Exploring a virtual music community: Informal music learning on the Internet

Over the past decade, online communities of practice have developed around several folk music genres, including Bluegrass, Irish Traditional, and Old Time (OT) music. This article uses Wenger's (1998) social learning theory alongside Hine's (2000) cyber ethnography research to investigate the informal teaching and learning practices that define the OT online community as a community of practice (CoP). Three central questions guide the exploration: What makes the OT online community a CoP? What technologies and software do learners use, and how do they adapt them? What learning practices characterize participation in this virtual space? The findings carry implications for both lifelong music learning and formal school music education, and demonstrate the value of cyber ethnography for online narrative research in music education.

Introduction

Wenger (1998) argued that all communities are shaped by social learning patterns unique to each group. While every community of practice exists as a distinct environment, studying them reveals how people learn collectively. Although the term "community" depends on how one defines it, when sociological frameworks are applied, online groups — including the one examined here — display learning characteristics comparable to those of traditional, face-to-face communities.

Internet-based communities of practice have emerged around folk music traditions such as Bluegrass, Irish Traditional, and Old Time music. Drawing on Wenger's theoretical framework and Hine's work on virtual ethnography (2000), this article examines how music teaching and learning occur within the OT community online. Analyzing interactions across forums, wiki sites, blogs, bulletin boards, chat pages, and YouTube videos reveals how members learn music from each other through cyberspace.

Wenger's concept of community of practice

Wenger (1998: 3,4) described CoP theory as a social learning framework grounded in the idea that learning is fundamentally a social phenomenon, reflecting our deeply social nature as knowing beings. The theory concentrates on learning as social participation, built from four components: meaning, practice, community, and identity. These components form the structure for this article.

Communities of practice consist of people who share interests and, through mutual interaction, learn to perform their activities more effectively and meaningfully (1998). Under this definition, everyone belongs to at least one CoP. Since physical proximity is not required, communities of practice can exist virtually. Wenger acknowledged this explicitly, using as an illustration the way people "congregate in virtual spaces and develop shared ways of pursuing their common interests" across a worldwide web of computers (1998: 7).

Because practice is always located in time and space — without specifying physical space — Wenger concluded that "surfing the Web is one way to discover new horizons and form new communities" (1998: 132). Media researchers make a parallel claim about space and online community formation. Hines (2000: 84) observed that "localities become disembedded from their cultural, historical, geographic meaning and re-integrated into functional networks, or image collages, inducing a space of flows that substitutes for the space of places."

Communities of practice in music education

Several music education scholars have employed Wenger's CoP theory to understand music teaching and learning. Froehlich (2009) suggested that connecting diverse communities of practice outside public schools with those in music education could empower practitioners and broaden school programmes. Salavuo (2008) studied social media to determine its influence on pedagogical change in music learning, concluding that social-media-supported CoPs created new opportunities for music learning, especially in online music communities. Lavengood (2008), though working from an ethnomusicological perspective, examined Celtic music culture and practice on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia, and argued that the transnational Celtic music community there operated as a CoP, based on membership in social communities and identity construction.

Online music communities and learning

Studies of online music communities are plentiful in both ethnomusicology (Font 2007; Kibby 2000; Lizie 2000; Lysloff 2003; Scully 2005; Silver 2007) and sociology (An 2007; Williams 2006). While all investigated specific online music communities, several aimed to understand how participation in a virtual community differed from its offline counterpart, including how cyberspace shaped music transmission, discourse, and identity (Lizie 2000; Lysloff 2003; Nugyen 2007; Silver 2007; Williams 2006).

Music education research has also explored online music communities. Salavuo (2006) surveyed one such community to learn why members participated. Although members valued social connections, musical reasons outweighed social motivations for belonging. Salavuo and Hakkinen (2005: 126) investigated learning in the music discussion forum of milkseri.net, an online music community, and identified the following learning activities:

• Uploading one's music and seeking feedback
• Listening to peers' music and giving feedback
• Discussing, asking questions, providing answers, and debating
• Recommending music to others
• Connecting to collaborate on joint projects

Waldron and Veblen (2008) examined music teaching and learning in the Irish traditional virtual music community (IrTrad). Using Marshall McLuhan's ideas on media interaction, they surveyed the range of Internet platforms used by IrTrad members, including websites, blogs, forums, chat sites, links to notation, and YouTube videos.

