I keep hearing that wooden ended Concertinas are better to sing with than metal ended ones, but, given that the reeds are the same in both, why do wooden ended Concertinas sound softer than metal ended ones?

Does anyone really know how this works?

Cheers
Dick

i know very litlle about acustics(and spelling ) but i'ld venture that maby because wood is much more porris then metal theres more material to absorb the sound instead of reflecting it (in the case of the metal) thats just a total guess. anybody actually know? Also i think this is generally just a rule of thumb, surely there are some wooden ended ones that have more bark then other metal ended ones.
p..s been browsing about this placve for a while. it's a happy thing your all so vocal about this wonderfull instrument!!
-kj.

My own very unscientific opinion is the kj is on the right track with absorbtion and reflection.

But the basic assumption that all steel reeds are the same may be faulty. Scale of the reeds, hardness and resiliency of the steel, reed shoe material and button board material may all make a difference. Here is a link to a previous thread that might bear some rereading.
http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php...4&hl=Wakker

Complicated little instruments with lots of variables. Fun, though!

Greg

FWIW,
When Colin designed and built the Shantyman for me it was to be in C/F with wooden ends, to be used for singing accompaniment.
Cheers,
Geo

Good point Greg - so many variables, which may vary between two examples of one model by one manufacturer!

Have any of you ever tried swapping one end material for another on one and the same concertina? You could use existing metal ends as drilling templates for temporary wooden ones - the fretwork needn't be too fancy, just a few holes scattered about to give you the same ratio between wood and holes as in an original wood-ender.
Could be an interesting experiment!

Cheers,
John

I suspect that it would be equally interesting to experiment with a variety of woven fabrics to line the inside of the ends. The metal ends of my Anglo are lined with a finely woven, silk-like (but probably man-made) fabric which must surely have some impact on the tone of the instrument. Different fabrics might well give rise to different tonal effects. I notice that many, if not most instruments appear to have no fabric lining of any sort on the inside of the ends. I would expect un-lined metallic ends without linings to produce a more 'metallic' sound and wooden ends by their very nature to produce a rather more mellow tone. Fabric linings also play an important role in preventing dust, dirt and other foreign bodies from gaining access to the engine room. I have voiced similar opinions before on this forum and am quite prepared to be told that I'm talking nonsense !

Good point Rod,

I've seen a few Lachenals with fabric inside, including wooden ended ones, & my little Sally Army Ab/Eb Lachenal actually has very thin red leather, which must surely restrict the escape of the noise from the reeds.

Eventually, I plan to send this away to have it re-tuned & cleaned up, so it'll be interesting to see what it'll sound like with just a fine, thin material in place, instead of this leather.

Does anyone else have this leather inside, or have you seen it being used?

If not, I'm thinking that perhaps a non musician may have replaced the gauze with this leather, not realising that it would make the box quieter.

However, if this fabric does play a big part in the sound, perhaps fitting material inside, might be the way to go, for anyone who wishes to soften the sound of a metal ended instrument, they wish to sing with. Obviously you would have to choose your material carefully, so that it wasn't going to be shedding loads of fibres & so clog up the reeds.

Cheers
Dick

Yes similar thing here Dick, but this time its my Salvation Army Wheatstone Treble that has a quite thick red gauze inside the metal ends. On the Wheastone ledgers it actually mentions the gauze in the listing. Sounds great to sing to - I regularly lead worship on it (yep, at the Army). I'm sure that it's that that contributes to the beautiful tone it has (well, its nothing to do with my playing it that's for sure). Interestingly I have a Triumph Duet as well (Lach) which also has a thin white leather liner inside the wooden ends. It still sounds awful, that I do put down to my playing!

regards, AL

I've recently aquired a 30 button wooden ended Lachenal with thin red leather inserts.
Gill

All vocal chords are made of the same material, but voices don't sound the same.

Sound a reed on its own, with no box around it and you get a fairly mediocre noise.

Twang a guitar string under tension and you will get a less satisfying sound than if the string is properly attached to a guitar.

There are three things going on, at least:

Resonance. The vibrations of the reeds, strings, etc. in a musical instrument make the body of the instrument and all its various components vibrate too. A wooden box will soften the sound. A metal ended box will soften it less.

Absorbtion. Some substances will absorb some of the sound. I'd expect wood to absorb more than metal.

