couldn't stand few months ago (and of course years ago).
i guess finally i will like each and everyone (except ottmar liebert ;-))
flamenco is really a never ending journey and i think whoever has a FIXED and unchangeable idea of what he likes or dislikes, is limited and will miss a lot.
ones mind should be always kept open in flamenco imo, there is so much to discover, in both directions ->past (traditional) -> now and future (modern).
it is sometimes frustrating to read some "close-minded" comments, like traditional is the only "real" flamenco (and of course vice versa...modern players who make fun of the traditional players), but i admit that i was one of these closed minded guys too and thought that most of the traditional guitar players just play 3 chords and call it "the real thing"... (and maybe i still am a bit close-minded), but my attitude is always changing and improving imo.
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 6 2009 11:46:43
 |
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
|
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: runner
Ricardo, in your last post, you wrote,"In my experience, there are few who really appreciate modern flamenco guitar...... There should be way more folks tolerant of the modern players on a flamenco forum IMO."
Could you expand a little on this? My sense is that this Foro is almost completely dominated by, first, those whose interest in flamenco is overwhelmingly about guitar, and, second, whose interest is in those very modern players that you feel are not appreciated enough. If one compares the numbers of posts and posters on this Foro to those of the tiny handful of forums dealing with Old School, this Foro blows the rest out of the water, in terms of sheer numbers, and, I presume, appreciation of modern players.
runner
Correct about guitar being the focus. Second thing is about many people being interested in modern players is true in general, but there is a distinction to be made. They are generally interested in "modern" players and at the same time the traditional players. So why make it seem like it is not possible to be into traditional playing if your favorite is some modern guy? I can only think of a few, Florian Doit, and no one else off hand who openly admits to NOT liking traditional players AS MUCH as modern ones.
On the other hand, over the years, the number of people who have vocalized a lack of interest or tolerance for "modern" or "nuevo" or "technical" or "jazzy new age" flamenco, as they percieve it, is quite large IMO, relative to the two guys above. I would say the reason it SEEMS that modern flamenco lovers dominate, is because in the mind of the old school lovers, it does not make any sense how someone could accept both traditional and modern flamenco as to be part of the same genre. You can either have a taste for this or that, not both...and more confusing to that mind set, how can one not see there is a clear division???? Again, that mind set resulted in the split of the forum...not between modern lovers vs trad lovers....but from those who generally view flamenco guitar as a single evolved art form (this forum in general) and those that view classical flamenco guitar as a separate genre, the dividing line specifically being Paco de lucia.
I am not saying that in this forum it is a requirement to like all and every player in the history of flamenco, I am just saying there are many around who still have that division in their tastes and minds. We all draw a personal line somewhere.
quote:
Ricardo, one can recognize the influence of Ramon Montoya in Tomatito's playing and still appreciate Ramon Montoya's toque more than and above that of Tomatito's. Likewise, one may appreciate Tomatito's more than and above that of Ramon Montoya's. It is a matter of personal preference. There is no logical inconsistency in either position.
i agree with you 100%. You can understand and recognize something and still NOT like it, of course!!! But something is missing there too, you can actually like BOTH players. And you can even like them both if you DONT see the connection. My point of the analogy was not about liking or prefering an artitst or not.
I was generalizing that the types of folks who are not tolerant of modern flamenco, and write off modern players as "not flamenco" or as jazz or whatever, usually don't hear the connection to players they DO recognize and like. That is usually why they dont' like it.
For example: "I like sabicas. Tomatito is too jazzy for me. Paco Peña? Oh yeah he is good too."
To me all 3 guys stole A LOT from Ramon Montoya, and in many ways flat out note for note. But it is not simply artist inspiration and borrowing of ideas, those musical or technical details define the art form in general!!!
Regardless if they like or don't like the modern artist, those connections exist in the music. As Arash posted above about himself, i think it is totally true that the more you study, the deeper you go into it, not only do you start appreciating things you did not have a taste for earlier, you actually end up with a bigger list of players you DO like. So many things in flamenco are an acquired taste, acquired by listening and learning and being open to the stuff. The concept of modern VS traditional, to me, is a close minded concept that does not leave much room for acquiring taste.
Oh to Doit about the juerga...it is a way to really help with rhythm IMO, assuming you are doing the juerga with high level people. Very important for getting detail of rhythm and feel, tonos for the singer, improvising etc etc....all you can't learn so immediately and solidly in your room with videos, music, and a metronome. And most important...it can inspire creativity. Sure many things can too, but never cancel out on something that might be inspiring.
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 7 2009 6:32:08
|
|
Stoney
Posts: 132
Joined: Nov. 6 2009
|
|
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Wow - I knew resurrecting this thread would be a hot potatoe.
My last words on the topic.
