Reuther Uniform System Layout...

[jjj]

I hate the conventional piano keyboard, because one has to learn to play it 24 times and keep practicing it for ever. Not all home musicians are interested in a professional career. Thus, the advantages of button keyboards, such as the C-system accordion or the concertina button system makes sense.

I'm excited about the Janko style Reuther uniform system layout, but I still can't figure out why it has to have three rows?

Wouldn't two rows be enough? Why do they have to copy one row in order to have one more row? That the original Janko's piano keyboard has six rows has something to do with the left hand playing; it avoids crossing of hands.

Yet, the Janko style Reuther uniform system layout is designed to be played by one hand only. Do you have any logical explanation why it has to have three rows? Thanking you! Kind Regards from jjj from Chile

Edited February 7, 2008 by jjj

[ocd]

A feature of having three rows is that one can transpose a passage that uses only two adjacent rows to any key and keep the same fingering. Say you learn a fingering you like for the C major scale, a fingering that uses only the outer two rows of keys. Now you want to play the C# major scale. With three rows you can use exactly the same fingering. If you had only two rows, you would have to come up with a different fingering. The same phenomenon happens with the Continental chromatic system: if you learn a passage on the three outer rows, you can transpose it anyway you like (if you have five rows) just by starting it in any note you want. More generally, if you learn a passage that uses only three adjacent rows, you can transpose it and keep the same fingering (as long as you don't run out of notes at the bass or treble, of course).

 

ocd

[Hooves]

I hate the conventional piano keyboard, because one has to learn to play it 24 times and keep practicing it for ever. Not all home musicians are interested in a professional career. Thus, the advantages of button keyboards, such as the C-system accordion or the concertina button system makes sense.

I'm excited about the Janko style Reuther uniform system layout, but I still can't figure out why it has to have three rows?

Wouldn't two rows be enough? Why do they have to copy one row in order to have one more row? That the original Janko's piano keyboard has six rows has something to do with the left hand playing; it avoids crossing of hands.

Yet, the Janko style Reuther uniform system layout is designed to be played by one hand only. Do you have any logical explanation why it has to have three rows? Thanking you! Kind Regards from jjj from Chile

 

 

Its an interesting layout, I found this page with some information on the system (which I had never heard of till I read this thread).

 

http://www.red-bean.com/~noel/uniform-keyboard/

 

According to this article, you could have only 2 rows, but you would need to learn 2 patterns instead of 1. I'm just taking that on face value as I have no expierence with this system at all.

 

Guess the next thing to do is look for a MIDI controller configured this way, or build one.

[jjj]

Thank you all for kicking me to reasoning. Words alone confused me even more, but forced me to think.

 

Here's how to understand it easier:

 

1st row= ......... F G A B

2nd row= C D E .......... C.......................f# g# a# c

3rd row= ..................................c# d# F ................ c#

 

To play Janko with one hand, one only requires a three row keyboard, instead six rows.

The above diagram shows the pattern of C-major and a#-major scale.

In order to stick to one pattern only, three rows are needed. The one and only pattern of any octave required simply

consists of: three keys on same row, four keys on upper row.

 

Inadvertently, if there would only be two rows (1st and 2nd row) two different pattern would be required (to learn); e.g.

1) c-major: C D E on 2nd row and F G A B on 1st row.

2) A#-major: c# d# F on 1st row and f# g# a# c on the 2nd row.

Edited February 8, 2008 by jjj

[m3838]

Yes, Uniform keyboard was forsaken for the only reason of thousands of desperate piano players picking up profitable accordion in 30es. So they already knew how to play piano professionally and perspective or re-learning wasn't economically wise.