Old Time music

Besides Native American music, Old Time music is the oldest traditional folk music form in North America, historically rooted in Appalachia. Though it draws from British Isles traditions, OT also incorporates African American musical elements. The genre includes diverse dance forms, ballads, and folk songs performed on string instruments such as fiddle, guitar, banjo, mandolin, and dulcimer (Godfrey 1990; Hayes 2008; Riggs 1994; Scully 2005).

OT music embodies values and learning conventions distinct from Western art music. Transmission is primarily aural and oral; when written notation is used, it functions as a guide or "blueprint" rather than a fixed manuscript (Riggs 1994). Musical interest depends on each player's personal creativity, and many tunes exist in multiple local and regional variants (Hayes 2008).

Traditionally, people learned OT from friends or relatives, and later through local jam sessions and festivals (Godfrey 1990; Hayes 2008; Scully 2005). The Internet, however, has made OT accessible to any learner with a web connection (Scully 2005).

The larger OT community contains both an offline and an online CoP, and the boundaries between them can blur. This is common, according to Atay (2009: 143), because "our offline associations [in communities are] a reflection [of] our online interactions and vice versa." Still, one can examine each separately, provided the researcher understands the contextual links between the online and offline versions. Although Gajjala (2006: 273-74) argues against dichotomizing real and virtual life, since discursive-material spaces combine both, discussion of boundary blurring in the OT community must wait for another paper. Here, the focus is on the online OT CoP.

The Sugar in the Gourd (SITG) website (http://forum.sugarinthegourd.com/) serves as the main gathering space for the online OT community. SITG offers useful information, links, and forums with posted texts containing embedded YouTube videos, links to personal sites, and other relevant websites.

I joined the SITG forum in December 2007, participating only as an observer, or "lurker," a term Hine (2000) uses for non-posting researchers. To determine whether the online OT community constituted a CoP, acting as a hidden participant-observer seemed the most suitable initial data collection method for this cyber ethnographic exploration. The following brief explanation of cyber ethnography outlines my rationale.

Cyber ethnography: exploring narratives in virtual space

Atay (2009: 20) states that "new situations require new epistemological perspectives because old ones might not be enough, or appropriate, or effective." As researchers, we need new methodologies to "study and explain newly emerging social and cultural phenomena, and Internet-based [or cyber] ethnography [has] emerged as a way of collecting data in cyberspace." A paradigm shift is required because of the nature of the virtual world itself.

While belonging to the ethnographic tradition, cyber ethnography differs by combining visual images with written texts rather than transcribed oral narratives. Merging images with text enriches data collection and supports theoretical insight when mapping networks like the one in this study (Twine 2006). Cyber ethnographers could be online at any hour capturing different aspects of the field, though in most cases this is neither necessary nor required. The timing, reason, and method of data collection depend entirely on the nature of each study, much like traditional ethnography (Hine 2000).

Another difference from traditional ethnography lies in the ease with which researchers can remain hidden from those being observed. This allows "researchers to collect data without being visible interactants with the participants" (Atay 2009: 107). In Internet culture, this hidden observation is called "lurking," referring to people who read discussion board messages without contributing. Hine (2000) and Sveningsson (2004) apply the term to researchers conducting fieldwork. A strength of lurking in cyber research is the ability to study a culture in its natural cyber setting, creating a different relationship with the observed compared to traditional ethnographers (Atay 2009). Lurking does attract some criticism regarding ethics (Sveningsson 2004), but despite these concerns, "lurking" and cyber ethnography remain "productive, effective ways of conducting research and collecting data in virtual environments" (Atay 2009: 113).

Methodology

For this exploratory study, I employed the cyber ethnographic technique of hidden participant-observer. Following Lysloff (2003: 235), conducting fieldwork meant "spending many late nights in front of my computer, 'traveling' the far corners of cyberspace" while immersing myself in the SITG forums to collect data. Though I joined the SITG website in 2007, data collection began in January 2009 and spanned seven months, ending in July 2009. This period allowed enough time to examine the SITG website by following member interactions. I also left room to return to the site for additional data if needed.

Because cyberspace differs epistemologically from physical space, Atay (2009) argues that a theoretical framework can guide virtual exploration. Based on this view, I used Wenger's CoP theory to frame this initial examination. Focusing on posts from the SITG forums, I looked for evidence of Wenger's four components of learning as social practice — meaning, practice, community, and identity — within the OT online community.

