Łukasz Martynowicz

At least one player tried not only resting, but also straping via velcro patches. On similar note, I have observed differences in my performance depending on the kind of trousers I rest my concertina on, with the best results with my bare skin - not only giving me additional traction, but also better tactile feedback. I can play softer and with less overall volume that way.

The reason I play with unsupported melody side is that for me personally, playing left hand side requires a lot more concentration (I'm very dominantly right handed). So I can both play melody and controll bellows with my right hand, but I can't play even the basic um-pah rhytm with free floating bass side. In the beginning I used neck strap and my hip in sitting position to stabilize the concertina and make the "loose end" move in a steady, predictable manner, but it created different problems and due to back injury I cannot play that way anymore. Nowadays I use thumb straps in addition to hand straps and play standing with knee support. With my previous setup, neck strap provided a constant pivot point of the free end, the attachment point of neck strap, and it was of little difference if concertina was moving inwards or outwards. But with my new setup, harder squeze of the bellows make an air "cushion" that provide an unstable pivot point for the melody side located at the bass side making the melody end to want to "slide" a bit on this cushion. This does not occur with chord heavy arangements, but with lighter and faster styles and single note accompaniments, this effect is significant enough to have to counter it by thumb tension, which makes my entire hand to be a bit stiffer and fast passages harder to play on the push. Just for the sake of completeness, bellows resistance on the pull has a stable, "self centering" vector, so it does not require any compensation. Combined with more ergonomic muscle work it makes it far easier for me to play some passages on the pull.

To add on that: for me, as a duet player, pull is much more natural from ergonomic point of view to a point, where I can play some phrases only on a pull or heavily struggle to play them on push, so if I could I would only play on pull . This is because I play fast phrases/short notes using retracting finger muscles which are naturally weaker and are further inhibited with push bellows direction. Another reason is because I operate bellows with my melody hand and pull direction is stable ballance wise (you go away from pivot point) and push can become unstable with higher volume and requires more controll.

Adding my two cents to slant vs no slant question. I play on Elise (slanted) but when deciding on orientation for the instrument I'm building, I decided to go with no slant, and the reason are multiple. The origin of Hayden slant is not because of ergonomics, but because slant make keys "sorted" by pitch in relation to handrest and make it possible to overlay buttons on the stave in order. But on Elise this is true only for the right hand keyboard, because slant is mirrored while note layout is not - as far as I know this is also true for H-1 and H-2. This makes it a bit awkward to play rich harmony progressions, because left hand has to be positioned slightly differently than right hand on the same chords (for example, it is far easier for me to play minor chords on the right side than on the left) and it is my common mistake to misplace my ring finger on the left side to 4th lower than intended, because my intuition seeks the button where there is none. Due to this I found that I unconsiously straighten the orientation by leaning concertina a bit forward (I use thumb straps). I have experimented with proper slant on both sides and it makes playing chords easier and more natural, but it results with instrument differing too much from both common slant implementation and no-slant Wikki orientation to retain easy instrument switching ability.

Thank you for this link, I saw this discussion a while earlier than this current thread, before I got steadily back on track of who posts what here nowadays, so I missed that it was your post. It is indeed exactly about what I was asking about and is perfectly in line with my position on the topic from years back. Glad to see that someone worked on theory behind it. The reason why I asked about this is simple - this transient period is far more important part of "why and how free reeds generate sound" question than the focus of this thread and there was a long history of discussions about how free reeds work here on this forum completely ignorant about this transient, usually leading to completely false conclusions. Now I'm perfectly satisfied with the scope of your answers and understand, that you have divided your works into separate chunks and hopefully at the end of your journey you will indeed come up with what I would call a complete free reed theory. As to DIX reeds, I must apoogize, after 5 years I misremembered my experiments from back then - I have mixed up effects of various shoe materials vs geometry and scaling. I dug up those a moment ago and Johann is right - they have overall different geometry and scaling than their typical accordion counterparts. If you still want to know more about them here's a link to harmonikas.cz with description and schematics https://www.harmonikas.cz/en/dix-1#obsah

I know that resonance and coupling matter in case of chamber layout - I was merely stating the fact, that Tom's work does not include (or it hasn't been clearly stated, that it does) chamber geometry and tongue geometry (as you more broadly point out). And with DIX reeds I don't think it's related to resonance, but to minutia of airflow around the tongue in the initial stage of agitation, restricting development of higher modes of vibration, and I brought this up as an extreme case of reed/shoe geometry influence on the tone - DIX reeds are just a tiny variation on otherwise classic accordion reed design - trapezoid tongue in non-tapered opening.

Tom, your initial post adresses differences in timbre between materials and your answer to David describes how reed shoe amplifies tongue vibration, but nowhere you adress how the vibration itself starts, which is what David asks for and what is the crux of the the question "how free reed works" and a subject of endless debates on this forume since forever. I don't know if you are aware, but couple of first oscilations of the tongue happen above the upper plane of the frame, with movements yet too small to close the gap entirely (I've been away from this forum for nearly 5 years and may have missed some important arguments; I saw there was at least one topic about turbulent flow being the source of initial vibration while I was absent). The tongue is already oscilating when it enters the frame, at which point "exactly like child on a swing" and "water hammer" analogies are adequate illustrations of how already existing oscilation is fed energy and reaches peak volume, but all those descriptions concern free reed at fully developed swing. If the initial pressure rise is too steep the reed chokes, because if you apply "fully developed swing" physics to a stationary tongue (not already oscilating slightly above the shoe) what you get is a simple one way pressure valve, with equilibrium position where the spring force of the tongue equalizes the pressure force applied to it. It is the same if the reed is set without the initial gap at all and from what you have presented here to this point I don't know if your model discerns between the initial setup with and without a gap as it should to be true. No model of the free reed will be complete without explaining first weak cycles before the tongue enters the frame. Your model should also be able to explain why "tongue tip over hole end of the chamber" produces significantly weaker speaking reed than "rivet over hole end of the chamber" configuration with every other parameter remaining the same. You might also want to test your model trying to explain why DIX reeds, regardless of materials used, produce less higher harmonics than non-DIX equivalents by the means of only two tiny holes at the tip corners of the shoe.

