Brief Chat with Bruce Gandy
December 2013

Bio

Bruce Gandy has reached the top of his profession. Over 35 years of piping experience, taught by some of the greatest names in piping, he has won the Gold Medal at Inverness and Oban. He has taught piping at the College of Piping and Celtic Performing Arts. He is also a widely respected composer of bagpipe music, both light music and ceol mor.

This year, he was asked to perform one of his pibroch compositions by the Piobaireachd Society at Piping Live.

Question & Answers
Hello David, sorry for taking so long to get back to you for something that shouldn’t be so hard, since you’ve laid out all the questions here. So, I’ll attempt to answer stuff in text here and we can see where to go from there.

1. What got you into pibroch playing?

I started playing piobaireachd as an 8- or 9-year old, because it was just part of the teaching that myself and other young men and boys in the Victoria, BC area received from James Troy. I believe that initially it was not a case of not liking it, but more that it took me a while to start to understand. (This is a big part of an answer to a later question.) As a young boy, I received piobaireachd lessons from James Troy, weekly, for 2 – 4 hours per session. I was young, fairly skilled and had a quick memory. So it was more of a “feed me” more tunes-type thing at that time. I was also very fortunate to get a lot of time in with Bob Hardie and Andrew Wright at the Couer d’Alene school. I just wish I was a few years older at that time, in order that I might have gotten more from them and realize what I was actually getting in terms of guidance.

2. What keeps you interested?

Playing and teaching tunes keeps me interested. I enjoy looking through “some” of the new tunes but I also enjoy playing through tunes that I have played a long time. It’s a great feeling to find a slightly different feel to a tune, not just to be different, but to do something that makes you feel that you are adding to the musicality of the piece. Teaching piobaireachd as much as I do really helps this process, since you have to explain about pace, tension, release and even settings.

3. What determines your interpretive expression of a tune?  Audience? Tuition?

I would say a cross between the tune type, what or how I’ve heard in the tune played before and, of course, the guidance from some respected mentors and friends. Having said that, time itself does a great deal for guiding one’s impression on how the tune should go.

4. What implications do you see of the impact of now widely accessible manuscripts and early publications of pibroch tunes?

I’ll probably get hung for this, but I feel that from what I’ve heard, these manuscripts (MacArthur, for example) are made for those with much experience.  Perhaps the notes themselves in many of these can be adapted, but the treatments, nuances and even the interpretation of the technical embellishments are too much for less experienced players. I truly believe these tunes are difficult to interpret without experience, much like starting a player on “Abercairney Highlanders” as opposed to “Norman Orr Ewin”g.  

I’m not saying that I am 100% in line with the Kilberry or Piobaireachd Society collection. But, there are more than enough tunes in there for players to get their first 20 or 30 tunes and learn a standard way of playing the different types of variations first. For instance, you cannot play Strong medium medium Strong in a Dithis variation, if you do not have the ability to keep a steady (what I call “home base”) pace of medium medium medium medium. That may be a bit square sounding and over worded, but I think, “Learn to walk before you run.”

5. What concerns do you have about their publication?

I think I probably covered most of that earlier, in that people get caught up in the fantasy of this “newly discovered” manuscript.  That’s my concern.  As for the publications themselves, I’ve studied piobaireachd a long time and I still find it difficult to find enough time to really get inside some of these. As for the content, I will leave that by just saying there is a lot of great music there, as well as a lot I wouldn’t put time into (but those tunes could be masterful in some other person’s chanter).

6.  What excites you about composing pibroch?

The respect for the music itself and the challenge to create more. I’m sure that there’s some ego in it as much as I don’t want to think that, but really, I just think: there’s always room for more. I’m finding now that if it’s too simple, it may not stand up unless it’s magical, and if too tough, it’s a rough go to get others to play them. The Piobaireachd Society’s initiative this year in holding a recital at Piping Live was, in my opinion, a very forward move by the Society and I was very humbled to be asked to perform.

6a.  Are there “constraints” that shape the structure and outcome?