Wenger expands on these four elements as follows:

• Meaning: A way of talking about our changing ability — individually and collectively — to experience our life and world as meaningful.
• Practice: A way of talking about the shared historical and social resources, frameworks, and perspectives that sustain mutual engagement in action.
• Community: A way of talking about the social configurations in which our enterprises are defined as worth pursuing and participation is recognizable as competence.
• Identity: A way of talking about how learning changes who we are and creates personal histories of becoming in the context of our communities (1998: 5).

Evidence for a community of practice: meaning in the OT online community

Meaning, the first of Wenger's four components, is negotiated in community through the interplay of participation and reification (Wenger 1998: 63). Artifacts play a central role because they function as signifiers for specific groups and become reified through this process; reification is both product and process. Examples of artifacts range widely: "a fleeting smoke signal or an age-old pyramid, an abstract formula or a concrete truck, a small logo or a huge information-processing system, a simple word jotted on a page or a complex argument developed in a whole book, a telling glance or a long silence" (1998: 60). Had YouTube videos existed when Wenger published his book in 1998, he likely would have included them in that list.

These "reificative connections" matter because they enable the transcendence of "all the spatiotemporal limitations inherent in participation" (Wenger 1998: 111). This is especially pertinent to meaning-making in online communities, as cyberspace depends on computer-mediated communication, a hallmark of which is asynchronous communication — any form of communication where participants need not be present simultaneously (Hines 2000: 157). The meanings resulting from the dual processes of reification and participation in online communities illustrate how both transcend time and space.

The SITG thread examined next exemplifies negotiated meaning in the online OT community. It contains an embedded artifact — a YouTube video about Appalshop's Old Time Music Summer Camp — along with one reply posted later. The first posting, dated 4 April 2006, comes from Ptarmigan in County Antrim, Ireland. Ptarmigan introduces the embedded video "Passing the Pick and Bow," a short documentary about the Appalshop Old Time music camp in Whitesburg, Kentucky, by commenting that "there is important work going on here." The single reply, from Rendezvous 1849 in Cleveland, Ohio, posted seven months later in February 2007, notes the time lag, that Ptarmigan is "so far away," and that the Appalshop week happened "right under our noses, and we didn't notice." The exchange reads:

Ptarmigan: Important work going on here: 'Traditional Music Program and Passing the Pick & Bow'

Rendevous 1840: Ptarmigan, I just found this post, and I see it's never been answered. Thanks for posting it. I have to wonder why you, from so far away should have to tell us about what's right under our noses.

This exchange demonstrates asynchronous communication in the process of reification — the YouTube video serving as the artifact — and participation. The posters are separated by time and physical distance. As readers, we also transcend time and space in observing this negotiation of meaning, though in printed text rather than directly from the message board page.

The posted YouTube video itself is noteworthy. Besides documenting learning at the Appalshop week and illustrating the fluidity between online and offline OT communities, voice-over narratives discuss meaning and identity in OT music. One speaker states:

This is my music, this is my home, this is where I come from, and it's the best way is to get the kids involved. It's also a way to learn about culture ... in Kentucky, we're in danger of everything becoming bluegrass. So it's very important to have an event that's Old Time.

(http://tinyurl.com/y8cre8v, accessed 19 August 2009)

Practice: negotiating engagement, definition, and repertoire

Practice in community does not mean “playing scales at the piano.” Rather, it emerges through the interplay of practice and community, built on three interlocking dimensions:

1. Mutual engagement among participants. 2. Negotiation of a joint enterprise that is “defined by the participants in the very process of pursuing it” (1998: 77). 3. A shared repertoire — over time, “the joint pursuit of an enterprise creates resources for negotiating meaning that results in a shared repertoire” (p. 82).

All three dimensions appear in the SITG thread at http://tinyurl.com/yau36f4, which starts with a question from poster christine:

christine: Anybody out there capable of creating midi files? I need one of the tune “Gilda Roy,” as I can’t read music and I use midis – when I can find them – to hear the notes of tunes better. Then, I find the same tune on a CD to hear how it’s played for real. I have this tune [“Gilda Roy”] on “The Cliffhangers” CD – “On The Edge,” played by Mark Simos. [But I] can’t figure out what in the heck he’s doing!

Her query draws multiple responses from regular SITG contributors. Participants discuss learning modes, pedagogy, technologies, and the artifacts that aid tune learning. Technologies mentioned in this thread—which also serve as artifacts in CoP theory—include the software program “the Amazing Slowdowner,” MIDI files, TablEdit, abc notation, and recording CDs to cassette.

Talked about include the software program “the Amazing Slowdowner,” MIDI files, TablEdit, abc notation, and recording CDs to cassette. One participant offers to translate the tune from standard notation into TablEdit, an alternative notation system and translation software.