But I don't know any B-system 5 row players, who wouldn't practice everyday, despite that they can indeed transpose easily and need only to know one pattern. Of all that I know (not many) all use 5 rows not to transpose, but to build easier fingering. So if you would have 3 or 6 row Janko keyboard, I think you will start using all 6 rows for playing, and eventially will arrive at the disturbing point of having to learn the keyboard 24 times. For home musician it's the same. Say, you want to learn easy Bach piece or some other piece, and search for some printed music. You find one, transcripted for your level, open and by looking at suggested fingerings, have a gasp - Oh my! they suggest using all 4 out of 6, or all 3 out of 3. For your own sake, of course, to make it 'easier to play' in a given key. Of course you can stay in basic rows for some hap-hazard home entertainment, but for this there is nothing like good old Honers with 2/half row. Get three of them, G/C, D/G and C/F, block thirds in the chords and you'll be covered for life. Diatonic push/pull is very easy to play, all necessary accidentals are there and without thirds you can use 8 bass buttons for any music. Leo can sell you one or two. Cheaper than Uniform keyboard, available today!, small and portable, great sound, longevity, good looks.

Plus you can't have piano with uniform keyboard at any location, where there is a piano.

May be you can find some accordions with uniform keyboard, contact Petosa in Seattle, or place ads on every accordion site you know. Ebay didn't give any results.

[jjj]

Yes, Uniform keyboard was forsaken for the only reason of thousands of desperate piano players picking up profitable accordion in 30es. So they already knew how to play piano professionally and perspective or re-learning wasn't economically wise.

But I don't know any B-system 5 row players, who wouldn't practice everyday, despite that they can indeed transpose easily and need only to know one pattern. Of all that I know (not many) all use 5 rows not to transpose, but to build easier fingering. So if you would have 3 or 6 row Janko keyboard, I think you will start using all 6 rows for playing, and eventially will arrive at the disturbing point of having to learn the keyboard 24 times. For home musician it's the same. Say, you want to learn easy Bach piece or some other piece, and search for some printed music. You find one, transcripted for your level, open and by looking at suggested fingerings, have a gasp - Oh my! they suggest using all 4 out of 6, or all 3 out of 3. For your own sake, of course, to make it 'easier to play' in a given key. Of course you can stay in basic rows for some hap-hazard home entertainment, but for this there is nothing like good old Honers with 2/half row. Get three of them, G/C, D/G and C/F, block thirds in the chords and you'll be covered for life. Diatonic push/pull is very easy to play, all necessary accidentals are there and without thirds you can use 8 bass buttons for any music. Leo can sell you one or two. Cheaper than Uniform keyboard, available today!, small and portable, great sound, longevity, good looks.

Plus you can't have piano with uniform keyboard at any location, where there is a piano.

May be you can find some accordions with uniform keyboard, contact Petosa in Seattle, or place ads on every accordion site you know. Ebay didn't give any results.

 

Thx for the good advice. Sadly, I possess only basic knowledge of musical theory and so, partly unable to follow your good advice.

The thing I know for sure is that with three rows of Janko accordion, as used by the Uniform accordion keyboard, do allow me to get away with learning only one major and one minor scale, in order to be able to play all 12 major & 12 minor scales. In addition to that the Janko pattern isn't that remote from the traditional piano keyboard. These attributes are preferable at least for my situation.

Since I acquired considerable skills in playing the piano accordion, the Janko style keyboard would accelerate my relearning process using special Klavarscribo notation for Janko. Other button keyboards (such as the (easiest) C-system) would take me longer to learn.

Edited February 7, 2008 by jjj

[Hooves]

Yes, Uniform keyboard was forsaken for the only reason of thousands of desperate piano players picking up profitable accordion in 30es. So they already knew how to play piano professionally and perspective or re-learning wasn't economically wise.

But I don't know any B-system 5 row players, who wouldn't practice everyday, despite that they can indeed transpose easily and need only to know one pattern. Of all that I know (not many) all use 5 rows not to transpose, but to build easier fingering. So if you would have 3 or 6 row Janko keyboard, I think you will start using all 6 rows for playing, and eventially will arrive at the disturbing point of having to learn the keyboard 24 times.

