Jump to content


Photo

Question Re English Fingering Chart

fingering charts chords notation ABC

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 bellowbelle

bellowbelle

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1409 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA

Posted 26 June 2014 - 08:48 AM

I've been looking over the chart for English concertina fingering as given here:  

http://www.concertina.com/fingering/

 

 

The first chart, English Concertina Keyboard -- http://www.concertina.com/fingering/images/english48-W842H736.gif 

 

has me wondering why it's shown as starting an octave above Middle C.  This isn't 'wrong' but I can't figure out if it's actually 'correct' and I would in fact be somehow wrong to show the chart with the lowest C being notated with a capital C, not the small c.  

 

So, I would have started with the low G being lower, notated as G,  -- then continue up going G#, Ab, Bb, B, C     -- etc --- 

 

simply an octave lower than it's given on the chart.  

 

Sound-wise, the chart is more correct, maybe?  But as far as what I'd want to read or write on the musical staff, I think I'd want to go with the lower octave start.

 

Am I missing something...? 

 



#2 Steve Mansfield

Steve Mansfield

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whaley Bridge, Derbyshire

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:34 AM

 

Am I missing something...? 

 

Not missing anything, but maybe over-thinking it a bit! 

 

For reading from staff notation the lowest C (left hand, bottom of third row) would indeed be middle C. 

 

Whilst in abc notation C is middle C, c the octave above, and c' the octave above that, there's no guarantee that the creator of the fingering chart had that convention in mind. 

 

I could use the same chart with my baritone and the note relationships would be exactly the same, but c on that chart would then sound the C below middle C.



#3 sqzbxr

sqzbxr

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:45 AM

I agree with Steve, I don't think the creator of the charts was thinking of ABC notation, but was trying to display note values for four octaves using simple text characters.  On my charts, I prefer to use the more conventional standard of notating the octave by position on the standard 88-key piano keyboard, e.g.:  C4 = middle C:

 

Lachenal-Extended-Treble-1.jpg



#4 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 26 June 2014 - 12:08 PM

I agree with Steve, I don't think the creator of the charts was thinking of ABC notation, but was trying to display note values for four octaves using simple text characters.


Agreeing with Marc and Steve. It's only recently that ABC notation has become widespread and relatively standardized. Although I invented something similar decades ago, it's less than 10 years (maybe less than five?) since I became aware that there was an extended community using such a notation and attempting to standardize it.

I might guess that the author of those layouts on concertina.com wasn't even aware of ABC notation as a standard when he created them. He just created what seemed a sensible method of labelling the notes, with primes indicating successively higher octaves.

Even today, not everyone uses the "ABC" standard or feels obliged to avoid notational conventions that conflict with it.
 

On my charts, I prefer to use the more conventional standard of notating the octave by position on the standard 88-key piano keyboard, e.g.: C4 = middle C...


Something similar can be said of this notation. Within the past few months, I've seen layouts for instruments for sale where "C1" was used to indicate C below middle C -- the lowest note on the instrument in question, -- thus making "C2" the notation for middle C.

And while I've learned to use the system in which "C4" or "C4" corresponds to middle C, I think it's strange that as a "standard" it uses "A0" rather than "A1" for the lowest note on the piano.  I.e., its alphabetical octave runs from "C" to "B", not from "A" to "G", even though the frist (lowest) octave on the piano does run from an A to a G.

 

But I'm not particularly bothered by these different notational "dialects", since I much prefer the older, 2-dimensional standard of  music notation that employs 5-line musical staves.



#5 bellowbelle

bellowbelle

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1409 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:15 PM

Very nice chart, Marc!

 

And thank you, Steve, and Jim....

 

I guess as long as the system is considered only "relatively standardized," I am safe to do things kinda my own way.   ;) 

 

Of course, I realize I can always do things my own way -- and I am in fact working on a project that is first and foremost just for my own self, but if I do share it with any other concertina players in some form, I don't want to be totally against-the-grain of something already set in stone.

 

I have an odd mix of formal and informal musical training, but besides any of that, I just don't want to give up some of the methods and definitions I've 'always' used.  It's not always because I don't know what it's 'supposed' to be, but just because I made my own rules, to keep things simple!   Things like...   well, "The 2nd shall always be referred to as the 9th."   But, there was actually a time or two when I played a chord and included the 2nd and called it the 9th, and was told that it could NOT be the 9th unless the chord also included the 7th... without the 7th, it was simply an added 2nd.   :wacko:  Who cares....   :P

 

So...  I've learned to try to not be TOO cryptic, but just make my own stuff for my own head, and then if someone else can benefit from it -- well, great. 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: fingering, charts, chords, notation, ABC

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users