As I said in the above referenced URL, I doubt there's enough interest to support a forum for just fingerstyle. However, the decision is Eric's to make, not mine. We'll see what he has to say.

I would post here more often if we had a fingerstyle forum.

What exactly is finger style picking ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Will Frady

What exactly is finger style picking ?

---

Will, short answer is it is the most common way banjo was played pre-WW2. If you've heard of Vess Ossman, Fred Van Eps, Joe Morley...finger-style players. Typically 3-finger up-picking + thumb on nylon or gut strings. But there are variations, especially players that use this method on steel strings. Finger-style never died out and this method continues today though it has been eclipsed in popularity by Scruggs-style and clawhammer.

the name for that style has been put forth a lot as Classic style in the last few years-- and there is a in depth web site already ---not to say it can't exist here -or other places

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

the name for that style has been put forth a lot as Classic style in the last few years-- and there is a in depth web site already ---not to say it can't exist here -or other places

---

Classic is a U.S label originating in the the 1950's. In practice it relates to genre and a specific period of fingerstyle playing, with a particular emphasis on early recorded players. This background would naturally form a solid foundation of any new fingerstyle forum, but the common denominator would be broader; the technique in all its forms old and new, rather than a singular focus on the historical element in isolation. The purpose? A realisation of connection and continuity.

But, yes plenty to interest those whose main enjoyment is the classic period.

I don't see it that way of classifying--
I once went to the library of congress website's newspaper archives and sub filed the late 1800s up thru early 1900s--using the keyword banjo showed a large amount of banjo players--it was very popular-

In my opinion though I don't ask for agreement--If one was going to stipulate that it is more than those in the style of Van Epps etc. --they would have to name all of the exclusive properties allowed or not allowed--things such as single line melodies or multi line melodies, plectrum types ,string types --etc.
above all keep picking--and pushing on

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tractor1

In my opinion though I don't ask for agreement--If one was going to stipulate that it is more than those in the style of Van Epps etc. --they would have to name all of the exclusive properties allowed or not allowed--things such as single line melodies or multi line melodies, plectrum types ,string types --etc.
above all keep picking--and pushing on

---

Fingerstyle is not too difficult to define - pads of the fingers plus thumb, usually on nylon or gut string but bare fingers on steel is still within the finger-style family. There is a fair amount of scope for variations and personal quirks. 

Quite a few fingerstyle players also played plectrum style in the dance band era. But plectrum style is not a finger style as contact and sound comes from a plectrum. 

Fingerstyle is much broader than C-tuning Classic fingerstyle. I figure it takes in that, Charlie Poole style and the various traditional three-finger non-Scruggs approaches. I doubt BHO has enough Classic players to sustain a forum, but it’s Eric’s call.

I figured a plectrum means a pick of any kind in the broad sense--but I agree that is not the usual "common denominator''--so I had that worded wrong

A good part of my arrangements are not any of the bluegrass scruggs,keith or single string styles ---they are played with 2 fingers and a thumb with picks on all--they are usually banjo arrangements of whatever I ran across from fiddle tunes to tangos staying faithful to the melodies and fillingin the holes
When posting -- I just call them other --and am quiet happy with that --No one really pays much attention to that-

I play finger styling and have a pint jar full -of reshaped and ruined picks that I have been trying to get correct since 1971--It would sadden me to get cast aside when I am getting them closer--but I know some sad moods----

I am looking forward to see some of your arrangements--bare skin always gave me better control but obviously there are other pros and cons

my opinion I don't ask agreement

There are a lot of interesting information in these threads, but I think several people mix up genres and techniques.

In my world Bluegrass, Old-Time and Classic Banjo are genres (and there are several more genres in the banjo world!), while Scruggs Style and Clawhammer are techniques.. Finger-picking (up-picking) and clawhammer (down-picking) are different techniques, and both fingerpicking and clawhammer can  be divided into different sub-categories. For example finger-picking can be both Scruggs style and classic banjo style. And the genre Old-Time can be clawhammer as well as different fingerpicking styles with 2, 3 or 4 fingers, with or without picks.

The Forums in BanjoHangout seems to be based more on genres (styles) then techniques: Bluegrass (Scruggs ) styles, Clawhammer and Old-Time styles, 4-String: Irish Music and Related styles, 4-String (Jazz, Blues and Other Trad styles), and All Other Styles. The name of a new forum for fingerstyle should be Classic Banjo and other Fingerstyles.  