Members also post links to a MIDI “fakebook,” The Fiddler’s Companion (a PDF compilation of OT fiddle tunes with standard notation and historical notes), and a California Fife and Drum band’s website featuring MIDI recordings, standard notation, and abc notation. Interestingly, respondents not only address christine’s original plea but also start independent discussions with each other: several debate the usefulness of the “Amazing Slowdowner,” different tab formats, and music software conversion programs; others offer advice, tips, e-mail help, and pointers to additional sources. Alternative tune names and the tune’s structure are also examined, leading to a broader conversation about learning tunes in general.

The thread ends with christine’s final, simple question:

christine: Thanks for the feedback […] What string does the first note of the A part start on “Gilda Roy”?

Bosco: C note on the A string.

christine: That helps! NOW I hear it (don't know where the “C” is, but as long as I know which string I can find the sound). This is going to be my all time favorite tune – I’ll learn it if it kills me.

A close look reveals that all three interlocking CoP dimensions are present in this single thread. Mutual asynchronous engagement as a joint enterprise appears through the sharing of repertoire—assuming respondents understand the resources, artifacts, and learning modes under discussion. Repertoire, in Wenger’s sense of shared resources understood by community members in context, shows up in knowledge of website resources, alternative tune names, seminal figures in the genre, and technology. Although the tunes discussed are part of the larger OT music repertoire, Wenger’s definition of repertoire differs. Because respondents must grasp the tune’s specific nuances in context, repertoire in its other sense (accepted music canon) becomes an artifact here.

Poster christine clearly knows her learning style and has crafted a personal method: listening to MIDI files, recording CDs to cassette for playback, and using TablEdit because she does not read standard notation. Waldron’s (2006, 2009) and Waldron and Veblen’s (2009) participants used similar individual strategies for learning Irish traditional music, and Green’s (2002) participants did likewise for popular music.

Participants in this thread can “unjumble” posts—a skill they develop through asynchronous responses to one another’s comments besides the original query. Hine (2000) argues that this ability is essential for becoming a member of any online community, which is addressed next.

Community in OT cyberspace

Wenger explains how the third CoP element, community, is built and maintained:

> The existence of a community of practice does not depend on a fixed membership. People move in and out. An essential aspect of any long-lived practice is the arrival of new generations of members. As long as membership changes progressively enough to allow for sustained generational encounters, newcomers can be integrated into the community, engage in its practice, and then – in their own way – perpetuate it. These encounters between generations are the aspect of practice [that] can be shared across generational discontinuities precisely because it already is fundamentally a social process of shared learning. (1998: 99)

Web communities fit this description ideally. People “move in and out” frequently, but becoming a member demands sustained effort from newcomers; otherwise they remain “virtual tourists” (Hines 2000: 119). That “sustained effort” includes “learning to read a newsgroup meaningfully, resolving th[e] jumble into its separate threads, understanding messages as part of a present and ongoing interaction” (p. 116), and picking up correct “netiquette.” For virtual music communities, this “becoming” also involves learning musical praxis in cyberspace, often with the help of forum “old-timers.”

Examples abound in the OT virtual community. First, a thread started by a newbie at http://tinyurl.com/yd6a5dl, introducing himself:

TNFrank: Just wanted to drop in and say “Howdy” to everyone. Been playing music most of my life on guitar from 5 to 46, and now I’ve switched to mandolin and I’m lovin' it […] I’m really getting into bluegrass a lot [emphasis added]. […] not much on “theory” since I’m self-taught and I’m sure my technique isn’t the best, but I think music is more about having fun and playing then learning the theory of why […] anyway, I hope this is a lively forum where people aren’t afraid to post. Talk to ya’ll later.

[Between this post and the next, the board shows 25 views of TNFrank’s initial post but no responses, prompting him to ask why.]

TNFrank: Wow, 25 views and not a single reply. Guess this isn’t going to be such a lively forum after all.

christine: Maybe cause you said “the word” – Bluegrass. Seriously, good luck with the mandolin, you play well. After listening to your riff [a mandolin recording embedded in his post], it was in my head for the rest of the day.

Christine, whom we met earlier, gently chides newcomer TNFrank for mentioning bluegrass on the OT forum—a heated identity issue on SITG that TNFrank did not know about. Christine joined SITG on 28 December 2005 and, as a more seasoned member, introduces TNFrank to this aspect of OT forum netiquette, easing his potential induction. She balances her critique with praise for his posted riff. Also telling is TNFrank’s passionate argument for playing over theorizing about music—he is clearly a lifelong music learner.

