Teufelhunden54 - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:01:02

---

Can you post a link to someone playing the Georgia shuffle?

groundhogpeggy - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:01:25

---

I don't know how I "learn" tunes, mainly because I really don't know very many, if any at all, really. But when i mess with a tune on fiddle, I come out of a mindset of Nashville shuffle... I stray from that to catch a quick breath and then back.

Georgia shuffle, from what I've heard, is, to me, one of those nerve-wracking things. Not cutting anyone's playing down, but it's crass-sounding to me, at least when I've heard it in use, or think I'm hearing it in use. Som eof the other shuffles or patterns or whatevers sound good to me. I don't see myself ever trying Georgia shuffle. The other things, maybe yes, maybe no: but I meander in and out of Nashville shuffle for now... Of course, it's way to early for me to know what I might end up doing... who knows... maybe even 95% Georgia Shuffle....(shudder, shudder)!!!

groundhogpeggy - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:03:55

---

I like it that on fiddle hangout you can discuss what you think about things (not people, just things, such as shuffles, etc.). On some sites, everybody gets all worked up if you do that... like some sort of jukebox mentality or something.

---

Edited by - groundhogpeggy on 08/04/2010 14:04:20

dsreiner - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:06:18

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teufelhunden54

Can you post a link to someone playing the Georgia shuffle?

---

I play it slow and fast and contrast it with other patterns on my music page at fiddlehangout.com/myhangout/mu...sp?id=385

Page down to "Georgia Shuffle Examples."

Dave

---

Edited by - dsreiner on 08/04/2010 14:08:05

Humbled by this instrument - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:06:38

---

Here's some ol' Georgia Shuffle:

youtube.com/watch?v=r2XT9u7iw9...e=related

Humbled by this instrument - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:10:27

---

Here the first girl to fiddle uses Georgia shuffle here and there tastefully:

youtube.com/watch?v=UJd8EN5-gIw

Teufelhunden54 - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:37:39

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

I like it that on fiddle hangout you can discuss what you think about things (not people, just things, such as shuffles, etc.). On some sites, everybody gets all worked up if you do that... like some sort of jukebox mentality or something.

---

How true, Peggy. There is a saying. Great people discuss things, and ideas. Small people discuss people.

Teufelhunden54 - Posted - 08/04/2010:  14:48:14

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dsreiner

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teufelhunden54

Can you post a link to someone playing the Georgia shuffle?

---

I play it slow and fast and contrast it with other patterns on my music page at fiddlehangout.com/myhangout/mu...sp?id=385

Page down to "Georgia Shuffle Examples."

Dave

---

I guess I have been doing the Georgia shuffle without knowing it. I thought it was just syncopation. I guess the first song I ever played with a shuffle was Boil Them Cabbage. Funny how you pick up on something without realizing it.

groundhogpeggy - Posted - 08/04/2010:  15:05:20

---

Anybody think Georgia Shuffle was "invented" to keep from wearing your arm/shoulder out during long, fast sessions?

rcc - Posted - 08/04/2010:  21:07:47

---

IMO, a good bowing is

- musically tasteful. Interesting, not cliched or overly repetitive, fits in with or adds to the melody
- rhythmic in a good way
- mechanically efficient

A good bowing make it *easier* to play the tune fast and for a long time once you get it down. I practice slow a fair bit. But when I'm working out a bowing, I'll play both fast and slow even if I know I'm going to butcher it playing fast. My goal when playing a passage fast is to see what the bow momentum feels like at speed. Do I think it's going to feel smooth and efficient once I get used to it or is it inherently herky-jerky, too much work, or have some other aspect that will make it inherently difficult to speed up.

BTW, one of the secrets to Tommy Jarrell style bow-rocking is that although it can be a real pain to learn, the bowing mechanics facilitate playing efficiently at high speeds once your arm gets used to the techniques.

But the same is true of shuffles. I was watching Bruce Greene play a few weeks ago and he uses relatively simple bowing techniques (mostly circular sawstrokes, two-note slurs and a few basic shuffles) but he's very mechanically efficient with them. He can just crank out tune after tune at high speed and not work hard. He's a real joy to watch.

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/05/2010:  00:48:33

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

Anybody think Georgia Shuffle was "invented" to keep from wearing your arm/shoulder out during long, fast sessions?

---

Might have been.

It didn't take long after someone showed it to me to realize that it's physically a lot easier than Nashville.
But it didn't take too long after trying to explain shuffles on-line that it's REALLY hard to explain it without
at least a video, and better yet in person.
Nashville Shuffle on the other hand, is a piece of cake to explain, but is really VERY taxing on the arm and wrist,
PARTICULARLY if you aren't holding everything the optimum way to get loose wrist action... and the irony is that the classical method of holding the bow is NOT that conducive to loose wrist action.

And I've found that with other patterns as well... there is one that's even EASIER on the wrist than Georgia Shuffle,
and I saw Byron Berline do it once, and years later, I accidentally did it, and was able to repeat it, and can still do it when I need it...
but I, who take such delight in analyzing patterns have not yet been able to chart out what I'm doing when I do it, let alone explain it to anyone else!!!

So, the physically easy patterns are mysterious,
and the obvious patterns are a royal pain in the WRIST!!!

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/05/2010:  02:05:55

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

I like it that on fiddle hangout you can discuss what you think about things (not people, just things, such as shuffles, etc.). On some sites, everybody gets all worked up if you do that... like some sort of jukebox mentality or something.

---

(Caution: Mad Bowing Scientist at work- DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER unless you've checked that
you have at least one dose of your preferred headache medication on hand!!!)

Well, it HAS been known to happen that people here get worked up when we talk about shuffles.

To talk about shuffles, you have to:
1. analyze how they work (which is painful for some)
2. describe them with words (which can lead to HUNDREDS of words, also painful for some)
3. give them a name if they don't already have one. (And this can come across as jargon, a secret language, which mystifies people, makes them feel excluded, and therefore is also painful.

And so, some people take it personally, and act as if talking about bowing here is a deliberate, sadistic attempt
to inflict pain. (When it's only caused by a geeky, obsessive love for fiddling!)
And so, they get worked up about it.

At the very least, you get LOTS of complaints about having caused people headaches!!!
(If I had a dollar for every time, I think I could buy a new bow!!! Well, maybe not a very expensive one!!!)

So you have this ironic situation:

The thing that people agree is the most important thing about fiddling in general,
and Old Time fiddling in particular, is the LEAST popular subject on a forum dedicated to fiddling
in general, and dominated by Old Time fiddling enthusiasts in particular!!!

