Łukasz Martynowicz

I don't know if this is equally possible on all Duet systems (due to different ergonomics of each of them), but on a Hayden you can comfortably use a bass/tonic drone as a third layer of arrangement, that is playing a drone beside a full chordal accompaniment on the LH. This is a VERY air consuming technique and of limited practical use (I sometime dabble on my concertina exploring it's capabilities in an improvised way and one time this technique of increasing number of voices came to my mind). As to maximum number of sounding notes I use up to 7 in some punk rock songs (single note bass + full chord on the left and an octave higher chord on the right) for necessary punch and fill. Other than that it is usually 3-5 notes maximum (full chord accompaniment plus melody with added fifth or octave on accents).

The index and and middle finger works just fine for root & 5th in the mirrored layout; or am i missing your point? My bad. I was mirroring layout in my head only just before sleep, without the actual instrument in my hands and got this one confused. I'm so used to Hayden version now, that it feels unnatural to use different fingering on either side (spreading fingers differently uses different and less trained muscles in my forearms). I totally forgot, that it is exaclty the fingering used on RH side... Though the single digit multi button fingering is opposite to what I wrote earlier… It is easier to press root+fifth with a single button on a RH (or mirrored) side. But then, on a Hayden LH side it is easier to play root+fifth+oct this way. It is because the half moon shape of a digit when playing three buttons at once is bent upwards. I do this 3 button trick quite often for singing, but I use two fingers when playing root+fifth accompaniments for melodies. Thinking a bit more about those two variants, as with any two layouts there are advantages in both: playing major 7th chord is easier on the RH (or mirrored) (you can play it with two figers only), while 7th is easier on the Hayden LH. And you'll probably come to a point when you'll use single finger techniques and use 4 button chords like doubled root major or 7th chords, especially if you'll play self accompaniment for singing or as a harmony instrument when playing with others. @Patrick & Don: I don't think that sticking to any "rigid" finger-button assingment is a way to go on the Hayden. I use both your variants of fingering a major scale depending on actual phrases in a tune. And I use my wrist a lot when playing chordal accompaniment (especially oompah rhytms) and realy don't see how one can stick to rigid scale fingering when doing so. In fact, my melody playing is more closely related to chord fingering than to scale fingering as I often learn a tune from harmony structure, adding melodic passages to fill harmony, not the oposite way.

Except for the one you've linked here and the ones on BBC website all other inside shots are 3D renderings and not actual photos. But it indeed looks like they are making it only partially from plastic parts. Nevertheless I would very much like to hear how this 3D printed soundboard sounded

Original Wicki layout was mirrored, hence the "normal" and "inverted" (Hayden) modes. Mirrored layout is in fact easier to grasp as finger movements when playing octaves are identical, but Hayden version has some advantages when playing chordal accompaniment: - it is easier to use pinky finger for additional bass note (major triad with doubled root - with minor chords it is awkward in both layouts) - using index and ring finger (or a single digit) for playing chord core (root + fifth) is more natural in Hayden orientation There is also one unused (?) feature in Hayden version - one can play a single octave with two hands in 'Anglo' style: going up in one row on the LH and then going down on the RH without skipping rows with the same hand. Can be usefull in melody-only playing of otherwise "uncomfortable" phrases. Of course the same can be done with original Wicki variant, but going twice up doesn't feel that fluent as just rolling fingers in the same direction, like on a piano.

If what can bee seen on theese few photos is in fact a production-ready prototype I'm more than curious on how will it sound. The whole reedblocks, soundboard and action are made from plastic. Outer shell looks like it's made celuloid-covered plywood and if the price is the main concern I wonder if they will use zinc plate reeds or standard accordion reeds. All previous "modern concertina building" threads can be summed up to "you simply cannot get a traditional sound without traditional materials".

Given this whole "hand crafted" question above, I assume, that by "hand cut" you mean "with a jewellers saw" hand-tool and not "with a scroll saw" hand-guided power tool? But using scroll saw gives you quite the same varations and imperfections as hand tools, and takes a fraction of time and effort. Could you even be able to distinguish two fretworks done each way in a blind test?

