Talk:Jug band

<snipped anonymous contribution that I'm moving to the article> Tokerboy

Untitled

Can we find some examples of a jug band with many jugs in different keys, played in the way described by the material moved from here? What it describes is more elaborate than anything I'm familiar with, but I don't claim complete familiarity. It stands to reason bands would have multiple jugs, but this business of playing major scales, etc, seems way beyond anything I've ever heard. Also, I'm not sure about the business about adding or subtracting water. Why wouldn't the overall pitch be determined by the size of the jug? You wouldn't want to be holding a big jug full of water, just get a littler jug. Ortolan88

I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like the bottom paragraph is describing a completely different sort of "jug band" to the rest of the article - something more like a troupe of hand-held bell ringers or a collection of bottle-blowers - one made up of only jugs (or jugs and a single melody instrument, as it says), rather than the more familiar kind of jug band. That talk of multiple jug-players, and chord playing... it doesn't fit in with what little I know of jug bands, anyway. --Camembert

I should have probably added: while that's what it sounds like it's describing to me, I've never actually heard of such a thing, and it sounds rather unlikely (though probably not as unlikely as eight jugs playing in a skiffle band). So I could be wrong. --Camembert

A trained seal group got tired of doing the horns and switched to multiple jugs? Maybe there's a reason that bit was stranded anonymously on the talk page. Ortolan88

I assumed it was reasonable, but I wouldn't have known if it wasn't--all I did to check was the Google test and it passed. If it's bullshit, it's original bullshit. Tokerboy

Sure is. I didn't take it out of the article, but I looked on google images and couldn't find anything but one regular jug band that had several jugs that might have been played in different keys, but no array. There was no mention of this style on http://www.jugband.org either, and I just searched on "unusual jug band" and found no references. There's no doubt it could be done (I still don't know about the water), but it would be more convincing if there were at least one example of a band that played that kind of music. Ortolan88

Well, we have fictional kings and emperors writing about fictional nations with fictional citizens -- why not have a fictional kind of music, too? To be totally NPOV, we shouldn't be discriminating between real and unreal kind of music -- I need to write an article on my favorite fictional music, throat singing gangsta rap and maybe even a stub at honky tonk kabuki or my favorite gospel group, Fuck Your Mother in the Ass, with their pioneering incorporation of Norwegian death metal into the gospel scene, as well as their invention of the electric copper harp. Tokerboy 05:59 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)

Got sick of looking at it

I removed the following from the article:

==A different sort of jug band==

Another sort of jug band might include several jugs as well as a non-jug instrument which plays the melody, accompanied by the jug holders. The melody instrument might be a violin, a flute, a whistle, clarinet, etc. The jugs of varying sizes, can be tuned to a given pitch by adding or subtracting water until the jug sounds a fixed pitch when the jug-holder blows over the open neck. The mouth of the jug responds like a flute. When the jug is tuned, it can only play one pitch. to play a major scale, one would need at least eight jugs. and if the pitches span a range of more than an octave, more than 8 jugs might be used. Most basic accompaniments use three chords, built on the first, fourth and fifth pitches of a major scale. In the key of C the First (I) chord uses C, E, G, the Fourth (IV) chord uses F, A, C, and the Fifth (V) chord uses the pitches G, B, D. Most jug band performances would require planning and chartings so that the participants would know when to "blow" when in the rhythm pattern their pitch will fit. As with any ensemble, accuracy results from repeated practice. with a person playing the same part at each rehearsal

If anyone can show that this actually ever happened, I suggest they put it in a separate article and link it from here. God knows how many reports and term papers have been spoiled by this. Ortolan88 16:24, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Multiple Jug players in harmony

... and the Leasebreakers (link added to entry) has up to 5 jug players at a time playing in harmony. However they play the jug in one of the traditional folk styles (buzzing lips, changing pitch by tightening or loosening lips, using jugs as resonators.) Their main jug player, John the Jug, uses more than a dozen crockery jugs of different sizes -- ranging from just a few ounces up to five gallons -- to better resonate in different ranges. The others who play jug with that band use 1 pint, 1/2 gallon and 1 gallon jugs variously.

Some jug players I've heard also vocalize while playing.

I've never heard or seen the jugs filled with various amounts of liquid used in the "jug band" context.

ABOUT AN ACTUAL BAND WITH MORE THAN ONE JUG A video,"Things Aren't Like They Used to Be,' availabe from Sanachie, is made up of film shorts and clips from the 30's, 40's and 50's. The old Jimmie Rodgers short, etc. Whistler's Jug Band is shown performing the old minstrel tune 'Folding Bed.' Four jug players really move the tune along with guitar and banjo.User: Bogus Bofus

Although it's true that some bands occasionally use multiple jugs, including Whistler's Jug Band in the video mentioned above, this is not the norm and is usually done as a sort of performance stunt. Whistler's Jug Band used only one jug on its recordings, and the three (not four) jug arrangement was probably assembled specifically for the recording of this film. The point here is that we don't want to encourage the incorrect public perception of a jug band as being a band made up entirely of jugs, when in fact, a jug band typically uses one jug along with other instruments. ArloLeach (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

External links

I brutally tore apart the external links, leaving only two which seemed rather notable. The majority of which I removed were simply linking to jug bands, which is pure advertising. Not to mention Wikipedia not being a directory or link farm... --Dane ^~nya 11:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Granny Takes A Ride

I thought that "Granny Takes A Ride" was sort of a cult Jugband classic which was performed by The Purple Gang; the brit band that used to perform along side Pink Floyd.--220.227.48.17 16:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Call us British, please, and I promise that I won't refer to US citizens as Yanks in such a pejorative fashion. By the way, we're Britons, not Brits in the substantive.Jatrius 16:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep skiffle and jug band separate entries