Actually that's not true.
There is ONE even less popular topic.
MODES. Some people get so worked up when you use the words Mixolydian and Dorian,
that you'd think they thought you were cussing or something.
You're glad they're in another state, cause they seem upset enough to tar and feather you!!!

I find these reactions FASCINATING... even more fascinating for me than analyzing shuffles and modes, is
analyzing why people DON"T WANT TO THINK ABOUT THEM, or even allow other people to do so.

I think it's because both modes and shuffles are a LOT like algebra.

The commonly used modes, major, minor, Dorian and Mixolydian have 3 variables-
the third, sixth, and seventh steps of a scale.
Change one of those variables, and you have a different scale.

Bowing, likewise, can be seen as having 2 variables.
You have only 2 directions.
You have the length of the first downstroke, x,
followed by the length of the first upstroke, y.

Here is the equation for six stroke per measure shuffle patterns:

x + y + x + y + x + y = 8 (SNE's or single note equivalents)

Nashville Shuffle =
2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 8

Syncoshuffle =
1 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 8

Offset Nashville =
1 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 = 8

Equation for 4 stroke per measure shuffles:

x + y + x + y = 8

2 note slurs:
2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 8

Smoothshuffle:
3 + 3 + 1 + 1 = 8

So, if you hated algebra, you could very likely LOATHE talking about shuffles.

Or, you could see shuffles as a binary (since there are two directions)
computer program that you are programming your mind to do.
Since computer programming gives people headaches,
describing bowing accurately could reasonably be expected to do likewise!!!

Ironically two of the people who object loudest to analyzing bowing
use computer programming in their work. I think they object, because
analyzing bowing would be TOO MUCH like work to them, and they
want fiddling to be a vacation!!! Actually, at least one of them told me as much.

And then, I think you have some fox and sour grapes thing going on.

groundhogpeggy - Posted - 08/05/2010:  04:47:31

---

... not enough aspirin the in the world.... but anyway... yeah... I've noticed people can become extremely upset and defensive when discussing playing instruments. I've done it myself, but I think mostly it was when I felt attacked... and who's to say what makes someone feel attacked?

Anyway... algebra and I definitely do not get along at all... I'm actually surprised i somehow got through college as a very unmathematical person... a person who, when someone comes over to eat supper with us, cannot count out the right number of shrimp so that it's divisiible by the people eating... cannot count out the right number of forks to lay out... etc. It's a joke around here... I simply can't even count, let alone figger out the mysterious algebra... for a long time i thought the wars in middle eastern countries were just as a way to get even with the Arabic nations for coming up with algebra (there's my attempted joke of the day!!!)... anyway... when i was very little in school I remember getting headaches when we had math lessons... in college i was forced to get through a statistics class; I remember crying in my dorm room as I painfully worked on my homework (no calculators in those days... ugh... how did I survive????).

And I guess being analytical about the ergonomics of exactly what you do when playing something as complex as fiddle are a lot like all that math and stuff.

Yet, I am fascinated with it. I still don't know what I do, try to do, want to do, etc. I'm trying to keep an entirely open mind about it. I know when I hear it, or something similar... and i know when what I hear is what's trying to get out in my own playing... but which road, how to view it, etc., those are the great mysteries!!!!! MORE COFFEE!!!!!!

OTJunky - Posted - 08/05/2010:  06:09:23

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

Ironically two of the people who object loudest to analyzing bowing
use computer programming in their work. I think they object, because
analyzing bowing would be TOO MUCH like work to them, and they
want fiddling to be a vacation!!! Actually, at least one of them told me as much.

---

Nope - I object because I think fiddling and computer programming have nothing in common.

And I think the same thing about fiddling and Algebra.

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

And then, I think you have some fox and sour grapes thing going on.

---

Probably. But then there's the question of who's playing the role of the fox...

--OTJ

bj - Posted - 08/05/2010:  06:43:34

---

quote:

---

So you have this ironic situation:

The thing that people agree is the most important thing about fiddling in general,
and Old Time fiddling in particular, is the LEAST popular subject on a forum dedicated to fiddling
in general, and dominated by Old Time fiddling enthusiasts in particular!!!

Actually that's not true.
There is ONE even less popular topic.
MODES. Some people get so worked up when you use the words Mixolydian and Dorian,
that you'd think they thought you were cussing or something.
You're glad they're in another state, cause they seem upset enough to tar and feather you!!!

I find these reactions FASCINATING... even more fascinating for me than analyzing shuffles and modes, is
analyzing why people DON"T WANT TO THINK ABOUT THEM, or even allow other people to do so.

I think it's because both modes and shuffles are a LOT like algebra.

---

No, they are not a lot like algebra. You CAN play fiddle without all the analysis. Yes, you can do shuffles and play modal tunes without even knowing what they are, what they're called, how they work, or anything else other than how they sound. Whereas in algebra you have to know the theory as well as the arithmetic in order to get the right answer.

I'll go one further-- good fiddlers who don't analyze things to death play in a much more natural and pleasing way, at least to my ears. But that's a matter of personal taste. I always did prefer fiddlers and other musicians who are chanelling the Muse, so to speak, while those technical whiz kids who can play flawlessly at speeds in excess of 200 bpm often leave me cold.

quote:

---

... not enough aspirin the in the world....

---

AMEN, SISTAH!

---

Edited by - bj on 08/05/2010 06:46:18

Humbled by this instrument - Posted - 08/05/2010:  06:52:02

---

Yeah, well, all this discussion about bowing patterns is assuredly interesting, fascinating in fact; however, let us not forget that patterns, such as they are, do not a fiddler make. For tone and clarity, rhythm and style, one needs Classical instruction--alongside all the while.

Humbled

(Proud of himself, Humbled slinks away, coffee cup in hand, as other fiddlers begin to shout and throw breakfast sausages at each other, orange juice....)

OTJunky - Posted - 08/05/2010:  07:31:37

---

quote:

---

bj wrote:

No, they are not a lot like algebra.

---

I suppose fiddling could be compared to Quantum Mechanics. There the position of a particle is indeterminate - a normalized sum of potential states - until a measurement's made. Then the wave function "collapses" and the particle is found to be at one place.

This is a bit like fiddling in that you have a set of "possible" next notes to play, then when your finger tip hits the finger board the wave function collapses and you've sounded one of the possibilities.

Of course, the notes in the tune are "coupled" - not independent of one another. So for that we'd need Quantum Field Theory that describes the creation and annihilation of particles (or notes) that are the quanta of coupled fields. So maybe using QFT and second quantization we could describe all the potential versions of entire fiddle tunes.

Just a thought to maybe bring the thread to a higher level.