On the other hand, the need of a new forum can be discussed. Today posts about classic banjo and fingerstyles should be posted in All Other Styles. During the last 4 months there have been only eight active threads and in total less than 90 posts, and not all of them will fall into classic banjo or fingerstyle.

There is already another site dedicated to Classic Banjo (https://classic-banjo.ning.com/) which have about 900 members, but there seems to be only about one post per day just now. There is also a Facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/72996865608) with only a few posts per month.

So even if I am interested in Classic banjo and fingerstyle banjo, I cannot see that there is a real need for a new separate forum. So instead of discussing the name and content of a new forum, people should focus more to start discussions about classic banjo and fingerstyle banjo to show there is a real need. I don't think BanjoHangout needs more dead forums.

quote:

---

Originally posted by janolov

There are a lot of interesting information in these threads, but I think several people mix up genres and techniques.

In my world Bluegrass, Old-Time and Classic Banjo are genres (and there are several more genres in the banjo world!), while Scruggs Style and Clawhammer are techniques.. Finger-picking (up-picking) and clawhammer (down-picking) are different techniques, and both fingerpicking and clawhammer can  be divided into different sub-categories. For example finger-picking can be both Scruggs style and classic banjo style. And the genre Old-Time can be clawhammer as well as different fingerpicking styles with 2, 3 or 4 fingers, with or without picks.

The Forums in BanjoHangout seems to be based more on genres (styles) then techniques: Bluegrass (Scruggs ) styles, Clawhammer and Old-Time styles, 4-String: Irish Music and Related styles, 4-String (Jazz, Blues and Other Trad styles), and All Other Styles. The name of a new forum for fingerstyle should be Classic Banjo and other Fingerstyles.  

On the other hand, the need of a new forum can be discussed. Today posts about classic banjo and fingerstyles should be posted in All Other Styles. During the last 4 months there have been only eight active threads and in total less than 90 posts, and not all of them will fall into classic banjo or fingerstyle.

There is already another site dedicated to Classic Banjo (https://classic-banjo.ning.com/) which have about 900 members, but there seems to be only about one post per day just now. There is also a Facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/72996865608) with only a few posts per month.

So even if I am interested in Classic banjo and fingerstyle banjo, I cannot see that there is a real need for a new separate forum. So instead of discussing the name and content of a new forum, people should focus more to start discussions about classic banjo and fingerstyle banjo to show there is a real need. I don't think BanjoHangout needs more dead forums.

          

---

'Classic' banjo has a home space and a dedicated website elsewhere. In practice it is a special interest group with a predominant historical focus on a relatively small number of professional or semi-professional banjoists who constituted the early recording artistes. Absolutely fine as what it is. I love the historical playing; it's our banjo heritage and where my banjo heart is. Morley, Cuninghame, the Tarrant Baileys, Sid Turner, William Ball, Horace Craddy, Gordon Dando, Bertram Bird, Dave Thomas, Robert White and many other fine but lesser known players, all lived in my immediate surroundings.  If you want an example Horace Craddy lived in the same village and died whilst playing banjo on stage in a hall 30 yards from my front door. Really close by. Real people with real roots in the community.
You use the term 'dead'. Regrettably the inadvertant  effect of 'classic' banjo's singular historical focus and association, among non-fingerstyle members of the banjo community, is to reinforce the sense that the fingerstyle technique is confined to history i.e. 'dead'. 

On the contrary, as the stoical old inaccurate death notice witticism reminds us: New of my demise is somewhat premature.

We are simply suggesting/requesting the respect and encouragement of a contemporary dedicated, sign-posted  home space on BHO as other banjo players have. That contemporary home space with its historical background (in proportion) exists nowhere else. And BHO is the online home of the banjo.

FWIW, I post just about every day (during the week) on Facebook regarding "classic banjo", I just don't post to the specific group.

I usually post to the group "Historic Banjos".

I will also include "Beginner Banjo" if I am posting music or an instruction book scan.

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.

If there was a place for it here, I would tandem post.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

FWIW, I post just about every day (during the week) on Facebook regarding "classic banjo", I just don't post to the specific group.

I usually post to the group "Historic Banjos".

I will also include "Beginner Banjo" if I am posting music or an instruction book scan.

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.

If there was a place for it here, I would tandem post.

---

There's no reason you can't tandem post here, just figure out where it fits best and post away.

As I said before, I doubt there's enough interest to afford a forum all its own.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Texasbanjo

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

FWIW, I post just about every day (during the week) on Facebook regarding "classic banjo", I just don't post to the specific group.

I usually post to the group "Historic Banjos".

I will also include "Beginner Banjo" if I am posting music or an instruction book scan.

