The really telling bit is this:
Most musicians are generally supportive of innovation in the format, but some fans have a more restrictive view. “There’s some hardcore traditional fans out there who really think that the best bluegrass ever recorded was in the late Forties, early Fifties and that nobody can really improve on that,” says Cardwell. “That’s their favorite, and God bless them, they’re entitled to that perspective. Part of the reason for these strong feelings is they treasure the music so much. It’s more than just a casual interest, almost a passion, a religious fervor. People who just really love bluegrass music treasure it so much that they want to hold onto it very tightly and not let it change because they’re afraid if we don’t keep it the same, then it’ll disappear in a generation or two.
Here’s the thing: if you really want to hear the “vintage” sound, that’s the beautiful thing about audio recordings: the stuff is preserved intact — immune (at least in that form) from the “folk process” – and (barring stupid “copyright”-related bullshit) should remain readily-available to “future generations”.
So, why the impetus to turn an entire music genre into the equivalent of fucking Elvis impersonators?
This is one reason (among many others) why “Bluegrass” has become an aesthetically anemic, derivative, fringe subculture, which is in serious danger of dying out completely in less 25 years.
I don’t see that as any great “loss”, at this point.