frogspawn

David I know Anglo owners are always debating optimum button layout, but ultimately I think the charm and challenge of a concertina is to embrace its limitations and be able to knock out a concertina-orientated interpretation. Richard

My long-term goals are fairly simple, modest and vague. I want to be able to play along in sessions adequately and to accompany a few songs. I've played around with setting targets, e.g. learn so many tunes or learn to play in a new key, but this didn't really work for me. My immediate target is just to put in the time. Last year I averaged only 2 hours per week. This year I am averaging 5 hours per week. This has made a tremendous difference. What I actually do in that time varies, which keeps things interesting, but it is centred on the tunes and songs I intend to perform some time soon. OK, my first couple of attempts to perform have been pretty disasterous but I feel I've made a breakthrough. My tune playing is very gradually improving, i.e. getting more accurate and smoother (except when people are watching!). The big improvement is with my accompaniment. I now have an approach which I'm gradually applying to new songs. The big difficulty was getting the right approach in the first place. Richard

Are you sure it's the same reed? It's very unlikely - concertina reeds aren't designed like that. There are normally two separate reeds on each side of the reed pan - one for the pull one, for the push - tuned to the same pitch. Oh, I see...I hadn't realised. I asked this question before and misunderstood the answer. Because I didn't realise this I didn't try to lift the reed pans out. As it happened, it didn't matter because the troublesome reeds must all have been on the near side as cleaning those fixed the problems. Richard

Are you sure it's not your screws that are getting loose? How old is your concertina? Might the pads be in need of replacement? Are microscopic particles worth worrying about? Or even visible to the naked eye? I've had the concertina for a couple of years. It dates from c 1905 but was fully refurbished when I bought it. I'm sure it's in good physical condition. I've just had problems with the reeds. One didn't sound at all, one was a bit fuzzy and one had an extra 'zing' when pulled but not when pushed (same reed - it's a duet). All the reeds responded to cleaning, i.e. carefully passing a sliver of paper underneath them. I never saw any dust - hence my referernce to microscopic - but it's certainly worth bothering about when it affects the sound. Richard

In the past two weeks I've had to open one end once and the other end twice to remove microscopic dust particles. I'm not in a particularly dusty environment, and I keep the concertina in a box. In the two years previoius to that I've never had any problems. I'm worried that if this goes on the screws will start getting loose. Richard

Many thanks for the responses. This is exactly the sort of detail I was seeking. I play English folk music with a few Irish songs and tunes. The accompaniment is for singing. When playing tunes I have enough trouble just keeping up with the melody. I inflicted my singing and playing on a small audience for the first time last night. The organiser advised me to concentrate on my unaccompanied singing! But I'm not giving up just yet...Although I'd be the first to admit that there is always room for improvement, I don't find singing in itself very challenging. Operating machinery at the same time is another matter! Richard

I'm surprised nobody replied to this as I would have thought a discussion about arrangement would be of general interest, and cross-system! I'm currently experimenting with arrangements that don't use oom-pahs (i.e. alternating bass note and chord in 4/4 time) but something looser, partly because too full an accompaniment drowns out the melody on my duet as was recently discussed in another thread. For one particular song I'm playing three- (or two-) finger chords, but on the first and third beats, i.e. the strong beats. I'm not playing any left-hand accompaniment on the weak beats. This seems to work but it's really only an oom-pah without the pah. I'd like to develop something freer. When looking at the notation of other people's arrangements, I'm finding it hard to understand why they have thrown in the accompanying notes where they have. I trust that in time this will all become instinctive, but as my life affords more time for theory than practice I'd be interested in any comments. Richard

Did Nic Jones play the fiddle and sing or was that someone else playing the fiddle with him? I presume singer-fiddlers don't hold the fiddle under their chin! Richard

Tim Laycock on the Crane Duet certainly does. I am waiting for a convenient opportunity to study him closely! Richard

I want to add light left-hand harmonies to full right-hand melodies - i.e. thirds, fifths, the odd chord etc - rather than regular oom-pahs, but can anyone offer any guidance on exactly where to fit these in relation to the rhythm etc? For one particular, slow song I've added chords where the melody notes are particularly long and that seems to work, but it's not generally applicable. I've also looked at a few arrangements such as Dick Miles' Song Accompaniment for English Concertina, but I've yet to discern the logic. Richard

I love music in general and folk music in particular. I could make do with singing but instruments add another dimension. I particularly like the sound of concertinas - any type. My track record for actually learning instruments (as opposed to just buying them) is not good, but I few years ago I was dabbling with a melodeon on a stall and someone played along on an Anglo. I was thrilled by the sensation of playing together, and this has since driven me to aspire to being able to play competently in sessions - still a long way off. But I've bought a lot of tune books along the way so I can pose as a musician! Richard

Marien The Wheatstone buttons feel a little more springy, but that isn't significant IMO and seems to be the least of the differences. I'm used to jerking the Lachenal around and pumping the bellows quite a lot. The Wheatstone certainly isn't short of air so you don't need to move the bellows much, but they take a lot more effort to move. Maybe they just need to be worn in. Richard

Just measured the distance between the buttons (centre to centre). A column of 6 buttons is 50mm high on the arc layout and about 52.5mm on the chevron layout. A row of 5 buttons is about 62.5mm wide on the arc layout and 52.5mm wide on the chevron layout. The chevron layout is thus more compact, and reaching the buttons does feel easier. Richard

After a few minutes of trying out the new concertina I can report that there seems to be little practical difference between playing the two layouts and it is easy enough to switch between them with only minimal adjustment. But I can't get used to all that air in the large eight-fold bellows! Other than that I'm just wondering if I will be able to continue to hold the new one in the air as I do with the 55-button Crane. Richard

Marien I'm not sure that's true. In the Lachenal layout the index finger has to reach out to the row above the row played by the middle finger when you are going up the scale. In the chevron layout, where the buttons are effectively offset by half a row, the index finger only has to advance half a row higher than the middle finger! However, this is only when going up the scale. In reality, the hightest note in a given tune could fall under any finger, and absolute finger length will only become a factor at the extreme end of your reach. Richard

Here's the proof!