 

 

I wonder though if there isn't an advantage in the 24 patterns: what I mean is, having to study 24 different ways of making a scale, doesn't that force your mind to think in other ways? to address new patterns or create new patterns just by the fact you are forced to learn more than one sequence?

 

I'm only wondering that because although i studied piano briefly, my only real keyboard instrument is the concertina, in my case 2 duet systems, which I have come to realize suffers the same pitfall as the standard piano - each scale is a different pattern.

 

I think one could argue there actaully is an advantage to each scale beign different, in the sense that it makes you think about patterns more broadly.

 

And further, its more than 24 if you play modally: 7 modes per Key = 84 patterns; and if we add in our pentatonics, cultural scales, dominants scales, ascending/descedning minor, doesn't that equate to a whole bunch more than 24?

 

Then the clencher for me is when we start gettign chromatic, and we are movingn in and out of each "key" - will these compact systems really show an advantage over the current system?

Edited February 7, 2008 by Hooves

[m3838]

will these compact systems really show an advantage over the current system?

 

I agree with you. As much as I would like, for ease sake, to learn some "easy" system, I, after some experimentation, came to the conclusion that such system doesn't exist.

I think most people learn tunes in the keys they are commonly played, so transposition is less of an issue.

For classical music and anything specifically written you would never use other keys anyways, except when you have transposing instrument.

I think the real transposition issue is not the singers or a whim, but the voice of an instrument (individually perceived). The composers write music for the instrument in the keys and ranges that sound better. So it is unlikely to find fast melody for EC baritone's lowest range, or chordal arrangement for violin.

And I agree that learning many ways to play a scale broadens your dexterity. To a reasonal extend, of course.

[jjj]

Since most of the time I prefer to play by ear, I'm not interested in musical theory and scale practicing. I learn new pieces (and with that great melody playing skills) with Klavarskribo notation and then try to emotionally enrich the piece by playing them without notation.

Thus, the problem of scale complexity arises when playing by ear.

The Janko keyboard pattern allows me to easily change scales without previous scale practice. If that's not a considerable advantage, I don't know what is...

[David Barnert]

Since most of the time I prefer to play by ear, I'm not interested in musical theory and scale practicing.

I credit knowing music theory with greatly enhancing my ability to play by ear. There's nothing like understanding what's happening in a melody for engendering familiarity.

[jjj]

Since most of the time I prefer to play by ear, I'm not interested in musical theory and scale practicing.

I credit knowing music theory with greatly enhancing my ability to play by ear. There's nothing like understanding what's happening in a melody for engendering familiarity.

I prefer to learning the lot pragmatically. That's how I learned (experienced and discovered) how awkwardly backwards the conventional piano keyboard really is. I don't think musical theory would offer me this insight, because there everything is glorified as being the way it is right and that's the only way it has to be learned. No wonder I mostly ended up only playing in C-major and A-minor scale; how boring!

[m3838]

I prefer to learning the lot pragmatically. That's how I learned (experienced and discovered) how awkwardly backwards the conventional piano keyboard really is. I don't think musical theory would offer me this insight, because there everything is glorified as being the way it is right and that's the only way it has to be learned. No wonder I mostly ended up only playing in C-major and A-minor scale; how boring!

 

 

Sounds like you have been exposed to very bad and wrong music theory method. I too, am of the opinion that practice comes first and grammar second. It's how I learned English in 2 months well enough to find work in the US. But playing different scales is not grammar, it's just dexterity excercise.

If you were able to build that Janko keyboard - good for you. I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "complexity of scale" or why you think music theory is a set thing. As far as I'm concerned, music theory, as commonly taught, sucks immensely, but there are exceptions: Gary Dahl's "Harmony Application Method" is darn good, and aimed at people like you.