Well, for me, the single most important question whether the term "hand crafted" should be reserved only to pre-industrial era tools is - "Does it changes the final effect?". It is a bit like digital vs fully analogue photography, with everything set-up in front of the camera and not added in post-production. Does it looks and feels different? If not, where is the point of putting hours of work into something which is could be done in minutes? Does something turned on a treadle-operated lathe look, feel or work differently than turned on a modern, electric lathe? CNC looks and feels different than any hand method, because it has 100% reproducibility. No slight tolerance variations, no imperfections etc… I'm no purist, for me the term "hand crafted" means that no two pieces of work are 100% identical - each hand-driven tool, be it a modern power tool or a chisel and hammer will fell in this cathegory for me.

The easiest to learn and play is Hayden duet concertina. It has a benefit of uniform fingering in all available keys: each chord type has its own shape, regardles on root note. It is the only strictly logical and fully repetitive layout, with no random exceptions or octave switches.

Before investing any money in this project I would strongly suggest reading through those two threads: http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=16394 & http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=16398 Discussed there, are probably all main problems when trying to mass produce a cheap electronic or "guitar range" acoustic boxes. Including 3D printing production limitations. There was also a thread earlier (probably not a single one), with a thorough analysis of the whole concertina market, with points on introducing new types of instruments in general. All of the above lead to some quite solid conclusions: cheap market is owned by Chineese and Wakker entry level concertinas; pro market would never turn their backs on traditionally built instruments and those would never be any cheaper due to amount of labour necessary; and last but not least there is no way to build up enough market for a common MIDI instrument, as anyone has different demands and plays a different system. As to 3D printing itself - unless we are talking about the newest fluid-hardening process or industrial-grade printers, household filament machines have VERY poor resolution and dimension tolerances, thus are completely useless for any serious manufaturing. Technology-wise it is MUCH cheaper to produce concertinas from wood using CNC machinery, than 3D print or cast/mould from plastic, especially given the possible scale of production.

@Stradella: thinking about this particular system as "up a fifth, down a fourth" name-wise is completely reasonable, as Stradella system spans only a single octave and notes are arranged by a circle of fifths/fourths relations and not fifth interval - there are jumps that goes to lower pitch while still following "up a fifth" logic. It is the same logic in which Pythagorean tuning is made - each step of a scale is achieved by a fifth step up, but then "compressed" back into a single octave.

I just tried to imagine how this Kalbe would feel, and that is indeed a very strange wrist position. But this second one looks quite comfortable (apart from it's strange note layout) an Harry Geuns makes modern bandoneons based on the same principle: http://bandoneon-maker.com/professional-model-c-b-and-russian-b-system-bandonion/

Do you have any pics of this instrument? I'm very interested in how this instrument is held and played, since it sounds like having very odd ergonomics..

What makes it belong to the accordion family is the direction of button action in relation to the bellows movement. In general - accordions have perpendicular action while concertinas have parallel. [This is true for any tradition and region… except for Portugal - "concertina portuguesa" is a portugese 2-3 row diatonic accordion, most closely related to the melodeon. ] All concertinas (including chemnizers and bandoneons) are also built with a same general principle of having single note buttons on both sides of the instrument, allowing couter melody play, while accordions have a left hand side built to play full chord/bass accompaniment, hence the name (a-chord-ion in western or harmon(y)ia in eastern languages). Concertinas are also single reeded, except from German concertinas (which include chemnizers and bandonions), which have two or three reeds per note (which in case of bandoneons are tuned in octaves and not as a dry/wet unisono like in melodeons).