Excuse me. I gotta go mail a breakfast sausage to Humbled.

Should be good and rancid by the time it gets there...

--OTJ

---

Edited by - OTJunky on 08/05/2010 07:33:03

wooliver - Posted - 08/05/2010:  07:47:01

---

What can be written about bowing in 580 pages, Kenny Baker can destroy in one single tune.

I wasn't me that said, "talking(typing) about music is like dancing about architecture."

Not wanting to hit and run, there's a great approach taken in another venue concerning any and all music theory: "Descriptive" rather than "Prescriptive." One still has all the discussion one wants, but in a more palatable form.

---

Edited by - wooliver on 08/05/2010 07:58:49

hendrid - Posted - 08/05/2010:  07:56:09

---

No question that some facility in bowing patterns is helpful; however I lean more toward bj, tho in 9 pages what is left to be said. Listened to several videos and tunes on youtube and our files this morning where the melody was for practical purposes lost in the forced bowing it seemed to me. Did I say that*****

bj - Posted - 08/05/2010:  08:26:46

---

humbled, OTJ, wooliver, hendrid . . . I love you guys! LOL!

Mike_Fontenot - Posted - 08/05/2010:  12:28:55

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

[...] I saw Byron Berline do it once, and years later, I accidentally did it, and was able to repeat it, and can still do it when I need it...
but I, who take such delight in analyzing patterns have not yet been able to chart out what I'm doing when I do it, let alone explain it to anyone else!!!

---

Hey, NO FAIR throwing out a teaser like that!

How about posting an audio clip of you doing that bowing, both normal speed and slowed down. Maybe I (or someone else) can figure out what you're doing.

groundhogpeggy - Posted - 08/05/2010:  12:39:42

---

So... in essence, then, bowing is like Schroedinger's Cat... while the hypothetical cat both lives and dies at the same time because of the odd, seemingly opposite, behavior of quantum particles, anywhichwayers are studied and analyzed and then books are written which describe the anywhichway into discernable, learnable patterns... etc., etc., etc.

... do we still have aspirin around here somewhere????

---

Edited by - groundhogpeggy on 08/05/2010 12:40:33

OTJunky - Posted - 08/05/2010:  12:50:51

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

So... in essence, then, bowing is like Schroedinger's Cat... while the hypothetical cat both lives and dies at the same time because of the odd, seemingly opposite, behavior of quantum particles, anywhichwayers are studied and analyzed and then books are written which describe the anywhichway into discernable, learnable patterns... etc., etc., etc.

... do we still have aspirin around here somewhere????

---

I'll mail you some aspirin - since I've got to go to the PO anyway to send Humbled's sausage

But I do like your Schroedinger's Cat analogy and the conclusion you drew from it....

I think you've pretty much got it...

Too bad that Cheshire Cat never appears when you need him.

--OTJ.

---

Edited by - OTJunky on 08/05/2010 13:44:17

Mike_Fontenot - Posted - 08/05/2010:  12:56:11

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

Anybody think Georgia Shuffle was "invented" to keep from wearing your arm/shoulder out during long, fast sessions?

---

I think it was "invented" to make it very easy to heavily accent a note (by "stealing" some loudness from three adjacent slurred notes...usually the preceeding three notes, and most often with an upbow slur).

In the standard Georgia, that accented note is an off-beat note, and so the pattern provides an easy way to get very heavy syncopation.

Or, the accented note can be on-beat. I call that the "on-beat-Georgia" pattern, and Pogo calls it "the unshuffle" pattern.

Almost anytime you see a fiddler doing some "lightning thrusts" in his bowing, he's usually doing a Georgia, even if only an isolated half-measure of it.

If it's used constantly, it gets old pretty fast for most people. But used sparingly, it's a very useful thing to have in your toolbox. ("Whiskey Before Breakfast" just doesn't sound right to me without a little Georgia in it, here and there).

---

Edited by - Mike_Fontenot on 08/05/2010 13:00:53

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/05/2010:  16:14:06

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike_Fontenot

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

[...] I saw Byron Berline do it once, and years later, I accidentally did it, and was able to repeat it, and can still do it when I need it...
but I, who take such delight in analyzing patterns have not yet been able to chart out what I'm doing when I do it, let alone explain it to anyone else!!!

---

Hey, NO FAIR throwing out a teaser like that!

How about posting an audio clip of you doing that bowing, both normal speed and slowed down. Maybe I (or someone else) can figure out what you're doing.

---

Quite possible. I seem to really need at least ONE singe stroke between slurs to decipher what's going on.
String together a series of slurs, and I can't observe it or analyze it, I can only seat of the pants intuit it and
MAYBE figure out what's going on if I slow it down and play the first part of June Apple with it.
That's what I did with Smoothshuffle anyway, and that's what I'd have to do with this one.

Well, it's a LONG bow stroke, I'm guessing 4 beats, and actually at least two of these long slurs to make it a pattern. And the direction change comes in a way that suggests the backbeat, whereas the Georgia Shuffle puts a single stroke accent that's very overt. But what I haven't figured out is:
1. What beat I start the slur on.
2. Exactly where the direction change comes... it's got to be either between SNE 2 and SNE 3, or between SNE 3 and SNE 4,

I will have to get my audio interface squared away.
I've had some problems with USB interfaces, the first one got a crack on the one of the USB solder joints (I'm guessing)
and the replacement fried one of the channels, and up to now, I've always recorded fiddle in stereo.
And both the half-fried interface and the Heil mics that give me the best recordings stay packed and ready for up to 4 gigs a week, since the interface is my best preamp for my sound system.
I have a Peavey mixer with USB on order. When it comes, I plan to use it at home, dicker with it, and learn what it's more complex controls actually do before I gig with it... and so I hope to get some recording in then.

Of course my real point in sharing that was that <I> have a limit where my ability to analyze bowings breaks down.
(Once I get away from short bow fiddling)
And at that point, I totally understand how people feel who can't analyze bowing at all.
Long bow fiddling that nevertheless has some rhythmic pulse is VERY mysterious to me.
I'd have to take lessons or some such to "get it".
Fortunately, I do like short bow fiddling just fine,so I'll probably save my money...

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/05/2010:  16:43:32

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bj

quote:

---

So you have this ironic situation:

The thing that people agree is the most important thing about fiddling in general,
and Old Time fiddling in particular, is the LEAST popular subject on a forum dedicated to fiddling
in general, and dominated by Old Time fiddling enthusiasts in particular!!!

Actually that's not true.
There is ONE even less popular topic.
MODES. Some people get so worked up when you use the words Mixolydian and Dorian,
that you'd think they thought you were cussing or something.
You're glad they're in another state, cause they seem upset enough to tar and feather you!!!