That's my vote. I thin of skiffle as more of an English, even more locally Scouse phenomenon--Audie Holmes 19:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Definitely agree....Explanations of how skiffle and other forms evolved from jug band music are fine, but skiffle was a huge phenom in the UK and therefore deserves its own article, and spasm/jug music is much older.... 74.72.168.46 (talk) 13:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Nowhere in any reading about or listening to that I have done of old pre war American music has jug music ever been referred to as "skiffle", though that's not to say that it wasn't part of the vernacular, just that it does not seem like a representative term. For the sake of common associations, too, people tend to associate the word skiffle with the British phenomenon that predates the Beatles. Anyways, I oppose the merger, because while they maybe related, they are not the same idiom. Why are wikipedians always trying to merge everything????? NewMind (talk) 23:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I vote to keep them separate too. Both articles could use a good deal editing, but they're distinct enough to warrant two separate pages. Lizmarie (talk) 17:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that these could be kept separate. "Jug band" has been around since the 1920s at least. "Skiffle" goes back just to the 1950s. Djeaux (talk) 20:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Clearly, the two categories are not the same. Skiffle band music is much more recent and largely a UK based phenomena. When I lived in England in the late 1960s during the Jug Band Revival, I was part of the Ffilharmonious Jug Band and we were forever trying to convince people that we were not the same thing as Skiffle band busking on street corners with more contemporary songs of the time. This music grew out of roots America and many of its proponents were serious musicians. Several have pointed his out already. The roots of Jug Band Music are in Memphis, Tennessee, USA, and Louisville, Kentucky, USA in the late teens into early 1920s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmwwxman (talk • contribs) 19:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree these should be kept separate, for all the reasons mentioned above. Pustelnik (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Submarine Band

Does anyone remember the Mike Fright" episode from the Little Rascals films, with the International Silver Strings Submarine Band? Does this qualify as a jug band? Pustelnik (talk) 14:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Jug Band Revival: What needs to be done?

This section needs to be edited badly, but it keeps growing with low quality content. I suggest we establish some guidelines on how to chose which bands/events deserve to be mentioned. For sake of argument, we should probably follow Wikipedia:Notability (music) or require that the band have its on page (and/or a page for the more famous act with which its members were associated).

We also need to get our references in-line with Wikipedia policy. I may try to handle that once I feel confident that we're in agreement on notability. Lizmarie (talk) 03:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Quit deleting references to The Jugadelics. If you don't want to learn about this band that's one thing. Just stop being ignorant here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.183.43.203 (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree that this section seems to be a target for current jug bands adding gratuitous links to themselves. I think it's appropriate for a band to add itself to the "external links" section or perhaps a new section called "list of jug bands," because it's a relatively small genre and it's nice to see the active groups that do exist. However, I'm afraid that working the band names into the text with superlatives like "most authentic" and "grandpappies" is adding bias to the article. The established notability guidelines seem like a good place to start, and I can help research this if needed. ArloLeach (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I object to the use of a picture of 5-Cent Coffee as an example of a modern-day jug band. Despite the fact that they play at the San Francisco jug band show, I have never seen the group use a jug, and as the opening paragraph states, a jug band is a band that uses a jug player. Instead they use an actual bass, as is shown in the picture on this entry. I've seen this group perform, and they may use electronic bull horn or tow chain to make unusual sounds, but they have never in my experience used a jug to provide bass tones. Their myspace page does not identify the group as a jug band, and I can find no pictures in their albums that show a jug being used. The group does not even identify itself as a jug band in its own website. 75.157.88.104 (talk) 18:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)75.157.88.104 (talk) 18:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Focus on the Music

I think that the point is being missed here. Are we talking about the ensemble or the music? You could take a gutbucket, jug, and a couple of kazoos and do a pretty good version of Thus Spake Zarathustra. Throw in a mandobanjo and you're having fun with Beethoven's Ode to Joy. But is that jug band? A symphony orchestra could do Stealin' but it would sound horrible. (But Banjoreno could be great!). In this wiki there is a lot of discussion of the necessity of actually having a jug in the ensemble. But where is the discussion of the soul of the music?

It has often been said: jug band music is the blues, but it's the happy blues. Geoff Muldaur's quote addresses another aspect of the soul of the music: "The essence of the jug-band idea is people jamming music for free and for fun with an extremely unrehearsed, spontaneous nature to it."

Growing out of the intersection of the medicine show and blues, it evolved as music for busking and rent parties. To me, the essence of jug band music is that it has the old combination of lighthearted, enthusiastic playing with suggestive rhythms that still draws the crowds and fills the tip jars.

Today there are lots of bands on the street typically with a resonator guitar, washboard or junk kit, and standup bass or gut bucket, playing traditional jug band numbers and/or original material with jug band soul. The jug may have worked on the street corners of quiet rural towns with more horse traffic than Model-As but on a noisy modern street corner they just are not loud enough to be heard. I would hate to have to say that they are not making jug band music, simply because the jug is not as effective on a modern street corner, and I think that this entry needs to focus more on the music and its soul. Salmo13 (talk) 08:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

A broader definition of "jug band music" is that a jug is not required, but some use of homemade (or extremely inexpensive, e.g., kazoo) instruments is required. This is the criteria used in the entry guidelines for the Minneapolis Battle of the Jug Bands, for example. This is still more specific than the fairly broad "happy music" or "jug band soul" criteria proposed above. Personally, when I produce jug band showcases, I define a "jug band" as a band using homemade instruments and a "traditional jug band" as a band using homemade instruments and performing the same genres of music as the pre-war jug bands performed. ArloLeach (talk) 08:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jug band. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071220054025/http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2005/02/10/63169 to http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2005/02/10/63169

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Where is the jug here?

--Erdic (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)