Interesting-- my Wheatstone Crane (from 1942) has the arc (rather than chevron) layout. When does your new one date from? I wonder if mine was made from old Lachenal stock. I notice that the Crane layout involves more stretches than the EC does. I have very large hands, so that isn't a problem. I'm still very much a beginner on the Crane and I haven't tried one other than the one I own, but I wouldn't expect a lot of difference in playability, just a minor adjustment. It's number 30736 in the Wheatstone ledger so I can date it exactly to 6 October 1925. Reach could be an issue. My experience to date is that getting the straps right is crucial. The new machine has a B below Middle C on the right and an extra button on the outside which I think might be a Bb. On the left, it goes down to G with another button on the outside which may be another Bb. There is also an F drone button on the left mirroring the air button on the right. If my speculations are correct it should be particularly suited to playing in Bb or F. More details when it arrives. Richard

As a satisfied Crane owner I subscribe to the ingenuity of its button layout; and having committed myself to this system, which is only available in antique form, I decided it was time to buy a spare which I am currently awaiting. Now, my existing Crane is a Lachenal and each row of buttons takes the form of a gentle ellipse. My new Crane will be a Wheatstone in which each row forms a chevron. The two styles are illustrated towards the bottom of this page under the headings of Crabb and Lachenal: http://www.craneconcertina.com/layouts.html I don't know how much difference I'll find between them and how awkward it may be to alternate between them, but from a conceptual point of view I suspect the Wheatstone layout is superior. You can appreciate, from these diagrams, that the Lachenal layout presents essentially a succession of horizontal rows, while the Wheatstone is much more symmetrical and can be 'read' diagonally. This is significant. Let's say you go up the scale from the right-hand low G, i.e. G, A, B. On the Lachenal you are conscious of going first to the button immediately to the left, and then of going to the left again but one row higher, so you sort of 'step up'. This pattern is then repeated. On the Wheatstone, G, A and B are in a straight line so you simply climb the scale by playing a succession of diagonals from lower right to upper left. Perhaps this difference is marginal, but it does seem more intuitive to me. I also suspect that finding the 1, 3, and 5 notes for triads will be a little more obvious. As with any system I expect the differences are not significant in the longer term, but I'd be interested to know if anyone knows anything about the historical background to these layouts or anywhere where their relative merits are discussed? Richard

Yes. Probably a foreign object jammed in the reed in my experience. Dirge - thanks for your response. I found my copy of David Elliott's Maintenance Manual and slid a bit of paper under the reed tongue. No obvious foreign bodies, but it's working now! Phew. Richard

I've just noticed that one of my buttons sounds on the push but not on the pull. Before I start unscrewing things, would anyone like to suggest what the cause of this is most likely to be? Does a duet have separate reeds for push and pull on the same button? I hadn't really thought about this before. Richard

Another little "benchmarking" exercise... I need a structured approach or things will just drift. I've taken on board recent recommendations to ensure I tackle new stuff, but my initial target is just to put in the time, regardless of what I'm actually doing. In my first serious year of concertina playing I averaged 2 hours a week. In the current year I am averaging 3 hours a week. Not much and not enough, but about as much as I can fit in with work, commuting and domestic commitments. I record my time on a spreadsheet which calculates the running weekly average. I don't do this because I'm obsessive but to provide the discipline I would otherwise lack. If it's a snatched 20 minutes I'll just play the tunes I already know by ear. If longer I'll play the tunes I can read from scores. If longer still I'll try out some completely new tunes or experiment with song accompaniment. If I know I'm going to have more than 20 minutes I'll line up what I'm going to do before I start. This ensures the time spent is entirely hands-on the machine. I aim to accumulate 30 new tunes each year. I get bored easily so instead of concentrating on a few tunes, I aim to learn all 30 at once. First I begin by listening to them over and over again at every opportunity, but particularly when I'm commuting. I will then try to play them from scores, concentrating on the tunes I have absorbed. Eventually I find I can play them by ear. I do something similar with songs. Some tunes/songs are easier to absorb than others. By focusing on lots of tunes/songs I don't get bored and some at least will stick without too much time and effort. Once I have the tunes by ear I can concentrate on improving them. Richard

True. However, the Gower is known for its 'Englishness', a controversial subject with deep historical roots which you can find discussed in the notes to the The Gower Nightingale CD, recordings from the 30s and 40s of the excellent Phil Tanner, who sings in more of a rural English accent than a Welsh one. This is not a call for English irredentism, just an observation! The recordings include the Gower Wassail. I'm also impressed with the idea of learning some Christmas tunes. Richard

For those of us who learn this way, the Tune-o-Tron (or similar) becomes our ears. It plays ABC well enough for us to know whether to reject a tune, or consider learning it. Regards, Peter. I've had a program that plays ABC files on my palmtop for some time, but I only recently discovered ABC Navigator which is freeware and looks excellent. Richard

I do. I can tell you what any of the note letters are, but I don't think about them while learning a tune off staff notation. That would be asking far too much of the little grey cells. That's the way I read music now, but not the way I learnt to read music.

I'm beginning to see the advantages of ABC. Learning to read conventional music involves translating the dots on the staff through the name of the note (C, D, E etc) to the buttons on the box. I suppose, theoretically, you could go straight from staff to button visually but I doubt if anyone approaches it like that. With ABC you can go straight from the representation of the notes to the button - two elements rather than three with no 'translation' in the middle.