Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JimLucas

  • Rank
    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    all systems
    all kinds of music

    My main squeeze is the English -- in various sizes, but principally the standard treble, -- but I also play some Crane duet and anglo, and a wee bit on the MacCann duet, which I hope soon to devote more time to. I'll try my Jeffries duet and Chemnitzer once I get them into playing condition, but that may be a while.
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. JimLucas

    Matusewitch builders

    Some were made by Wheatstone, others by Crabb. I think Matusewitch went with Crabb after the Boosey & Hawkes takeover of Wheatstone. I do remember Boris telling me that he insisted on brass reed frames... no aluminum! Regarding the maker of a particular instrument, I would expect that that could be determined from the serial number, since I doubt that Wheatstone and Crabb had similar numbers in a given period. And one could also check a particular serial number against the Wheatstone ledgers, and similarly ask Geoff Crabb to look for a match in his records.
  2. JimLucas

    Site Upgrade

    I didn't know there could be a difference. But same old password, yes?
  3. JimLucas

    Pop Up Ads

    I, for one, would be happy to contribute, but I would prefer not to have such a fact advertised to the general public.
  4. JimLucas


    I had the pleasure of playing one recently. The resulting sound is reminiscent of a woodwind instrument... clarinet or bassoon. That probably accounts for the "clarionet" name. Well, the only ones I've seen (I think it's three, now) have all been vintage single-action Englishes with a "bass" (i.e., string cello) range, but I don't see why the same principle(s) couldn't be applied to a double-action instrument with a higher range. In fact, on the two that I've seen the insides of, only the lowest reeds had "resonator" tubes; the higher notes just had the fishtail reeds. And that leads me to suspect that the tubes aren't "tuned" to the notes the reeds are sounding, but are just special extensions to the chambers, used mainly to affect the distribution of harmonics. Maybe the same effect could be obtained without the tubes, but only with much larger chambers? (That is, admittedly, speculation. I haven't researched it.)
  5. JimLucas

    Pop Up Ads

    Not to mention the fact that this is supposed to be a "family friendly" web site. I wonder how many (if any) of our members are under the age of 18. 16? 14? And keep in mind that one doesn't even have to be a member to browse here.
  6. JimLucas

    46 Key Jeffries C/g Anglo For Sale

    Couldn't find it. Link?
  7. JimLucas


    The language of Argentina and of Argentinan tango is very definetely Spanish. (Source: am native Spanish speaker.) Yep. Portuguese is the language of Brazil, not Argentina. (Of course, both are dialects recognizably different from the versions spoken in Portugal and Spain themselves, just as there's a difference between American English and English English.)
  8. JimLucas


    The Crane/Triumph (two names for the same layout) concertina is also an option. Even the Jeffries duet, for that matter. But in case it matters to you, you should be aware that sound quality of all these concertinas is very different from bandoneons or accordions. You might or might not like the difference. And depending on where you live, there could be another option: the Chemnitzer concertina. In construction and sound the Chemnitzer is more like a bandoneon, though it has a different layout of the notes. Both duet concertinas and Chemnitzers -- and I presume bandoneons, too, though I haven't paid much attention to bandoneons -- come with different numbers of buttons and therefore different upper and lower limits to their ranges.
  9. The highland pipes scale is normally written as if in the key of A-mixolydian, which is the same number of sharps as the D-major scale. But the scale of the pipes actually sounds much closer to what is Bb in comparison to the modern pitch standard of A=440 hertz, i.e., a half step "higher" than written. And transcriptions from recordings may then be written as if in that key, which would make sense to a concertina wanting to play along with the pipes, but would not make sense to a piper used to the traditional notation. As others have noted, the intervals on the pipes are slightly different from the even-tempered scale. Not enough for the tune to sound weird if you're playing solo on your concertina, but some of the notes could sound slightly discordant if you're playing in unison with a set of actual pipes.
  10. Hard to see the detail, but I'm pretty sure it's an English.
  11. JimLucas