I find these reactions FASCINATING... even more fascinating for me than analyzing shuffles and modes, is
analyzing why people DON"T WANT TO THINK ABOUT THEM, or even allow other people to do so.

I think it's because both modes and shuffles are a LOT like algebra.

---

No, they are not a lot like algebra. You CAN play fiddle without all the analysis. Yes, you can do shuffles and play modal tunes without even knowing what they are, what they're called, how they work, or anything else other than how they sound. Whereas in algebra you have to know the theory as well as the arithmetic in order to get the right answer.

I'll go one further-- good fiddlers who don't analyze things to death play in a much more natural and pleasing way, at least to my ears. But that's a matter of personal taste. I always did prefer fiddlers and other musicians who are chanelling the Muse, so to speak, while those technical whiz kids who can play flawlessly at speeds in excess of 200 bpm often leave me cold.

---

Well, the geometry of snowflakes is there, whether you pay attention to it or not.
But if you want to make a design that looks like a snowflake, it better have six points on it.
The mathematics of bowing rhythms is there, whether you analyze it or not.
And one of the things we tend to underestimate is what powers exist in our subconscious minds.

I personally think that the subconscious mind is capable of intuiting some pretty complex stuff.

I have no idea whether Melvin Wine came up with his bowing patterns intuitively or analytically.
But the patterns are there... I can see them in the videos, since they are coincidentally so similar to mine.

You might keep in mind, that there are different reasons for a stiff performance...
it <might NOT> be because the fiddler is analyzing bowings while playing them.
(which I very seldom do)
It might just be because of "red light fever".
(How I feel when recording is the next worst thing to stage fright, and for me, that tends to produce cautious and perhaps rigid performances.)

In my experience, "channeling the muse" or whatever, isn't something the performer can control.
And it tends to be inconsistent.
There are Tommy Jarrell performance that I feel are inspired, and others that make me suspect he was feeling more arthritic than inspired during that recording session.
And you could probably find similar examples for almost any reasonably accomplish musician.

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/05/2010:  17:31:59

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by OTJunky

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

Ironically two of the people who object loudest to analyzing bowing
use computer programming in their work. I think they object, because
analyzing bowing would be TOO MUCH like work to them, and they
want fiddling to be a vacation!!! Actually, at least one of them told me as much.

---

Nope - I object because I think fiddling and computer programming have nothing in common.

And I think the same thing about fiddling and Algebra.

---

NOTHING in common???
If fiddling is music, it's well know that there is a lot of math in music.
Time signatures are a mathematical description.
Do you ever talk about I, IV, and V chords?
Well, that's math... and algebraic thinking-
those are variables that can be replaced by fixed values.

You yourself talked about rags often featuring a 3-3-2 pattern.
That, and Double Shuffle which is similar are related to hemiolas,
and it's all a 3 against 4 rhythm.
You can program these things, you can describe them mathematically.
Anything rhythmic is chock full of math.
Now if you were talking about that arrhythmic kind of mournful bagpipe playing,
(pibroch???)
that might have a whole lot less math going on.

There IS a place where you take the rigid mathematical patterns, and you tweak them,
and make them sound human. A computer can play the same rhythm as a human drummer,
but it won't sound the same; a computer can play the name melody notes via an abc file that a human
musician could play, but there is a phrasing thing that humans can do that goes beyond the mathematics of it.
But the math is still there. And you can still recognize the tune, and the rhythm and the time signature in both the computerized and human examples.

quote:

---

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

And then, I think you have some fox and sour grapes thing going on.

---

Probably. But then there's the question of who's playing the role of the fox...

--OTJ

---

Well, I've actually "tasted" bowing non-analytically. And even Anywhichway. And I still do both at times. So it's not an out of reach thing for me.
And the essence of the "fox and grapes" is knocking something you HAVEN'T tried.

What bowing analytically has done is to help me teach myself-
I take a pattern, plug it into a bowing exercise like the ones on my music page.
Then I practice the pattern until it's natural.
And then I <non-analytically> add it wherever it feels right.
The "math" is there in the pattern, but I'm NOT calculating while I'm playing,
fiddle tunes go far too fast for that!!!

Since it's helped me teach myself there IS the possibility that others could be taught
the same way. And from responses I get, the bowing examples DO seem to help some people.

But not everyone is wired that way. I recognize that.
I have no objection to someone like Steve (SDTML, or something like that)
He freely admits he couldn't analyze bowing if his life depended on it,
and plays quite well, nevertheless. And there's lots of people like that.
What he DOESN"T do is carp or complain about those who can and do analyze,
or try and learn that way.
In other words, it's one thing to say the "grapes" are out of reach...
that's true.
It's a whole 'nother thing to say they are sour.
If someone can't reach them, they wouldn't know,

We all have things in life that are out of reach for us.
What we shouldn't do is rag on the things that are out of reach,
or the people who CAN reach them, or might be able to reach them,
if they find a ladder.

groundhogpeggy - Posted - 08/05/2010:  18:14:30

---

Pogo, I have a lot of trouble seeing how patterns become music... I know people do that, but I have to see it broken down and explained slowly for me to get it at all. I sure wish you'd show up on youtube one of these days breaking down patterns you use all the time. Even if I just know, so many ups and downs, etc., I just can't get that into how it fits the music easily until somebody can slowly show me that. I know it's very time-consuming to do that, but if ya ever do... I'll be studying those youtubes.

The one time David Bragger explained and showed a syncoshuffle slowly, and then put it into the tune, it made more sense to me... I still can't play that shuffle though... feels artificially contrived when I try... still, to see it broken apart and then used was a helpful thing for me, and I just don't see anybody much showing that. I know people say Brad Leftwich does, but his youtubes I've seen also sound contrived and unnatural, to me... no insult to him, he plays a hundred times better than I do... but his bowing doesn't sound easy and musical to my ear... I'm just full of opinions, ain't I? I mean, I respect Brad Leftwich and everything, just not crazy about his playing from what I've seen.

Humbled by this instrument - Posted - 08/05/2010:  18:46:44

---

Pogo, wow! Your poetry does it for me! I mean...l've read some...(what's his name, that Iambic pentameter dude...) Shakespeare; I've read Poe; I've read Dickenson (though 'twere a bit slow); yet your trochaic metre just knocks me out! Whew! And you make us reach for the rhyme: as in your lines ending in "common?" and "description"; "values" and "hemiolas." (By the way, I've had to see a doctor about my hemiola, got so bad.) Yet it works. More Whitmanesque than Whitman, and better themes.