Well, this month went by so quickly… I had very little time to post or play or do anything concertina-related, but I made a resolution this month, that I'll get back to active playing, so here it is. This is just a short sample recording of A (old and rearranged) and B (completely new for me) parts of a much longer song. Hopefully I'll someday record it with vocals and in full lenght. Still much room for improvement, but I'll probably work on this tune only after finishing building my DIY-tina. https://soundcloud.com/martynowi-cz/dwie-siostry-revisited-wip [and for sake of reference, a link to the very first version posted earlier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0buNZcKxHc ]

Just to be precise here: you should rephrase your question to: "...what would you rate the ANGLO Concertina's difficulty?". It is obvious from your entire post, but this makes huge difference on the possible answers. I don't mean to highjack this thread to general "concertina types" discussion, but to express my experience with the anglo, it is easier for me to just make a simple comparison: It took me a year to be able to play some relatively simple melodies on the anglo to speed and with proper phrasing and expression. I have never managed to play anything with harmonies or countermelody on it. Year after switching to Hayden, I could play my first fully accompanied arrangement with decent left/right-hand independence, make up my own chordal arrangements and generaly understand how music works a lot better. So, on my scale I would place the Anglo (profficient level) around 6 - tougher than piano, because of quite arbitrary 3rd row (and outer buttons in home rows), diatonic core and bisonority. But it is obviously easier than fiddle, so on your scale it cannot go over 7 [but on my scale fiddle gets more like 9 - I can realy think of no other istrument than fiddle/violin, that must be learnt from early childhood to be able to go on proffessional level; only a trumpet gets near, with 8 maybe]. And of course because of diatonic nature of it, on the very basic level anglo gets around 2 for melody only folk playing in home keys. Just as a sidenote, other concertina types IMHO get as fallows: Hayden 2 (except for maybe the most odd scales, like Klezmer scale), English 3-4 (not more than a piano), Crane 4 (most piano-like layout), Maccan probably same as anglo, around 6, due to highly irregular layout.

Welcome to the club Alex! My Elise rarely gets any attention lately, but my milling machine gets lots

Stuart, this is a great example of concertina use I would very like to hear more often! And I agree with John, that you should try to add something like leading concertina interlude/solo. And maybe mix tracks in a bit different way, so that concertina isn't as much in the background (this is a very common thing though with free reed instruments in general to treat them as an underlying filling, especially when there is a leading guitar or brass section involved)

Stacked Cherry switches can accomodate the 16x9 grid - there is a room for 2-3 mm diameter extension pins between switches of the upper level. They would also fit within standard concertina ends thickness. The only drawback of this solution is the price of a single switch. But this is definately cheaper than trying to build entire action from scratch and use hall or reed switches. As to modifying a stock Elise or similiar chineese case (based on Elise): Wakker H-2 64 button layout could be fitted into Elise case by simple hole drilling only if existing buttons were considered as highest octaves. Otherwise some buttons go into the fretwork. This makes it necessary to move the handrest to more desirable position, which in turn changes the ballance of the instrument (bellows movement wise). But it's perfectly possible. All of the above is true in case of Cherry switches. Fitting new, 64 button action cannot be done by simple adding some levers - entire action must be redesigned to route all necessary levers, so in reality we only take the outer shell, handrests with straps and bellows from such instrument.

Have a look on a "Klezmer scale", as an example of an "extreme" scale on a Hayden: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrygian_dominant_scale It spans the ENTIRE width of chromatic octave of a Hayden layout and is very difficult to play even as a simple scale excercise on a 16/9 grid. It would be close to impossible to play on a larger array with a hand strap.

That's why I pointed out the difference in some note jumps. Tona manages to use a very elongated big button array on a concertina, but his layout has accindentals next to naturals, like CBA, so melodic passages don't jump from one end to another, and three row layout reduces wrist movement to (almost) single rotation point. On Cranes and Maccans you have almost exclusively linear in-out hand movement. On large Haydens however, you have to use both degrees of freedom of hand movement and that is the main problem - hand positions for playing low sharps, high sharps, all flats, lowest row or highest row are require completely different and sometimes strange wrist positions (a low, sharp major chord vs low flat minor chord, or high sharps) As to Chemnizers and Bandoneons - they are usually bisonoric, making (on average) each interval jump two times closer than on an unisonoric keyboards… There is signifficantly less wrist movement on an Anglo than on a Hayden.