    44 Key Aeola English

    Not necessarily an "experiment" initiated by the Wheatstone company itself. They made many instruments to custom order, and I would guess that this is likely one of those.
  12. JimLucas

    Scandinavian Squeeze-In 2018

    Bump. Scandinavian Squeeze-In April 27-29, 2018 (last full weekend in April) Time flies! (Especially when one is struggling with numerous interruptions.) Here it is, less than a month until SSI 2018. We have a number of confirmed participants, but I'm missing responses from several individuals to whom I sent personal invites, and I've confirmed that there have been erratic lapses in my email service, both going and coming. (Meanwhile, many other emails get through just fine. ) Because of that: Anyone who has sent me an email indicating that they wish to come to our weekend but who hasn't received a personal reply, please contact me again, either by PM here on concertina.net or by email through the "booking" or "contact" links on our web site: http://www.nonce.dk/SSI/ (Those links have been updated to include two email addresses on separate domains, in order to reduce the risk of failure.) Also, we've extended the booking deadline to Monday, April 14.
  13. JimLucas

    Wheatstone Oval Label

    Many words have multiple meanings, with context often indicating which meaning is intended. E.g., watering a garden vs. watering beer. Maybe a better example would be a "tin ear" vs. a "tin whistle".
  14. JimLucas

    Large Anglo Keyboard Numbering System

    I think that what you're describing, Adrian, is equivalent to my stated exception of "if one notates a particular tune/arrangement for a particular instrument". So yes, in that respect, it is a very useful protocol.
  15. JimLucas

    Large Anglo Keyboard Numbering System

    I think the B-C (Brown Coover) notation is useful for purposes of maintenance and comparison of note layouts, but not for notating tunes/arrangements... except if one notates a particular tune/arrangement for a particular instrument. My experience is similar to Alan's. I've almost never seen two non-Wheatstone anglos of more than 32 buttons that had entirely the same layout, even in relative terms (compensating for different core keys). And the differences were usually at least 3 buttons in both directions, though various web sites show what they present as "the standard" (or just "the") 38-button Jeffries layout. (Adrian's anglos are an exception, but I understand he has had changes made to insure that that's the case.) And of course, the "standard" 40-button Wheatstone layout is quite different from any 38- to 45-button Jeffries layout I've seen. Even on 20- and 30-button instruments, there are "common" variations on the lowest button of the inner left-hand row (the G row on a C/G). In addition, I've seen at least two anglos -- a Lachenal and a Jones -- which had two separate (but smaller, and closely spaced) buttons for the left-hand thumb. I have always preferred the staff-oriented musical notation, which I started learning to read (on the trumpet) when I was 10 years old. When I added other instruments -- sax, flute, piano, even guitar (on none of which I became very proficient), -- I learned to match the different notes (on the staff/staves) to the different fingerings and physical locations on each instrument, rather than have a separate way to "picture" the different notes for each instrument. Imagine that for a single tune you would need to carry separate "tablature" sheets for each instrument you play... e.g., tin whistle, anglo concertina, and tenor banjo? Not for me, thanks. Conversely, if you're sharing a tune with others, it's a rare whistle player who can read mandolin tablature, much less a sequence of concertina button numbers. Instead, I think it makes sense, even for anglo concertina, to use standard notation, learn (in your head, but eventually in your fingers) where each note is, and then only where there is ambiguity (multiple possibilities) add some sort of additional notation above or below the staff to resolve the ambiguity. In particular, for an anglo, simply indicating push or pull in addition to which note can often serve for more than one layout, though the required button may be in different places in each layout. And returning specifically to the issue of anglos with more than 30 buttons, I would maintain that anybody working with such an instrument (with the possible exception of the standard Wheatstone 40-button layout) had better know "in their fingers" where every note is, rather than trying to construct a tune or arrangement from an arbitrary sequence of button numbers. Having merely a sequence of button numbers (plus push or pull, of course) for each tune/arrangement for one many-button anglo could result in absolute cacaphony on another anglo with the same geometrical pattern of buttons.