Reflection. Some of the sound has to bounce around inside the box before it finds its way out. Wood and metal will reflect differently.

Think about the jews harp: a twanging reed with no musicality until the skilled player uses all parts of his mouth to adjust the pitch and quality of the sound.

Sing in the car, then sing in the bathroom, then sing in a field. Same voice, different sound quality.

I have an Edgley A/E with metal sides and leather baffles. It was crafted this way and hasn't any negative effect that I can tell. The instrument plays quite loudly when I want or need it to and the tone is excellent.

Mike, sorry but I have to correct this. The instrument you refer to is a jaws harp (think about it). I'm not sure where the 'alternative' name came from (probably just popular misconception) but it's pretty non-PC although widespread admittedly.

Pete.

..... and then it is magically transfrormed into a horrendous irritating din .......



Dave

Pete, while calling it a "jew's harp" is decidedly un-PC as you say, that name predates "jaw harp" by a goodly chunk of time--Wikipedia, admittedly a less than perfect source, states that the more socially acceptable name only showed up in the last century or so (according to the same source, the OED--would that I had one here to check--is decidedly uncharitable about the theory that "jew's harp" derives from "jaw harp," calling it "baseless and inept"). The Jew's Harp Guild website says that the first written source calling it a jew's harp dates to 1595, whereas "jaw harp" is a 20th-century creation. There are apparently several theories as to were the earlier term came from. In the meantime, you can also call it a mouth harp, a maultrommel (the German term) or lots of other things--and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with calling it a jaw harp, just that the weight of history is not behind that term.

jdms

Well actually Pete, we usually call it a TRUMP ... north of the border!

-deleted-duplicate post

I must be honest, I resemble that remark Dave!

You see, I actually won the 'Jews Harp' competition at the Kinross Folk Festival, way back in '74 I think it was, when, if I remember rightly, Aly Bain {believe it or not } was judging!

But then, let's be honest, what the heck would Aly Bain know about playing the Trump!

Cheers
Dick

Hey B,

I know there are a million & one Banjo jokes, but are there many jokes about the Concertina & it's players out there?

Cheers
Dick

Getting back to the subject of lined ends...I am confused. If the fabric lining of the ends of of my instrument were to be replaced by leather (however thin) the bellows would surely be totally starved of air and there would be nothing to activate the reeds. I am obviously missing the point somewhere along the line.

Hey Rod
Baffles (the lining in the ends) can be mounted on standoffs to allow airflow.
Here is an article discussing the subject.

Interesting point.

I suppose with leather in place, you have to work a little harder to get the same amount of air to pass over the reeds.

I wonder were all, or most, of the Sally Army Concertinas deliberately made with leather in place, to ensure that these instruments were a little quieter, knowing that they would always be used to accompany singers?

I've just taken out my Sally Army Lachenal, with the leather in place & checked it out & working the air button, I see that air is getting through around the edges in places, but mostly at the top, through the large round hole. { it's not oval! }

Surely it doesn't take that much air to actually sound a reed though, does it?

I like the notion that the wood pores absorb some of the sound.

Makes me wonder just how quiet a Concertina would be, if the ends were made of THIS material?

Cheers
Dick

Brilliant Laitch, thanks for the link to that fascinating article.


Ah Ha, so was Leather only used on Victorian instruments?

The serial number on my Lachenal is 183993. Anyone know how old it is?

Does anyone here use these Pine Baffles Robert Gaskins talks about? I guess they'd put manners on even the loudest Concertina?

Many thanks to Robert for posting this brilliant article. All the answers to all my questions on this subject are there ... plus all the solutions!

Here endeth another C.net thread!

Cheers
Dick

It would filter out all but the cheesy tunes.

Think of the baffles or lining (fabric, leather, what-have-you) as absorbents - they are not supposed to stop or reduce air flow.

If you empty your (tiled) bathroom of all sorts of fabric (towel etc), sing a tune (don't get carried away), make a mental note of the sound, put the towels back, sing the same tune, you will surely experience the absorbing effect of the fabric. But it didn't stop the air flow in your throat, yes? (Neighbors might do it, though - sorry, I got carried away ).
/Henrik

I don't disagree, but should point out that reeds and strings work completely differently. Separate a string and a reed from the respective instrument, and this becomes apparent. Take the string of an archer's bow and a violinist's pitch pipe, for example.
The bowstring produces a musical note, but it'a a mere whiper. The pitch-pipe, which is just a reed in a small, metal tube, is easily loud enough to tune a fiddle in a noisy pub, where electronic tuners (without a pickup) fail miserably.