Traditional style piobaireachd playing does place some boundaries on the tunes, since we just don’t have a lot of venues to play at. However, as more concerts, recitals and other events occur, we now have a little more freedom in the grounds and early variations. I think that some of the constraints are what keep the tunes to be known as “piobaireachd”. If we go too far off the line (and I don’t know exactly where that is), then these tunes kind of become something along the lines of a suite.
The absolute most important boundary is public appreciation and the ability to perform piobaireachds, whether as a group of pipers utilizing harmony, or even asking for other instruments. The more chances we are given to play in public, the more chances that the tunes can have a chance to evolve in some way.

7. Do you have a favorite pibroch?

This probably changes often, but I love “Lament for the Children”, partly due to the story that accompanies the piece and partly due to its endings, which never seem to resolve. However, another favorite would be “The Unjust Incarceration,” a masterful piece of music that seems to build and build all the time. That’s just two that I’d never say, “I don’t fancy that tune just now,” but there are many others as well. Some tunes become fave’s because they’re new, much akin to liking a new song. But when I’m asked something like this, I try to think of tunes that have stuck with me for a long run. Those two would always figure in a top 5 list. 

7a. Do you have a favorite source?  Do you find yourself drawn to a certain source?

Again, for manuscript, it depends on the tune. I enjoy the Binneas settings and I enjoy the settings I get from my teacher, Jimmy McIntosh, as they just seem to make sense. However , the best sources have always been a sit down chat with someone who has great experience with a tune and have them talk you through it. That kind of 3-dimensional, vocal source cannot be beat!

Thanks for these thoughtful answers.

If you don’t mind, I wanted to engage with them a bit, to see what you think.

You mention experience as being integral to the performance and understanding of pibroch.  In particular, you worry that the recently available tunes will be misappropriated or misunderstood by enthusiasts with little background or appreciation of the nuances and musicality that comes from long study of pibroch.  The concern is that these tunes become perhaps a fad, a way of introducing new styles of performances without any understanding of the musical context from out of which they appear.

I agree.  One of the things I’ve come to appreciate about any pibroch is the depth of possible musical expression that can be mined in the song.  I think that is what attracted me to the musical form in the first place.

But let me be a devil’s advocate:  One of the other epiphanies I had about pibroch came about precisely because these manuscripts came into view.  Namely, the standardizing and standardized publications struck me as odd on a number of levels when I first encountered them.  First, and foremost for a newbie, was that the notation simply wasn’t meant to be played the way it was transcribed.  As a classically trained musician, I understood a lot about tempo rubato, and it didn’t bother me all that much to learn about expression and timing.  But after a while, things like the value of cadences, the way in which echo movements are performed, the odd way in which some movements seem to disrupt the flow of the piece – these became more and more irritating.

And then I found Hanny-MacAuslan and a new world of insight came to the fore.  And the more you compare the original manuscripts through history with each other and with the Piobaireachd Society publications, the more you can begin to understand the ways a certain kind of performance came into being by tracing the changes down through the roots of the scribal and publication tradition.

I would argue that, from my experience, these tunes bring a wealth of new insight that help inform my playing, even of standard settings. That, despite having only known 10 pibrochs before being exposed to them.

Now, I had been a musician for a long time.  And that, I think, is really what’s important: The experience of years of exposure to music that, even if you are a child prodigy, can only improve your appreciation of pibroch.

I have a few other things to share, but I wanted to start with this one.

I have to agree with that David, which is partly why I like the Binneas settings.  I just find that while the shorthand is a bit tough to learn at first, for most beginners, 1 page seems a lot better than the four or five pages we see. Yes, there are certainly more subtleties in some of the older books, since Piobaireachd Society and Kilberry (almost one in the same at times) figured a way to standardize the settings. This was good for reading and memory, but for playing: not so much.

I still think that it’s easier for people to just learn a bunch of tunes, the “basic” or easy way. Then, if they can take the notes as they know them in the (what some may say “boring”) time that they know to play them, then they can venture off the track to alter note lengths and cadences etc, to add drama or tension/relief, or really, put dynamic into an a cappella/legato instrument.   (I’m not sure how to say it another way.)  

If it was a drummer doing jazz, they would still learn how to be doing 1,2,3,4,…1,2,3,4 at any time, so they know how to venture away from there when they want.

I hear you.  Rudiments, foundation.  Even more than that: experience.  I revisit songs all the time, because somehow something new seems to lurk in them such that I can’t quite feel like I’ve mined as much out of them as I would like.  That, and as more songs become familiar they bring their own insights and wisdom and sometime cause me to think, “Oh, maybe I could try that with this other song and see how it works.”