Perhaps it is best to ask Tona on ergonomics of a large button duet. Differences in spacing on a Hayden layout keyboard would result in a number of ergonomic differences. My MIDI has a 15x10 array of 7.5 mm buttons and even such small differences compared to Elise are noticable while playing. In this particular case two most noticeable are chord playing (especially minor triad) as I must group my fingers a bit tighter. There is also a "cumulative offset" problem when switching between instruments - counting lowest note button as a reference point, the furthest button is displaced by almost one whole note on a 64b keyboard. When I was entertaining the idea of building a transformable or completely flat, non-concertina MIDI controller, I've found it easier to play fast in a "flat position" on large button keyboards like CBA or bandoneon (my scrap CBA has 17x19mm grid), as I don't have to restrain my finger movement to such small spacings - finger movement can be less precise. But the Hayden layout combined with a handstrap makes it very hard to finger efficiently on a widely spaced grid in "concertina position". Bandoneon keyboard don't have such long jumps to accidentals… But with wrist + thumb strap this could be quite comfortable and on electronic instrument, when you can place buttons to the very edge of the casing, larger buttons (perhaps Stagi size keyboard?) could even fit on a reasonably small box…

Very nice machine indeed. Too bad it is in storage...

The problem with bits breaking in the last stage of driiling can be easily solved, by drilling through a compound "sandwitch". When I have to driil a hole in thin stainless steel I put a piece of scrap brass underneath (and in some cases also a pre-drilled piece of brass over, to work as a precision clamp extension) and clamp such sandwitch to my compound table. With such setup you'll get a nice, clean hole with no pressed dent. As to tool options, I highly recommend this little piece of machinery: http://www.proxxon.com/en/micromot/20165.php(I use it with a different, more sturdy compound table). It costs more than a simple drill press but still is a lot cheaper than a fully fledged milling machine, and can deal with anything from brass ball joints for stop-motion animation puppets, to furniture making… It covers almost all my needs in my DIY Hayden project (except from fretwork cutting and preliminary, coarse woodwork). @Don: those end mill bits are fine for metal work in small workshop conditions ONLY if they have a lot more cutting surfaces than typical 4… Even for woodworking in hard woods those pictured on wiki site, can catch into wood and require very shallow passes and sturdy setup. But various Proxxon or Dremel mill bits with 8-16 edges work great for brass or aluminum. But in general - saw cutting such works as fretwork is the only reasonable option, as there are too many drawbacks to milling approach: amount of material to turn into dust, round corners, bits wear, maintaining temperature while milling metals, and compensating for rotary force while cutting shapes… Alex, a tip for center punching: don't Usually a nice cross scratch combined with a small pilot drill will work better. I often use a conical or small spherical Dremel milling bit as a center marker, as it won't deviate - it has a very short and thick shaft.

Stock Elise comes with domed buttons, which were too "pointy" for me. When I have made my replacement buttons, I made them completely flat - they had only a tiny amount of softening on the edge. This was giving me way more controll and stability, but was painful after extended play and gave me sore fingers afterwards. So after a couple of months I have rounded the edges more (about .75mm on the edge of 5mm button is now rounded) and they are now very comfortable and allow for sliding but still give enough grip that sweating is not a problem. @Henrik's '2)' - I'm making such completely sinking buttons on my DIY Hayden. I came to realise that what hurts my fingers most in long sessions, are drones and root notes in triads while playing om-pah accompaniments (especially minor triads, in which middle finger is anatomically forced to press harder than it should) , and that only having sinking buttons will counter this, as lighter action weight doesn't affect fully depressed buttons...

Thanks Maki! No, I have started learning to play my first instrument a few months after my 30th birthday. It has been five years of infrequent playing now, with only a total of maybe a year worth of a real daily practice… Prior to this I had had done some lessons using EarMaster software few years earlier (mostly basic interval recognition and rhytmic excersises) but without any instrument to play on I gave up after a month or two. But I did sing a lot since teen age and have been a bit of "music junkie", living with music playing in the background from dusk till dawn since I can remeber.