And I also disagree that playing in one key is boring. There is no difference between the keys in well tempered tuning, they all sound the same. Lots of French trad is written in Amin for G/C accordion - immence variety! I also don't understand what's the problem with various keys, when you learn by ear? So you hear a tune and you replicate it. Do you then transpose it? Why?

And besides, Universal keyboard is piano keyboard, only a bit improved (or not, not been pianist, can't say). You may want to check out Kravtsov keyboard, same initial idea.

The thing to remember though is "what's easy for beginner, may hold you back, when you improve". I guess that's what keeps Bandoneon "system" alive.

[David Barnert]

I don't think musical theory would offer me this insight, because there everything is glorified as being the way it is right and that's the only way it has to be learned.

I'm sorry, but nobody with any real understanding of music theory could say that. People are always searching for a discipline that explains observed phenomena and makes them feel like they can take control of it. A lot of people find this in religion. A lot of people find this in science. I find music theory deeply satisfying for the same reason.

[Rod Thompson]

Slightly off-topic, but not too far.

 

An Indian friend introduced me to the harmonium, which is a very popular instrument in the sub-continent. This is played one handed, while pumping the bellows with the left hand, and has banks of reeds controlled by stops.

Wikipedia entry

The connection with this thread is that it has a piano keyboard, but it transposable to any key withoout a change of fingering. There is a simple mechanism that moves the keyboard left or right along the box, and means that the keys actuate different reeds. Very simple in principle, but I'm sure it is tricky in the mechanism.

 

You can still play the black notes (as accidentals or for key changes during a piece), but if a singer says "it would be better a semitone lower", click and its done!

[jjj]

And I also disagree that playing in one key is boring. There is no difference between the keys in well tempered tuning, they all sound the same. Lots of French trad is written in Amin for G/C accordion - immence variety! I also don't understand what's the problem with various keys, when you learn by ear? So you hear a tune and you replicate it. Do you then transpose it? Why?

Some pieces sound much more lively when played in the right level/ scale. Also some pieces change scales in the same piece. Finally, scale change in the piece offers a refreshing repetition of the same piece.

 

People are always searching for a discipline that explains observed phenomena and makes them feel like they can take control of it.

The same can be gained by practice and observation. That's how I learned my English, my electronic skills and to write seven philosophical books ( http://jdrinda.tripod.com )

Basically, I prefer to discover the truth myself by practice, observation and reasoning. I don't mind some guidance, which I use like street signs... for orientation purpose, only. Yet, I'm only able/ willing to fully accept insight by doing my homework on it. That's why I'm unable/ unwilling to agree with pious business organization's doctrines.

...simple mechanism that moves the keyboard left or right along the box, and means that the keys actuate different reeds. Very simple in principle, but I'm sure it is tricky in the mechanism.

Yes, I build the same idea into my ELKA (E49) electronic organ. A motor dragged the whole contact board 6 keys up/ down, but it was pretty confusing and never really got used to it. Thus, the Janko or the C-system accordion keyboard makes more sense.

I agree with you. As much as I would like, for ease sake, to learn some "easy" system, I, after some experimentation, came to the conclusion that such system doesn't exist.

The Janko keyboard is such a simple system!! It's benefits have been acknowledged by renown pianists & composers, yet has been rejected, because:

i) ...most professional pianists refused to relearn ii) ...most piano teachers feared to lose years of teaching salaries ii) last (not least) some pianists loved the masochist aspect of greater complexity of playing the traditional piano keyboard. Janko (the inventor) actually performed his piano and the usually difficult to play pieces were that easy to play on the Janko keyboard that it seemed a "trick or fake'... and thus, failed to be recognized by most professional pianist (fearing the loss of their "the hard way" acquired skills).

How about putting all these dexterity efforts into playing the Janko keyboard, instead into awkward, outdated keyboard systems?

I wonder though if there isn't an advantage in the 24 patterns: what I mean is, having to study 24 different ways of making a scale, doesn't that force your mind to think in other ways?