As for me, I use bowing patterns in jigs, too. Wrote a whole bunch about it not long ago. Yep. Fact is, I think I said all there is to say about jig bowing, elucidating the subtle differences amongst slip jigs, slap jips, slide jigs, rickety lickety jigs, jiggityy diggity jigs, sloop jigs, poop jigs, etc.

In order that I may advance bowing pattern pedagogy,

I am truly...Humbled

Teufelhunden54 - Posted - 08/05/2010:  20:30:32

---

Could you put that to music ?

hendrid - Posted - 08/06/2010:  04:55:33

---

Jigs bowing, Curt/Humbled, yes you did -- fiddlehangout.com/topic/11565 -- I just re-read it, got a migrane, uncountable number of bowing patterns or did I get it wrong.... Interesting reading anyway until it got personal.....

OTJunky - Posted - 08/06/2010:  05:46:47

---

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

NOTHING in common???
If fiddling is music, it's well know that there is a lot of math in music.
Time signatures are a mathematical description.
Do you ever talk about I, IV, and V chords?
Well, that's math... and algebraic thinking-
those are variables that can be replaced by fixed values.

---

It turns out that there's a lot of math in practically everything.

When I was in college in North East Arkansas I took at course in Classical Mechanics - learned all about Newton's laws, Holonomic and Non-Holonomic constraints, and even the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formulations of it all. I thought that - given this advanced understanding of how physical objects react to forces - I ought to be able to play a pretty good game of nine ball.

So, I went over to the local bar in Truman, AR, joined some games and got my hat handed to me by a bunch of dirt farmers. It turns out that the secrets to shooting a good game of nine ball are not attained by applying an advanced knowledge of mathematics. Instead, the secret seems to be years of practice so that your muscles are attuned to the cue and ball and your perceptions are tuned to the table and how the balls are arrayed there.

I lost some money but my opponents recognized me for the over-educated fool I was and were relatively kind to me. A first lesson, I guess, in the differences between education and wisdom.

Similarly, you might think that professional golfers would've taken courses in the well developed mathematics of artillery. After all the golf ball is a projectile subject to the same laws of physics as an artillery shell. There are some differences in shape and spin but the math can be worked out.

Remarkably though golfers - like nine ball players - don't seem to pay much attention to the math behind the game. Probably for the same reasons that nine-ball players don't spend much time on the underlying math.

In fact, in both these games there are really too many variables involved to really create an accurate mathematical model of what's going on.

So, I agree, that if you want to focus solely on bow direction you can create some patterns and analyze them using algebra if you want. You could probably even apply some group theory if you want to get really serious about the math.

But I think that - like nine ball and golf - it doesn't really help much to go down that path. A change in direction is just one of many factors involved with the use of the bow in fiddling. There is easily as much subtlety in bow hair's contact with the string as there is in the cue tip's contact with the cue ball, or in the club head's contact with the golf ball.

In the final analysis, there's just the fiddle, the strings, the bow, the tune, and the rhythm and sound the fiddler wants to make. I think that in fiddling - like in nine ball and golf - a fiddler's better off just listening and practicing until he/she gets the result he/she wants - though the occasional piece of advice from other more advanced fiddlers can really help.

--OTJ

---

Edited by - OTJunky on 08/06/2010 06:30:43

OTJunky - Posted - 08/06/2010:  05:57:19

---

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

We all have things in life that are out of reach for us.
What we shouldn't do is rag on the things that are out of reach,
or the people who CAN reach them, or might be able to reach them,
if they find a ladder.

---

You are such an ardent believer in your pattern based approach to bowing that you seem to find it almost impossible to believe that some of us just don't agree with it. So, you sometimes make up reasons that we might not agree - as in this post.

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

Ironically two of the people who object loudest to analyzing bowing
use computer programming in their work. I think they object, because
analyzing bowing would be TOO MUCH like work to them, and they
want fiddling to be a vacation!!! Actually, at least one of them told me as much.

And then, I think you have some fox and sour grapes thing going on.

---

So, since your posts often tend to denigrate a non-pattern based approach to fidding, I think this "fox and sour grapes" thing probably cuts both ways.

--OTJ

---

Edited by - OTJunky on 08/06/2010 06:32:10

Humbled by this instrument - Posted - 08/06/2010:  07:18:12

---

Grapes grapes grapes...my grapes didn't come in this year, much. Got a lotta rasperries, blackberries, peaches, strawberries, but no grapes, sour or not.

And btw, my neighbor across the creek, a munificent and gentle lass, bought a fiddle and played for two weeks before smashing it against the wall. Bowing patterns can be dangerous, so be careful around fiddlers.

Mike_Fontenot - Posted - 08/06/2010:  11:47:06

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike_Fontenot



Hey, NO FAIR throwing out a teaser like that!

How about posting an audio clip of you doing that bowing, both normal speed and slowed down. Maybe I (or someone else) can figure out what you're doing.

---

I will have to get my audio interface squared away.
[...]
... and so I hope to get some recording in then.

---

No pressure...no hurry! But I'm sure you KNEW, when you did your original posting, that I'd be intrigued.

Mike_Fontenot - Posted - 08/06/2010:  11:55:11

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo
[...]
Bowing, likewise, can be seen as having 2 variables.
You have only 2 directions.
You have the length of the first downstroke, x,
followed by the length of the first upstroke, y.

Here is the equation for six stroke per measure shuffle patterns:

x + y + x + y + x + y = 8 (SNE's or single note equivalents)

Nashville Shuffle =
2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 8

[...]

---

That was a terrific elucidation of a fundamental principle of bowing.

I'll never be able to understand how any fiddler would not see the value in that kind of insight.

Good job, in spite of all the complaints that you got.

ChickenMan - Posted - 08/06/2010:  14:18:35

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by groundhogpeggy

Pogo, I have a lot of trouble seeing how patterns become music...

---

Music IS patterns, and more specifically, rhythm is patterns, and music generally contain rhythm of some sort (there are exceptions, but not generally in the kind of music you and I are talking about). Recognizing patterns take practice, and since you are now aware of the existence of patterns, if you continue to listen actively you will come to recognize patterns. Like the Bing Bang diggy diggy pattern you heard/saw in John Morris' playing.

rcc - Posted - 08/06/2010:  14:57:40

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo
[...]
Bowing, likewise, can be seen as having 2 variables.
You have only 2 directions.
You have the length of the first downstroke, x,
followed by the length of the first upstroke, y.

Here is the equation for six stroke per measure shuffle patterns:

x + y + x + y + x + y = 8 (SNE's or single note equivalents)

Nashville Shuffle =
2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 8

[...]