Next, a post from forum “old-timer” Oldwoodchuckb illustrates intergenerational support. In the thread http://tinyurl.com/yc5xjo8, he explains playing Irish tunes in Clawhammer banjo style, a technique linked to OT music. He freely offers advice and “tab” editions (an alternate notation) to anyone who emails him—adding that he does not keep email addresses after sending the tabs:

Oldwoodchuckb: I’ve been doing some thinking about ways of playing Irish jigs and waltzes in [Old Time banjo] clawhammer [style] of late and have incorporated a few of these thoughts into this new set of tabs. For the tabs email me at: oldwoodchuckb@yahoo.com. Put “Irish” in the subject line so I can easily identify the tab requests. As usual, I will not keep your email address after sending the tabs out.

Oldwoodchuckb’s post includes a signature with a link to his website http://tinyurl.com/m5sfrw, which contains a tune book, advice, and links to his free YouTube teaching videos. This not only shows an old-timer helping less experienced members but also demonstrates social capital in the community.

Identity and community

The fourth CoP element, identity, is “inseparable from issues of practice, community, and meaning” (1998: 145, 199). Identity forms through a negotiation of meaning that evolves as individuals interact in community; personal identity influences the communal, and vice versa, without one taking precedence.

Identity thus emerges from individual experience within the communal.

A common assumption about online communities is that participants radically alter their identities. That holds only for communities where members’ online and offline lives never intersect. In communities like OT, where participants know each other in both virtual and physical spaces, individual identity usually stays consistent across both; online identity alteration becomes irrelevant (Hines 2000: 120). The authenticity of actions in such communities ultimately depends on the corresponding offline community—a “situated trust” (p. 143). Lee (2005) found that members of both online and offline communities showed greater sociability and social awareness than purely offline members did; online bonds strengthened offline ties.

In the thread http://tinyurl.com/ye7ckxf, respondents discuss identity explicitly: what makes a tune OT rather than country, blues, or bluegrass. Ptarmigan starts:

Ptarmigan: Has anyone ever been able to pin point the fine line between Old Time, Bluegrass, Country and Blues? Or should we even try? I ask because I find that I like ALL the Old Time Music I hear, I like most of the Blues Music I hear, but I like very little of the Bluegrass Music I hear and I like even less of the Country Music I hear. Some folks are very adamant that there are in fact no divisions, but if that’s the case, then why do I like some forms of music and not others? The fact is, music just doesn’t all sound the same, so surely we should just accept that we all have likes and dislikes […] That doesn’t bother me – I think this would be a crazier world if we all liked everything. Or should we just call it ALL Country Music and be done with divisions?

Coupedefleur: Well, it depends on if you want a regular answer or a musicology answer (Laughing)! And where you draw lines in a continuum […]

Fred: Hey Dick [Ptarmigan’s real name] – Yeah, this topic is sort of on perennial simmer […] For me personally – a person who plays old time and bluegrass with a touch of all kinds of others thrown in – I don’t think about it too much. I like music with a particular kind of “feel” to it and I leave it up to others to affix labels afterwards. It doesn’t mean that there aren’t distinctions one can draw between the genres, but for me they’re porous [and] semi-permeable.

That’s where folks need help making links and seeing connections rather than making divisions. To me, it’s a mark that these traditions are living, breathing, viable music forms subject to change, interpretation, and growth.

Ptarmigan: Interesting replies, guys, with plenty of food for thought – thanks.

No definitive answers emerge, but the posters provide insightful, well-informed commentary (e.g., Coupedefleur’s thoughts on musicology) offered politely, reaching interesting conclusions. Fred’s argument about the permeability of music genres and the positive outcomes such interconnectedness produces is especially noteworthy.

Implications for music education

This cyber-ethnographic exploration of the OT CoP serves as a useful case for music educators. First, it demonstrates that cyber-ethnographic methods from media and communication studies can be effectively applied to online music education research. Second, it supports and could extend ideas already proposed by music education researchers about online music learning in community. Myers (2006) and Jellison (2000) argue that enabling adult lifelong music participation should be a primary goal of formal school music education. Jones (2005) suggests incorporating “diverse, small ensembles oriented to the musical lives of the community’s street-level cultural life” into North American music programs, citing folk groups, African drumming, and steel pan ensembles (2005: 9). All these genres now have established online communities (e.g., http://tinyurl.com/yc7d63r, http://tinyurl.com/y8ovecb); Salavuo (2008) already proposed reusing them as foundations for lifelong music learning. Combining specific local physical communities’ musics with school curricula—paired with those musics’ global online CoPs—could produce school music education relevant to students, potentially guiding them toward lifelong music learning. Moreover, blending school learning with the learning culture of online CoPs should yield richer, more meaningful musical experiences as the local is situated in the global and vice versa.

