Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter and the one that follows (<italic>Chapter Five</italic>) draw on interviews with twenty-two banjo makers in the United States and Canada to explore the issues facing these individuals who strive to maintain their preferred connections with the old-time music community without losing sight of the artistic and personal motivations that drew them into this undertaking initially. Chapter Four is focused on those who create instruments most closely adhering to the common expectations of old-time banjo players, factors that include certain structural and design features as well as playability and tone production. What unites all of those in this chapter is the influence of the past on their own efforts, but how this is defined is quite different from one person to the next. For some, this means replicating existing instruments from a specific era or locale, and involves learning techniques that long ago passed from common practice. For others, the past is purely inspirational, providing ideas to be expanded upon and subject to new interpretation. The chapter concludes with a consideration of tone production, how this has changed in recent decades, and how banjo builders approach what is clearly a highly subjective topic. The builders profiled here include Kevin Enoch, Chuck Waldman, Wayne Sagmoen, Kevin Fore, Jason and Pharis Romero, Greg Galbreath and Brooks Masten.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".