---

There's actually a third dimension to bowing -- vertical distance of your bowing hand from the horizontal plane. In other words, the Z-axis. If you move your hand up and down along the Z-axis as it's also moving along the X-Y axis, you get circles and arcs instead of piston-like back-and-forth movements.

If you do two quick sawstrokes using a circular motion instead of a piston-like motion, repeated sawstrokes become a lot easier and more mechanically efficient. You're redirecting your bow momentum instead of stopping the bow and restarting it. You have to be careful though because it's harder to make the downbow sound the same as the upbow (if that's what you want) so the direction of the circle tends to create a repeated accent. The accent will be on the part of the circle where your hand is heading towards the string -- going from high to low on the Z-axis.

I first learned circular sawstrokes as a two-string bow-rocking technique but if you use it on one string, you can shuffle or sawstroke all night long without breaking a sweat.

---

Edited by - rcc on 08/06/2010 15:01:04

Mike_Fontenot - Posted - 08/06/2010:  15:58:18

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rcc
[...]
If you do two quick sawstrokes using a circular motion instead of a piston-like motion, repeated sawstrokes become a lot easier and more mechanically efficient.

---

Good observation. I don't think I use that motion (probably should), but I've heard it described several times before, and I can see how it might result in a smoother transition in bow direction. I've heard some fiddlers who can sawstroke so smoothly that it's heard to distinguish them from slurs...maybe your circles are how they're getting that smoothness.

But even with the circles, Pogo's observations are still valid...there are two bowstrokes (one up and one down) per circle.

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/06/2010:  19:11:21

---

Okay, OTJ,

THIS helps understand your approach a lot better-
I can see how that experience could be rather definitive.

However, I still disagree.

Rhythm is something in music in general and Old Time music
in particular that DOES have some fairly simple math going on,
and some very basical mathematical analysis (if a person can count to 8).
PHRASING would be more like those other activities, IMO.
No need to even bother with the math, it's too complex.

Neither golf nor nine ball, have much of anything like rhythm going on.
Everything is centered around one thwack at a time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by OTJunky

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

NOTHING in common???
If fiddling is music, it's well know that there is a lot of math in music.
Time signatures are a mathematical description.
Do you ever talk about I, IV, and V chords?
Well, that's math... and algebraic thinking-
those are variables that can be replaced by fixed values.

---

It turns out that there's a lot of math in practically everything.

When I was in college in North East Arkansas I took at course in Classical Mechanics - learned all about Newton's laws, Holonomic and Non-Holonomic constraints, and even the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formulations of it all. I thought that - given this advanced understanding of how physical objects react to forces - I ought to be able to play a pretty good game of nine ball.

So, I went over to the local bar in Truman, AR, joined some games and got my hat handed to me by a bunch of dirt farmers. It turns out that the secrets to shooting a good game of nine ball are not attained by applying an advanced knowledge of mathematics. Instead, the secret seems to be years of practice so that your muscles are attuned to the cue and ball and your perceptions are tuned to the table and how the balls are arrayed there.

I lost some money but my opponents recognized me for the over-educated fool I was and were relatively kind to me. A first lesson, I guess, in the differences between education and wisdom.

Similarly, you might think that professional golfers would've taken courses in the well developed mathematics of artillery. After all the golf ball is a projectile subject to the same laws of physics as an artillery shell. There are some differences in shape and spin but the math can be worked out.

Remarkably though golfers - like nine ball players - don't seem to pay much attention to the math behind the game. Probably for the same reasons that nine-ball players don't spend much time on the underlying math.

In fact, in both these games there are really too many variables involved to really create an accurate mathematical model of what's going on.

So, I agree, that if you want to focus solely on bow direction you can create some patterns and analyze them using algebra if you want. You could probably even apply some group theory if you want to get really serious about the math.

But I think that - like nine ball and golf - it doesn't really help much to go down that path. A change in direction is just one of many factors involved with the use of the bow in fiddling. There is easily as much subtlety in bow hair's contact with the string as there is in the cue tip's contact with the cue ball, or in the club head's contact with the golf ball.

In the final analysis, there's just the fiddle, the strings, the bow, the tune, and the rhythm and sound the fiddler wants to make. I think that in fiddling - like in nine ball and golf - a fiddler's better off just listening and practicing until he/she gets the result he/she wants - though the occasional piece of advice from other more advanced fiddlers can really help.

--OTJ

---

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/06/2010:  20:06:43

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by OTJunky

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

We all have things in life that are out of reach for us.
What we shouldn't do is rag on the things that are out of reach,
or the people who CAN reach them, or might be able to reach them,
if they find a ladder.

---

You are such an ardent believer in your pattern based approach to bowing that you seem to find it almost impossible to believe that some of us just don't agree with it. So, you sometimes make up reasons that we might not agree - as in this post.

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

Ironically two of the people who object loudest to analyzing bowing
use computer programming in their work. I think they object, because
analyzing bowing would be TOO MUCH like work to them, and they
want fiddling to be a vacation!!! Actually, at least one of them told me as much.

And then, I think you have some fox and sour grapes thing going on.

---

So, since your posts often tend to denigrate a non-pattern based approach to fidding, I think this "fox and sour grapes" thing probably cuts both ways.

--OTJ

---

I didn't make up that reason we don't agree, at least not for the other person.
I maybe went too far in applying it too you. Generalizing-
shame on me!!!

Nope
the fox and sour grapes metaphor doesn't apply, because I've TRIED it-
and for many non-hoedown applications
(Airs, song melodies, waltzes, jigs, reading sheet music)
I STILL USE a non-pattern approach to fiddling.
It's NOT something that's out of reach or that I haven't tried, which is the whole point of the "fox and grapes" parable.

It's a question of using the right tool for the job.

I find pattern fiddling is a much sharper, more accurate tool for laying
down a danceable hoedown rhythm... even works well on some hornpipes.

If you can use anywhichway for a 4/4 song air (and I do),
why yes, you CAN use anywhichway for a faster hoedown in 2/4.
Just like you can use a screwdriver for a chisel, sort of, kind of.

BUT, when you speed it up, it tends to break down easier.
Kind of like a poorly designed engine that you can't rev high or it'll throw a rod.
For the same reason, too- a level of balance and precision that works at a slow speed
doesn't necessarily work at a high speed. But a level of balance and precision that works
at a high speed can also work at a slow speed.

Back when I tried to fiddle EVERYTHING anywhichway, I was at the mercy of some
hotshot banjo player or guitarist speeding things up, and trying to see what the fiddler is made of.
Now, more often than not, THEY get a surprise, because pattern downbowing can easily go slow OR FAST. ( Occasionally I STILL can't keep up, but that's usually on hornpipes because of the bow rocking-
I probably should practice hornpipes more!)

