Is That All There Is...!

I overheard a comment at a bluegrass festival just recently. The spectator commented that all the bands sounded too much alike.

I don't know who the person was and I now regret not taking the opportunity to engage them in conversation in order to learn more about the perspective and where the comment was rooted.

I suppose if the person were a newcomer to the genre, there wouldn't seem to be much difference from one bluegrass band to the next, much like all cowboys look alike and all outlaw bikers look the same to someone unfamiliar with the various respective accoutrements. To a newcomer, all banjo solos probably do sound the same.

However, if we get deeper than just face value of what that comment could have meant, if it were, per se, from someone with knowledge of the industry, was that person saying something we all should be hearing?

For the most part there is pretty much a standard pattern to a typical bluegrass show at any given festival. The band is on stage doing a sound-check, then the Emcee announces their band name and they play a song, usually an up-tempo crowd-pleaser. Then a few comments about the song or the next song and so on. Somewhere in their set they will introduce the various band members and some will stretch out on a limb and tell a joke or two. Then another crowd-pleaser for a close and maybe an encore or maybe not. That's it. Then the next band will repeat that formula with a few different songs. In the course of the day, the crowd may hear the same songs repeated by several different bands because no one counsels with the other bands before making up a set list.

Ron Thomason, founder of the popular Dry Branch Fire Squad has a joke he uses on stage that goes: Q: Why do instrumental songs have names? A: So you can tell one from another.  Humor always has a certain degree of truth involved. That's what makes it funny. In this case could there be more truth than any of us realized?  Does all bluegrass sound the same to a new-comer?

Then there's the look. The standard stage uniform for bluegrass performers seems to be suit and ties on one hand or what looks like yard-sale grunge on the other, usually depending upon the age of the performers. This, too, can be an undoing when the crowd is looking for the pizazz, the stuff they paid their money to see. Good music – sure, but that only goes so far. I can get good music right from the CD or the download without the burden of travel, accommodations, crowd noise, weather etc.  

At a time when many are calling for an increase in the average bluegrass admission price, could we be our own worst enemies?  I don't know about you but I don't really feel like paying a premium to watch what looks and sounds like the kids who practice in the garage next door. Neither do I want to see six pall-bearers on stage without a casket though. Where's the showmanship in either? Where's the visual statement that says “This is a stage costume”.

Imagine watching the popular Cowboy-Western group Riders In The Sky performing in jeans and t-shirts or watching Arthur Fiedler, the long-time conductor for the Boston Pops Orchestra, on stage in anything but a tuxedo. It just wouldn't be the same, would it? Bluegrass has never been able to establish a look that would instantly identify itself as such.

Could it be that, in the efforts to maintain a sound that is pure to it's origins, we've begun the stifling process? Could it be that with relaxed dress standards we've begun the homogenization process?

The next time your band performs at a festival, ask yourself: “How will a newcomer be able to know my band from all the rest?” “What stands out that makes us memorable?”   The next time you watch several bands perform at a festival, ask yourself; “Is that all there is?”