That's called masochism That's what decades of torture on the traditional keyboard do to pianists! They all end up masochists! The more it hurts.. the better!! Sorry I'm not subscribing to this "sick concept". It's like scratching your left ear by putting your right arm under your left leg trying to reach your left ear. Why not just achieving the same result by simply using your left hand? For those enjoying awkward keyboard patterns I recommend a keyboard with spiked triangle keys ...mounted at different levels. Then they can be really proud of mastering a melody on it!

Edited February 8, 2008 by jjj

[m3838]

I listened to your whistling examples - very impressive! What do you need your keyboard for?

I agree that simpler keyboard makes life easier, I disagree with the concept of "scale change" by jumping to next row, I agree that some key change (what you call "scale change" I guess) does add variety and often use "transposing" capability of my two row Hohner for jumping melody from C to G and back.

So you built Janko Uniform keyboard!

Tell me, what is the reason for 6 rows, when 3 do it all? For ease of fingering? But doesn't it add to confusion with so many choices? And by the way, I've studied B system Bayan for some 5 years and came to conclusion that it's very difficult system, because it's scales are "zig-zaggy" and not intuitive. When I fool around with piano accordion, I'm amazed how much music I can pull out of it compared to my bayan (after all that study). I don't care about "complexity etc." of the specific "scales", because it feels natural and intuitive to me. Now I think what a mistake it was for me to change from piano to button accordion.

I'm sure If I had Uniform accordioin, I'd be playing one now.

And I agree with your reasons about pianists rejecting the Uniform system. The same happened to me, when I introduced my musician friends to my new idea of symmetric music stave. The first reaction was - " do I have to re-learn?". When they saw how simple it is, the reaction was: - "So everybody can learn to read?" I came to it as an excercise, really, not thinking of changing the world, but the reaction was...well, reactionary.

[Hooves]

That's called masochism That's what decades of torture on the traditional keyboard do to pianists! They all end up masochists! The more it hurts.. the better!! Sorry I'm not subscribing to this "sick concept". It's like scratching your left ear by putting your right arm under your left leg trying to reach your left ear. Why not just achieving the same result by simply using your left hand? For those enjoying awkward keyboard patterns I recommend a keyboard with spiked triangle keys ...mounted at different levels. Then they can be really proud of mastering a melody on it!

 

 

No, its called using your mind to approach the same thing in more than one way, if you interpret thinking as painful, then I suppose for you it is masochistic.

 

The real point is, you have 12 notes: you could make 100's of scales with the use of those 12 notes, For playing, all that matters is you know what note to play and when.

 

For composition, you stated you had no use of music theory, so why do you bother learning any pattterns at all? Thats what most of what music theory is, explaining patterns of notes. I think virtually all melodic music has a scale base, but modern music departs from that base scale frequently, chromatic passages, major subsituitions, descending/ascending minor, but then again you have no use of music theory let alone jazz theory.

 

For improvisation, I come from a guitar/mandolin background, transposing is not a major issue on guitar, its like the Janko in that you can shift up or down frets to transpose, the same pattern works in multiple spots - that is an advantage, but it helps alot in improvisation to know many ways to play the same type of scale.

 

So though I think its neat that the janko keyboard allows you to play major scale the same way, you are still not learning just one pattern, unless you really believe all music can be expressed through the Major scale:

 

7 modes = 7 patterns (still much less than the standard piano at 84)

 

now start adding up all the scales when you get to Pentatonic, Hexatonic, even with the Jako, you are memmorizing a whole lot of patterns.

 

 

and of course lets not forget the piano masters - Tchaikovsky, Schumann, Beethoven, Les Reed, Scott Joplin -

 

the list goes on and on......gee I wonder why?

[m3838]

and of course lets not forget the piano masters - Tchaikovsky, Schumann, Beethoven, Les Reed, Scott Joplin -

 

the list goes on and on......gee I wonder why?

 

It's because they were known mazochists, you silly.