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.

If there was a place for it here, I would tandem post.

---

There's no reason you can't tandem post here, just figure out where it fits best and post away.

As I said before, I doubt there's enough interest to afford a forum all its own.

 

---

The current tenuous 'genre' 'Rock banjo'(?) and also 'Classical banjo' generate zero traffic and yet have their own sign-post designation. Fronting that shared list with the far more banjo-relevant 'Fingerstyle' is a minimal change in terms of effort, but a hugely significant change in terms of acknowledgement and inclusivity.

My suggestion to Eric is 'Finger-style, classical, 6-string and other styles'. The inclusion implicit in that rewording would motivate and generate a noticeable and consistent increase in posting traffic that the present formatting does not. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by EEB

quote:

---

Originally posted by Texasbanjo

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

FWIW, I post just about every day (during the week) on Facebook regarding "classic banjo", I just don't post to the specific group.

I usually post to the group "Historic Banjos".

I will also include "Beginner Banjo" if I am posting music or an instruction book scan.

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.

If there was a place for it here, I would tandem post.

---

There's no reason you can't tandem post here, just figure out where it fits best and post away.

As I said before, I doubt there's enough interest to afford a forum all its own.

 

---

The current tenuous 'genre' 'Rock banjo'(?) and also 'Classical banjo' generate zero traffic and yet have their own sign-post designation. Fronting that shared list with the far more banjo-relevant 'Fingerstyle' is a minimal change in terms of effort, but a hugely significant change in terms of acknowledgement and inclusivity.

My suggestion to Eric is 'Finger-style, classical, 6-string and other styles'. The inclusion implicit in that rewording would motivate and generate a noticeable and consistent increase in posting traffic that the present formatting does not. 

---

I've given you my ideas.  Since you don't seem to like them, may I suggest that you go directly to Eric since I have no authority to edit, change, or redo any software.

I thought that this specific section was exactly for this-- "Improvements and Suggestions"

As advised I’ve sent an email to Eric to flag-up this suggested improvement.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

I thought that this specific section was exactly for this-- "Improvements and Suggestions"

---

You  thought correctly.  But we mods can't make any changes, so it has to go to Eric for a final decision.   Since he runs another business, he may be busy and not able to read this forum everyday or over the weekends.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.
 

---

Do you mean normalised for finger-style/historic repertoire?

In one practical sense surely it is by default, because finger-style players will fairly quickly encounter a 'glass wall' beyond which it is very time-consuming to access the full repertoire and make progress without at least having basic notation reading skills.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EEB

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.
 

---

Do you mean normalised for finger-style/historic repertoire?

In one practical sense surely it is by default, because finger-style players will fairly quickly encounter a 'glass wall' beyond which it is very time-consuming to access the full repertoire and make progress without at least having basic notation reading skills.

---

I mean in general.  The folk narrative in the US had an easy time dismissing and diminishing the movement.  So the story goes... minstrelsy to old time, then the wealthy wore tuxedos and bought presentation banjos and tried to play classical music but gut was too quiet to be heard, then bluegrass.

When there was not much it was easy to step over.  It is more difficult to ignore. 
 

Additionally, normalizing notation to remove the stigma.  If it is common, easy to find and freely available perhaps someone taking up banjo might decide to start with a course that happens to teach by notation.  This would open up an endless supply of free public domain music for that person.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by EEB

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

My general goal is to normalize notation for banjo. At a certain point it becomes difficult to ignore or dismiss.
 

---

Do you mean normalised for finger-style/historic repertoire?

In one practical sense surely it is by default, because finger-style players will fairly quickly encounter a 'glass wall' beyond which it is very time-consuming to access the full repertoire and make progress without at least having basic notation reading skills.

---

I mean in general.  The folk narrative in the US had an easy time dismissing and diminishing the movement.  So the story goes... minstrelsy to old time, then the wealthy wore tuxedos and bought presentation banjos and tried to play classical music but gut was too quiet to be heard, then bluegrass.

 

When there was not much it was easy to step over.  It is more difficult to ignore. 
 

Additionally, normalizing notation to remove the stigma.  If it is common, easy to find and freely available perhaps someone taking up banjo might decide to start with a course that happens to teach by notation.  This would open up an endless supply of free public domain music for that person.

---

Interesting.

Oversight, neglect, and sometimes plain old misinformation, have the capacity to distort and undermine.

An approach that takes the fear out of learning basic notation would be a great service. Relevant theory introduced at the relevant time, to explain what a player is already doing, can be a simple light-bulb moment.