In contrast, anywhichway is a perfectly suitable tool for 4/4 song airs because:
1. The rhythm is not supposed to be so overt.
2. Song airs sound weird when sped up too much, so hardly anyone does.

And here's the rub.

When you advise a beginner or an intermediate to use anywhichway on a hoedown,
AT FIRST it sounds peachy keen, because when you learn a tune, you play it slow.

But then when you speed it up, the inefficiencies inherent in it put a limiter on your speed.
Which might be okay if you can always control what tempo you play at.
But unless you want to designate a jam a SLOW JAM, that's not realistic,
and if you want young whippersnappers to get interested and stay interested,
it's not a good idea to play too slow, or play slow all the time.

Lemme put it this way:
Pattern downbowing helps a fiddler who is "older than dirt" (me- see thread of the same name!)
keep up with young whippersnappers. (and old whippersnappers too!)

And that's a GOOD THING!!!

In addition, playing faster than your bowing technique wants to go has one additional bad side effect.
JUST BELOW the tempo that is so-fast-that-you-playing-falls-apart is
the tempo where you are "barely hanging in there".
Yeah, you can get through the tune, but you don't have the control to make it sound musical.
It doesn't really sound all that pleasant. It tends to sound shaky and frantic.
And downbowing helps me avoid that sound.
My wife can even hear the difference, she said about a year ago:
"Even when you play fast, it doesn't sound frantic!"
And I don't think it's because I'm all that coordinated (cause I'm NOT)
or practice all that much (because I DON'T).
It's because I took the route of pattern downbowing,
a road less traveled that has made all the difference.

So, if I seem awfully "ardent" in my support of pattern downbowing, it's because I've tried both, and my experience of 23 years fiddling is that anywhichway is NOT equal to it, no way, no how!
And I can't pretend that it is, just to make nice.

---

Edited by - fiddlepogo on 08/06/2010 20:32:09

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/06/2010:  20:24:08

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rcc

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo
[...]
Bowing, likewise, can be seen as having 2 variables.
You have only 2 directions.
You have the length of the first downstroke, x,
followed by the length of the first upstroke, y.

Here is the equation for six stroke per measure shuffle patterns:

x + y + x + y + x + y = 8 (SNE's or single note equivalents)

Nashville Shuffle =
2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 8

[...]

---

There's actually a third dimension to bowing -- vertical distance of your bowing hand from the horizontal plane. In other words, the Z-axis. If you move your hand up and down along the Z-axis as it's also moving along the X-Y axis, you get circles and arcs instead of piston-like back-and-forth movements.

If you do two quick sawstrokes using a circular motion instead of a piston-like motion, repeated sawstrokes become a lot easier and more mechanically efficient. You're redirecting your bow momentum instead of stopping the bow and restarting it. You have to be careful though because it's harder to make the downbow sound the same as the upbow (if that's what you want) so the direction of the circle tends to create a repeated accent. The accent will be on the part of the circle where your hand is heading towards the string -- going from high to low on the Z-axis.

I first learned circular sawstrokes as a two-string bow-rocking technique but if you use it on one string, you can shuffle or sawstroke all night long without breaking a sweat.

---

This is quite true, and very pertinent in bow-rocking-
I'm a strong believer in making little circles there,
although I can't yet see the utility of doing it on one string if you've got a loose wrist.
BUT, when you're talking about patterns, you're acting as if it's all taking place on one plane.
And, as a matter of fact, patterns are a whole lot easier to learn when they DO take place on one plane.
When I first learn a pattern, I get it going on a pair of strings or on a single note,
and try to avoid string changes until the pattern is firmly embedded in my subconscious.

rcc - Posted - 08/07/2010:  00:08:52

---

Just saying that I think of bowing in three dimensions, not two. You don't have to think that way but I do. It's just how my brain is wired. Interestingly enough, the guy I consider my teacher these days even though I see him only a couple times a year thinks about it very differently. But both ways of thinking about it clearly work.

As for the utility of doing little circles when playing on one string, I think it's easier to do once you get used to it. If you go back and forth only in two dimensions your muscles are working against each other. You start the bow moving, then you have to stop it. Then you have to get it moving the other way. Yes, if you're really good at doing this and you can stay relaxed, it works. Tons of classical players do this. But if you do little circles, the bow is always in motion and your hand never really changes direction. It's just spinning a constant circle.

If you ever get a chance to see Bruce Greene play, he does little circles on one string. It makes some of those Kentucky tunes a lot easier to play.

OTJunky - Posted - 08/07/2010:  07:01:18

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

Okay, OTJ,

THIS helps understand your approach a lot better-
I can see how that experience could be rather definitive.

However, I still disagree.

---

OK - thanks...

--OTJ

OTJunky - Posted - 08/07/2010:  07:04:03

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fiddlepogo

I didn't make up that reason we don't agree, at least not for the other person.
I maybe went too far in applying it too you. Generalizing-
shame on me!!!

---

Thanks again...

--OTJ

OTJunky - Posted - 08/07/2010:  07:49:56

---

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

Nope
the fox and sour grapes metaphor doesn't apply, because I've TRIED it-
and for many non-hoedown applications
(Airs, song melodies, waltzes, jigs, reading sheet music)
I STILL USE a non-pattern approach to fiddling.
It's NOT something that's out of reach or that I haven't tried, which is the whole point of the "fox and grapes" parable.

---

I think that - for many of us - pattern fiddling is not something that we haven't tried, or that is "out of reach". These days it's a common way for beginners to approach fiddling - in the same way that pattern picking was used by beginning folk guitarists in the 60's.

--OTJ

---

Edited by - OTJunky on 08/07/2010 07:53:58

wormbower - Posted - 08/07/2010:  09:20:15

---

quote:

---

Rhythm is something in music in general and Old Time music
in particular that DOES have some fairly simple math going on,
and some very basical mathematical analysis (if a person can count to 8).

---

Ah, THERE'S the rub! Anybody who's ever jammed with me knows that I'm incapable of consistently counting to 2.

Paul

Humbled by this instrument - Posted - 08/07/2010:  13:33:18

---

Of couse, underlying all bowing pattern technique is neuron response, right. A neuron, ( also known as a neurone or nerve cell), is an electrically excitable cell that processes and transmits information by electrical and chemical signaling. Chemical signaling occurs via synapses, specialized connections with other cells. Neurons connect to each other to form networks. Neurons are the core components of the nervous system, which includes the brain, spinal cord, and peripheral ganglia. Studies have shown that peripheral ganglia appears to a lesser extent in those who DO NOT consciously perceive "patterns" in their bowing whilst playing the fiddle. Moreover, a number of specialized types of neurons exist: sensory neurons respond to touch, sound, light and numerous other stimuli affecting cells of the sensory organs that then send signals to the spinal cord and brain. Motor neurons receive signals from the brain and spinal cord and cause muscle contractions and affect glands. Interneurons connect neurons to other neurons within the same region of the brain or spinal cord.