Why?
A tuned string vibrates at a certain frequency. To be audible, it has to transfer these vibrations to the air. But it is too thin to set enough air in vibration for us to hear it. The vibrations must therefore be transmitted to a resonant body with a large surface - e.g. a piano sounding board, a guitar top or a banjo head - which in turn sets a large volume of air in motion.
The pitch-pipe reed does not generate vibrations in the air. It pulses the stream of air passing through it at a certain frequency.

This difference in principle means different requirements for stringed instruments and free-reed instruments. The first objective in building a stringed instrument is to achieve audibility (loudness). Once you've got that, you can try for beauty and clarity of tone.
The free-reed instruments don't have to strive for audibility - they have it from the start. Any juggling with geometries and materials is concerned with the character of the tone.

What amazes me is that, on a given concertina, a given note has the same character on the press and the draw. Even though the pulsed air is passing through the hole in the action board and then the end of the box, on the press, and straight into the bellows, on the draw!
What I deduce from this is that the character of the tone of a concertina has little to do with what happens to the pulsed air-stream, and more with what happens to the reed vibrations that are incidental to the pulsing of the air. Probably these can be amplified and equalised a little by the reaction of the surrounding materials.

Just a few thoughts that might help,
Cheers,
John

Thanks Laitch for pointing me in the direction of the Article 'Baffles for Maccann Concertinas'. Just the sort of information I was hoping for. Didn't even know they were called 'Baffles' but shall now study the article in detail. I imagine the subject is as applicable to Anglos as it is to Maccanns ?

If I remember rightly, the basis of the "Baffles" article was that the left-hand side of a duet is sometimes considered too loud for the right-hand side, so that the harmonies - especially full chords - drown out the melody, and a bass baffle was offered as a remedy.
With the Anglo, the melody often dips onto the left hand, so it doesn't make sense to just baffle one side. If your Anglo is too loud for your voice, you can just play it more quietly, and if you just want to soften the tone, perhaps different thicknesses of gauze could be tried out.

Cheers,
John

Sorry John this is complete cobblers regularly repeated by people who don't play duets. What you say about the Anglo also applies to duets. You would have to have a very limited duet playing style to baffle one side only and like it.

Sorry, Dirge,

I plead not guilty to talking through my hat - I was only recalling in writing what the author of that article on baffles for Maccanns wrote.

I should have kept my trap shut just for a day or two - I'm expecting my "new" Triumph duet to arrive from Chris Algar this week. I promise not to talk about duet matters again until I've found out how to play it.

Cheers,
John

Whilst I was fascinated to read about 'baffles' I have no intention of experimenting with my own instrument as I am more than happy with it's tone and balance as it is. For obvious reasons a three-note left hand chord will be greedy for air and tend to leave insufficient air for a simultaneous right hand single note. I guess that a 'Baffle' cannot be expected to solve that particular problem ??? Has anyone come up with an appropriate solution in this instance other than resorting to excess volume ?

Longer bellows. Or just use a 2 note power chord on the left hand. The ear will fill in the missing third from the musical context, kind of sort of just go with me on this.

All musical instruments have their particular strengths and limitations. The Concertina probably has no more limitations than any other and much of the fun is in striving to overcome such limitations...is it not ?

... generating vibrations, surely? In terms of what we hear, what's the different between pulsing and vibrating?

Ray

Conceptually, a wave has peaks and troughs, the frequency of the peaks determining the pitch. The pulse, on the other hand, interrupts the air-flow and re-starts it, the frequency of the interruptions determining the pitch.
A string actually moves in waves, generating the sound (which is then amplified by the body of the insrument), and continues to do so after it has been plucked.
The reed (free reed or oboe reed or clarinet reed) needs an airflow to interrupt, and thus does not sound on when you stop blowing.

Once the note has "left" the instrument, it is carried by the air as sound-waves. That's what we hear, and although a held note on a concertina and on a violin sound pretty similar, the sound-waves are generated by a different method.

Cheers,
John

not more piano accordions, Dave?