Conclusion

Using Wenger’s framework, the OT online community clearly constitutes a CoP as defined. Rich, meaningful music learning is already taking place within it—seen in members’ own narratives. Participants

know their learning styles: they use, adapt, and manipulate technology for music learning; ask for feedback; help one another; share resources freely; pose and answer questions; and demonstrate OT music knowledge from performance, historical, and theoretical angles. Some philosophize about OT music and music generally. Above all, they show passion for their activity and its process. Wenger’s words capture this learning:

> Learning cannot be designed. Ultimately, it belongs to the realm of experience and practice. It follows the negotiation of meaning; it moves on its own terms. It slips through the cracks; it creates its own cracks. Learning happens, design or no design. (1998: 225)

Similarly, Hines writes from an Internet researcher’s perspective:

> The Internet is a text that is both read and written by its users. It comes into being through the activities of its users, and its capacities are made through the web pages and newsgroups messages they produce and through the multiple representations of what it is and what it can do. (2000: 147)

Cyberspace offers valuable lifelong music learning in community to anyone with a computer and an internet connection. Wenger’s powerful endorsement sums it up:

> Education, in its deepest sense and at whatever age it takes place, concerns the opening of identities – exploring new ways of being that lie beyond our current state. This discussion assumes neither that education takes places in schools as we know them nor that education is for children. (1998: 225)

Think of the possibilities.

¹ tag for a footer reference cite formatting clarification intention reformatted because journal style guidelines disallow inline affiliations in the markup – the snippet to use inside the article’s own prose.

List of relevant studies continued and web resources cited: Atay (2009) examined diasporic queer male identities online. CDBaby (accessed 2 June 2009) archives Cliffhangers’ album. Chiff and Fipple (accessed 8 February 2010) serves as a whistle forum. The California Consolidated Drum Band site (accessed 2 June 2009) provides audio recordings. Font (2007) critiqued Smithsonian Global Sound’s applied ethnomusicology. Froehlich (2009) analyzed school music’s “webs of interaction.” Gajjala (2006) applied cyberethnography to South Asian digital diasporas. Godfrey (1990) studied fiddling festivals and revival jam sessions. Green (2002) explored informal popular musician learning. Hardie (2005) compiled Scottish fiddle music analysis. Hayes (2008) documented Appalachian family transmission from front porch to stage. Hetzler’s Fakebook (accessed 2 June 2009) hosts tune collections. Hines (2000) theorized virtual ethnography. Jellison (2000) contributed to Vision 2020 on lifelong meaningful music education.

The John Salyer sound archive link (accessed 2 June 2009) preserves historic Appalachian recordings. Jones (2005) examined music education within the knowledge economy. Kibby (2000) analyzed virtual community formation through music websites. Lavengood (2008) studied transnational Celtic music practices on Cape Breton. Lee (2005) investigated online community and social capital. Lizie (2000) explored global music information flow and cyberspace identity. Lysloff (2003) conducted an online ethnography of a musical community. Mandozine (accessed 2 June 2009) provides mandolin tablature.

Resources also included: Miscellaneous Tunebook (accessed 2 June 2009) PDFs. Myers (2006) advocated lifelong music learning beyond schooling. Riggs (1994) developed an old-time fiddling method book. Rocket Science Banjo (accessed 2 June 2009) offers banjo resources. Salavuo (2006, 2008) and Salavuo & Hakkinen (2005) examined social media’s potential to transform music education pedagogy. Scully (2005) traced American folk revivalism 1965–2005. Silvers (2007) studied musical creation and consumption in virtual environments. Steel pan drums resource (accessed 10 February 2010). Sugar in the Gourd website and its forums (accessed 2 June 2009) preserve old-time music engagement. Sveningsson (2004) outlined ethics in internet ethnography. Twine (2006) applied visual ethnographic method to racial theory via family photos. Waldron (2006, 2009) researched adult Celtic traditional learning and community at Goderich Celtic College. Waldron and Veblen (2008) linked cyberspace, community, and music learning in Irish traditional music. Wenger (1998) theorized communities of practice. Williams (2006) examined authentic subcultural identity through music websites.