A typical neuron possesses a cell body (often called the soma), dendrites, and an axon. Dendrites are filaments that arise from the cell body, often extending for hundreds of microns and branching multiple times, giving rise to a complex "dendritic tree". An axon is a special cellular filament that arises from the cell body at a site called the axon hillock and travels for a distance, as far as 1 m in humans or even more in other species. The cell body of a neuron frequently gives rise to multiple dendrites, but never to more than one axon, although the axon may branch hundreds of times before it terminates. At the majority of synapses, signals are sent from the axon of one neuron to a dendrite of another. There are, however, many exceptions to these rules: neurons that lack dendrites, neurons that have no axon, synapses that connect an axon to another axon or a dendrite to another dendrite, etc.

All neurons are electrically excitable, especially young teen-age ones, maintaining voltage gradients across their membranes by means of metabolically driven ion pumps, dumps, and fizzles, all of which combine with ion channels embedded in the membrane to generate intracellular-versus-extracellular concentration differences of Nashville and Georgia bowing ganglionic ions such as sodium, potassium, chloride, and calcium. Changes in the cross-membrane voltage can alter the function of voltage-dependent ion channels. If the voltage changes by a large enough amount, an all-or-none electrochemical pulse called an action potential is generated, which travels rapidly along the cell's axon, and activates synaptic connections with other cells when it arrives.

Neurons of the adult brain do not generally undergo cell division, and usually cannot be replaced after being lost, although there are a few known exceptions. In most cases they are generated by special types of stem cells, although astrocytes (a type of glial cell) have been observed to turn into neurons as they are sometimes pluripotent; thus, it behooves a fiddler to study, consciously, bowing patterns in all their various forms.

Humbled

---

Edited by - Humbled by this instrument on 08/07/2010 13:35:17

fiddlepogo - Posted - 08/07/2010:  13:48:54

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by OTJunky

quote:

---

fiddlepogo wrote:

Nope
the fox and sour grapes metaphor doesn't apply, because I've TRIED it-
and for many non-hoedown applications
(Airs, song melodies, waltzes, jigs, reading sheet music)
I STILL USE a non-pattern approach to fiddling.
It's NOT something that's out of reach or that I haven't tried, which is the whole point of the "fox and grapes" parable.

---

I think that - for many of us - pattern fiddling is not something that we haven't tried, or that is "out of reach". These days it's a common way for beginners to approach fiddling - in the same way that pattern picking was used by beginning folk guitarists in the 60's.

--OTJ

---

Eh, yeah, sort of kind of.

There are some fiddlers who use ONE PATTERN (usually Nashville),
and cram EVERYTHING into it. As a phase to pass through (like adolescence) there's some virtue to it.
But it gets old quick. Yes, that COULD be called pattern fiddling, but it's a very simplistic version of it.
That's not the approach I'm using, or advocating, except as perhaps a stepping stone.

What SELDOM happens though, is for fiddlers to learn a second eight-note pattern (just as long as a full Nashville pattern.) Georgia Shuffle doesn't really qualify here... it's just half of a pattern.
Once you learn Sawshuffle, Syncoshuffle, or Smoothshuffle, whole new vistas open up.
They are interchangeable with Nashville as far as how they begin and end, but fit those melodic structures that Nashville would tend to mangle. And they pack much of the rhythmic drive of Nashville Shuffle, too.

Melvin Wine tended to interchange Nashville, Sawshuffle, and Smoothshuffle.
I tend to interchange Sawshuffle, Smoothshuffle, and Syncoshuffle a lot.
I got tired of Nashville Shuffle decades ago, so I tend to use it rarely, and only if the melody demands it.
I'm starting to use a lot of Offset Nashville, however, and also that Mystery Bowing I haven't analyzed yet.

And what you get, like with Melvin Wine's fiddling, is this balance between clear melodies and rhythmic drive, where you can get them both in the same package.

With so many other fiddlers, either you get lots of drive, but chopped up melodies,
or pretty melodies that somehow lack the rhythmic crispness and drive that I hear on old 78s
and field recordings.

I'm not saying ALL the old timers used it. I KNOW Melvin Wine did, because since I use so many of his bowings, his bowing is easy for me to "read". And Melvin Wine is DEFINITELY Old Time,
so that would put the approach squarely within the Old Time tradition.

Tommy Jarrell may have used a more complex version of multipattern bowing.
He did use Syncoshuffle (Leftwich's Tommy's Lick) and Nashville, and something that sure looked and sounded like Smoothshuffle.
I saw Tommy play several times, and his bowing motions were anything but random.
Certain motions were repeated fairly often to where I got the distinct sense they constituted a pattern or lick he could use at will, but since some of them were patterns I didn't "get", I can't read Jarrell's bowing with anywhere near the confidence I can read Melvin Wine's.
But the patterns I DO know he used, plus that predictability I saw leads me to believe he
was using a more complex version of what Melvin Wine was doing. (rcc disagrees...)

Henry Reed certainly used Smoothshuffle, since Alan Jabbour talks about it on the LOC video.
Someone has referred to him as a long bow fiddler, which surprised me, but maybe he used
other patterns based on 3 note slurs too. Of course, if anyone knows, Alan Jabbour would.

What I actually hear as the most common bowing in old recordings though,
isn't anywhichway, yet it's simpler than Wine's, Jarrell's, or my approach:
It's simply a down-up sawstroke, coupled with a tight Nashville Shuffle that blends well with it.
And that's a combination that I seldom see among revival fiddlers, except Brad Leftwich does it quite well.
But it's definitely downbow fiddling, and the rhythm and phrasing is definitely tighter and more predictable than anywhichway. Some quite excellent fiddlers use this combination too.

Occasionally I see/hear a fiddler that uses lots of sawstroke with another pattern instead of Nashville.
Earl Collins is in this category. I haven't figured out what his opening lick is, but it resembles Smoothshuffle. Tom Sauber might know.

One of the problems with all this is that most of the oldtimers were recorded, not filmed,
and when they were filmed, the video is usually out-of synch with the music,
so it makes it hard to read. The Bess Hawes film of Earl Collins is in this category.
The sawstroke is obvious though, even as poorly synched as it is.