In the film "Bring on the night" Sting, who at the time was trying to do a Jazz Popular music fusion says something like "the weakness of pop music is that it only draws on itself for influence and therefore rarely evolves - like a snake chasing its own tail it must one day die." (paraphasing here, not a quotation but you get the idea)
If you believe that philosophy, then the contrary would also see true, that for any style of music to grow and evolve it must have outside influences.
quote:
For a tradition to exist it has to be handed on, and will evolve as it does so, that is the nature of any tradition, so therefore whatever is "modern" must be part of the "tradition" because otherwise what you are calling "tradition" is not a tradition, it is "historical"
I also agree with this previous comment made here on this thread. However, one is not necessarily handing on a tradition by ONLY learning note for note the "big name" artist of the day without delving into some of the works of the older players.
Now, a generalization.
100% Traditional Flamenco cannot be anything except Flamenco.
50 / 50 - 60 / 40 - 70 / 30 % Traditional and Modern Flamenco mix will still be Flamenco.
100% Modern Flamenco could possibly be anything BUT Flamenco.
Spanish and Latin culture and language are so totally relative to region that what is Salsa dancing in one country could be completely unrecognizable in another. The same goes for language. So I'd have to agree with the poster who mentioned that we must take our cues from the people living and playing Flamenco in Andalusia and Spain today.
I really tried to bring this topic home for the "Local" flamenco player. I've yet to see a CD out of Spain that completely ignores the traditional. (within the modern flamenco world - the nuevo flamenco is a complete different conversation)
It would be safe to say that if you studied Flamenco for 10 years, went to Andalusia and they told you you were doing it all wrong you'd pretty much have to take their word for it, NO? Or what? "Well that's how we play bulerias is Assbackwards Arkansas so what do these gypsies know?
Stoney
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 7 2009 9:03:25
|
|
Stoney
Posts: 132
Joined: Nov. 6 2009
|
|
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
I wrote a whole thing and then the internet connection died so here's the shorter version.
Sting once said that pop music is like a snake chasing its tail. Since it doesn't regularly take in outside influence, it never grows.
Therefore, Flamenco does and must incorportate new things, harmony, instruments etc. as it is a vibrant growing evolving musical form. Logical.
My original post was largely aimed at "Local" musicians. I've yet to hear a "Modern" Flamenco CD from Spain that completely ignores the traditional. (Modern, not Nuevo - that's a whole other conversation) If you have no, zero, none, zippo, zilch, nil, nada tradtional Flamenco in your playing, you're probably not playing flamenco.
100% tradtional will always be recognized as Flamenco.
50/50 - 60 /40 etc. % Traditional and Modern will still be recognized as Flamenco.
100% modern flamenco may not be recognizable and may or may not be Flamenco at all.
As for the person who stated that we take our cues from the folk in Andlusica and Spaing who are playing flamenco today, I have to agree. (or 2nd hand or 3rd hand from people taking their cues from these same people) If you study for 10 years and then go to Andalusia and they tell you you are doing it all wrong, you'd pretty much have take them at their word. Or what, "that's the way we play bluerias in Assbackward Arkansas!" I think not.
Stoney
PS no offense to the good people of Assbackward Arkansas, I hear they are a real nice bunch!
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 7 2009 9:21:37
|
|
Stoney
Posts: 132
Joined: Nov. 6 2009
|
|
RE: modern vs traditional (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
There's flamenco that anyone can recognize or mistake as flamenco and then there's Flamenco that's functional.
I for one have seen a ton of folks that can play like demons and have no bloody idea what it is they are doing. Put them with a singer or dancer or even another guitarist and they are useless. And then again, who can say that the dancers have the slightest clue either? After all, if it was easy, anyone would do it.
I for one will be sure I know what I'm doing once I have lived in Spain for a while.
Case in point, my sister in law who studied dance in Spain asked me to accompany her class. She asked me to play "La llamada por bulerias" and I had no idea what she was talking about. So I asked both players in my hometown who were more advanced than me. They had no clue.
Whoever said that this music comes from Andalusia and we take our cues from them was more than 100% right. Anyone ever hear of a Flamenco guitarist who learned back in the 60s because they could read music and got some of the earliest transcipts. I'd hate to have one of those guys for a teacher.
quote:
"Practise makes Permanent....not Perfect."
There's that too. Don't get me wrong, there are some great players on this site from what I've seen and KUDOS if it turns out they are all doing it right, but who am I to judge? and let's face it, there are more ways to do it wrong than there are to do it right.
I just came from a Christmas party here in Mexico where everybody danced Salsa steps to every style of latin music and they all thought they were dancing correctly. Culture can be perverted, changed and watered down, the feeling can get lost and / or one can be over generous with one's own critique. Ot the Gypsy King sindrome. They believe they ARE playing Flamenco. (as per another post)
Of course this is only partly relative to the traditional vs. modern dialogue. You can butcher the style with traditional as easlily as you can with modern, espectially where dancers and singers come in.
Overall, I just prefer to be humble and say I know nothing about Flamenco. Then at least if I do have a moment, it's humble. Again, I'd rather master Sabicas than mangle Tomatito.
Stoney
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 7 2009 12:31:19
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.09375 secs.
|
Printable Version
I take two steps forward only to discover there are thousands more! 