On a slightly different subject, but still related to the subtleties of performance: when is the last time you have tried bringing the Urlar (ground) back as a refrain during the performance of a pibroch?

Hannay-MacAuslan and Donald MacDonald show where in their transcriptions the Urlar was repeated.  Haven’t taken a deeper look at the other manuscripts.

I’m wondering how often you’ve tried, what you’ve learned, etc…

I have not done it. I actually only would if it was for a competition. I get going “back to the chorus”, but to me it halts the overall building of the tune.

I do agree with coming back to ground at end to bring the piece through the full circle.  I feeling going back in the middle just gives a technical break, but then makes the tune even longer.

My real FEAR, though is that others would do it just so they could fantasize feeling like Donald Macdonald or something.

Oh, I would strongly recommend trying it out. It is eye-opening from a performance point of view.
It brings the song together in ways entirely unexpected. One would think it would break up the flow, or simply elongate the performance.  But it doesn’t. It gives a kind of gentle landing or respite, a reminder, and clears the palate before the next major variation.

It’s really been an eye-opening experience to do it.

I was working with my tutor on Mary’s Praise – the Hannah MacAuslan has a very interesting series of variations.  Then I noticed the emblem than indicated a D.C. return to the ground.  It came at several places. I thought, “Holy smokes, that’s going to hurt to play, and be boring to listen to.”

Wrong.

It breathed life into the piece.

I think we assume the musicianship of the ancients was questionable – that they were backwoods hacks. And it took the civilizing influence of the Victorians to rescue the music and give it shape and structure.

The more I play from the manuscripts, the more their musical genius comes out…

Well, I think we’ll agree to disagree on some parts there, David.

[One other thing I thought about which many people let slide (except well trained orchestra musicians) is that: If a bagpipe is not going really well, i.e., if the notes aren’t true, drones aren’t tuned and full of resonance, the tunes are just not good enough. Imagine a symphony playing stuff where people just showed up and haphazardly played. THIS, is a huge problem with piobaireachd (and other music also). Jim McGillivray wrote a great article on his blog basically saying you could be Donald MacPherson or Bob Brown or whoever, but if your pipe doesn't sound good, you won't. Sorry that was another big side note for me.]

I don’t think the old masters’ musicianship was questionable at all. The problem is that this stuff was never written in strict time and they had no way of really converting it. I talk with my teacher often about tunes. He’s a master himself, but even what he might tell me about a tune today differs from what he told me 10 or 12 years ago. So, over the decades and centuries, we don’t really know how Patrick Mor really intended a tune to be. But questionable? I would never say that. hell, they invented this deeply complicated genre to start with.

I agree, which is why I’m so fascinated to get back to the original sources, as they reflect more directly that musical genius, before the standardization took place.

I don’t condemn the effort to collect and write down the pieces. But in the process of doing so, a lot of regional variations were elided or combined, the overall structure was codified, the Urlar repeats overlooked, etc. Constraints of time, money, physical space on the page, printing may have all contributed to the process.

So, looking at the originals, we can begin to see more directly the brilliance of these older generations of pipers.

One last series of questions (admittedly naive): Do you think there will come a time when

1) new pibroch compositions will make it into the Set List?
2) the Piobaireachd Society will request settings be performed from the manuscripts, not the canon?
3) Binneas would be an acceptable version for competition?

New piobaireachds HAVE made a set list before, but they were always on a year where all the tunes were new tunes. I’d like to see a situation where some of the newer tunes were thrown into the barrel with others. At least, that’s my hope. I’ve written about a half dozen now and I honestly believe that two of them would fit in there. One is rather difficult and a bit longer, and this latest one I did I really feel it would be a nice silver medal piece.

There have also been years (twice now i think) where we have had to play tunes from the MacArthur Manuscript.

Jack Lee won his clasp a couple years ago playing such tunes and doing a lovely job, I felt.

And, finally, Binneas is a recognized source by all judges. They only ask the player to bring it to them so that a judging panel does not have to cart around a big library of books.

I am grateful for the time you’ve taken with us here. I wish you luck on your future endeavors in pibroch playing!

Bruce Gandy can be reached at www.brucegandymusic.com