Thank you Don for providing at least button counts of those boxes. Sadly those do not look promising.

I know this is thread necromancy, but it seems rather appropriate place to ask this - it is now mid 2019, is Troubadour still planned or has the idea of mid range Hayden been finally abandoned?

66 or 64 if links will work as indended, 62 otherwise, in Wicki parallel layout, although the initial design includes an experimental handrest/thumbstrap that enable a switch between slant/no slant as I learned to play Hayden layout on Elise, which has a slant. But as this is my first build and goals and methods shifted around few times already, I don't really know where I'll arive at the end. At the moment I'll simply focus getting to playable state and modify it further if necessary. By the way, I stumbled upon your YT channel a month back or so - a great showcase of what duetts are capable of. Something I dearly missed all those years back, when non-folk arrangements were rare to find and there were only a handfull of recordings on Haydens.

I was half way through making action parts when my back gave up on me and I could not play anymore. Frustrated, I shelved this project and stopped my activity here, I even stopped listening to free reed music for some time. A long series of unfortunate events and nearly five years later, with "blank slate", completely new ear for music and having to relearn how to play (in new, standing position so my back does not have to be constantly strained by slight twist), I open up this project once again. During those five years on the shelve fretwork eased out - it warped a bit after cutting this layered design and screw holes become slightly misaligned - it is not the case anymore. I have dumped my old buttons (I have done some poor material/fabrication method choices and they ended up being pretty, but too laborous and heavy) and abandoned some aesthetic goals of the past in favor of having an actual chance at finishing this instrument Getting reacquainted with my workshop took some time, but hopefully in the coming months I'll manage to make the action and finish this damned box - the goal now is to have it ready for the autumn, with october being a self imposed deadline. So, hello again to all of you!

Exactly because there is no exact correspondence between pitch and position on staff my brain literally hurts when deciphering standard notation but can grasp chromatic staff notations instantly. It is even more awkward for me because I play on Hayden (isomorphic layout), so same note occuring on different line/space depending on octave and chords looking different depending on root note are most annoying features of standard notation. Sadly it's been more than 6 years now since I first discovered chromatic notations and there is no progress at all in popularising any of them, despite all various open source software projects. And since this in no way relates to Anglos, I'll just stop here But as you and Don have said, the standard notation is "common language" and one simply has to understand it to not only have access to tunes, but to be able to communicate with others or popularise own work. In regards to "how to learn standard notation" I have found that trying to arrange sheet music for your instrument on your own is far better method than simply learning to read already written scores, which I strongly advise OP to do. And thank you RAc for your welcome. Indeed I'm starting my way back into concertinas after nearly five years long forced break...

I've spent quite a lot of time with standard notation in my life and still cannot sight read it - it just doesn't make any intuitive sense for my eyes-hearing connection. I still have to decypher it into abc first in order to play it - even more so if I have to read grand staff. So ABC format works great for me because I can read rhytm from noteheads/bars and actual notes from "raw" ABC. But what I can read on sight is chromatic notation, either in form of 6-6 Parncutt notation or common piano roll. Unfortunatelly, no easy software exist for converting common music notation formats to chromatic staff. @ OP: abcnotation.com is a site for you if you happen to know whan exact tune you're after and musescore can label notes automatically if you have musicxml or other file format source to read. As to Anglo tabulatures, common way of presenting those is labeling notes under standard notation in L/R push/pull numbered squares. Be aware though, that different book authors may utilize different variations of such tabulatures.

First flaw I can see, is that the physical size of the instrument is determined by the LHS reed sizes, not the RH sizes… But I can't see the reason for not applying the same layout to both sides - with such trick you have already sacrificed some of the versality of the layout, so I can see no reason not to go one step further, and bisonorize both sides. As to practical use of such instrument - I can imagine that it would be quite similiar in capabilities to a violin, i.e. it would be good for melodic and arpeggiated harmony play. With both sides bisonoric, you sacrifice the ability to play full chords (almost all chords have a two row span, you can only play major thirds in one row) but retain the ability to play in octaves and to play some two line melodic arrangements. It might be also interesting to look at the potential repertoire and check if it would be worth to make such instrument in a way, that a LHS plays f-row notes in the same bellows direction that RHS plays c-row notes - this way you could play full chords. Basically you would have sort of a "freaky, bisonoric, "english-ish" frankenHayden concertina this way And last but not least - couple of years ago, for a little while, I HAD similiar instrument. At that time I have deeply enjoyed the "bounciness" of playing on an Anglo, so my first DIY MIDI Hayden software allowed me to turn my instrument into "Hayglo" - I could set a desired interval between push and pull notes (same for the entire keyboard) and play on a "two offset Hayden keyboards" in a bisonoric way. But as soon as I have grasped the ease of use of a "normal" Hayden layout I have abandoned this bisonoric option, as bisonority is generally "against my brain".

@Don: for 62 "standard double" DIX reeds in brass (with valves) I've paid around 300 euros. I think that the price for two "concerina" reeds would be slightly larger than for a single "standard" but probably you'll end up somewhere around the same sum. Harmonikas.cz won't give you any estimated price untill you send them the complete list of notes needed, as price per reed vary with size...