JimLucas

Bruce B. said: So here's my response: I always preferred the Crane, even before I had one (and before the existence of the Hayden). It's pattern made more sense to me than the Maccann, and once I got one I discovered that it also made more sense to my fingers. I had a couple of Maccanns (80-button in mint and 55-button not so good), and the problems I had with them weren't so much the arbitrariness of the layout, but that fingerings seemed awkward. However, while I like the Crane, I have since decided that I was really trying to do things with the Maccann which were too difficult for a beginner, and that I should give it another chance. I've already started, but it will really get under way once I have the tuning touched up on a 55-button Maccann. (I think the 80-button is too big until I get comfortable with the smaller one.) My experience with the Hayden is limited to looking at charts and pictures, plus a couple of brief hands-on experiences where I only tried simple tunes and chords. I found it easy enough to pick up the system and start playing tunes and chords, but I didn't feel that it was either easier or harder than on the Crane or Maccann. The theoretical Hayden layout is indeed extremely logical and -- as often remarked -- allows arbitrary transposition by a trivial shift of the hand position. Unfortunately, this is fully realized only if the keyboard is extended sideways so that each row is 11 buttons wide. That just won't work with the hand held in place by the strap which supports the instrument, besides requiring an ungainly size. So in practice the "consistent" pattern of the Hayden seems no more consistent than the other duets -- though probably no less so -- and it really comes down to a question of how it feels to *play* in the different keys. I hope the Hayden players (David Barnert, Jack Woehr, Rich Morse) can help us out here. But I notice what appears to be a deficit in the 46-button layout, the only one *currently* available: Though the "main" octave -- going upward from middle C -- is covered in both hands, it is missing C# and Eb in the right hand, and Bb in the left. Maybe the Hayden players could comment on what it's like to play in the keys of Eb, Bb and Gm, and some of the klezmer scales that use those notes? One point of "logic" in the Hayden layout, and with minor exceptions in the Maccann, is that changing octaves can be accomplished by simply shifting the hand upward or downward a couple of rows. I've never felt that this was particularly important or even desirable. In fact, I sometimes find it a hindrance that playing an octave involves two buttons which individually would normally be played with the same finger, but which are separated by a button that I don't necessarily want to play. Neither the English nor the anglo has this "feature", so why should a duet? And if we look beyond concertinas, we find that the piano, piano accordion, and chromatic button accordion have this characteristic, but stringed instruments in standard tunings don't. I actually like the fact that on the Crane an octave involves buttons in different rows. I'm not going to address the Jeffries duet until I have some experience with it. Besides, both instruments and teachers are almost impossible to find, so I wouldn't advise a newbie to look for one. 1) "Like" depends on your point of view. If you have two chairs, one red and one blue, are they "alike" because they're both chairs or "different" because of the colors. Like the English, the Crane has the C scale in the center rows and the accidentals in the outer rows, but the pattern is not split between the sides, and it's not even the same number of rows. So 2) even if you think it's true, so what? Does learning one make it easier to learn the other? I don't think so. I think it depends entirely on the melody. On each of the duets there are some tunes which are easier and others which are more difficult, but which are which is different on each one. If there's a problem with the Maccanns, it's that the lowest right-hand note on most of them is G *above* middle C, so most melodies can be played entirely in the right hand only if they're played an octave higher than written. (But see another perspective below.) I haven't spent a lot of time yet working on fast tune playing on the duet, but your question prompted me to experiment a bit. I don't see why fast passages should be any more difficult on the duet than on the anglo, and my experimentation bore this out. On the anglo, like the duets, all or most of the notes of a given passage are generally in the same hand, though the anglo has the added -- and often limiting -- factor of bellows changes. I could play some passages up to speed even on tunes I hadn't tried previously on the duet, and it's clear that with practice I'll be able to play most tunes easily and quickly. However, I find that both the action/response and size/weight are significant factors. If the action/response is quick, then it's easy to get a tune up to speed; poor action/response slows me down much more than it does on the English, though that might be partly due to the fact that I'm already much more accomplished on the English. I find that greater size and weight are much more of a hindrance on instruments with the duet/anglo hand straps than with Englishes, and I'm certain this isn't *just* due to differential familiarity. I find it to be true even if I'm supporting the instrument on my leg(s) as I play. And the size, shape, placement, and adjustment of the straps and bars -- to optimize both flexibility and control -- are crucial. As for "the strengths of the duet," I do get tired of these stereotypes which seem to assume that because one instrument is better than another for a particular technique, then that technique is all that it's good for. Compare the smaller (up to 55 buttons) duets with a standard 30-button C/G anglo: Each has the lower notes in the left hand and the higher notes in the right hand, with a certain amount of overlap, and they all have the same lowest note, C below middle C. So aside from enforced bellows reversals on the anglo, how do they differ? The overlap on the anglo is four notes, from B above middle C up to E, but without the accidentals. On a 55-button Crane the overlap is a full octave, from middle C to C an octave above, and fully chromatic.(On a 46-button Crane it's a fifth, from middle C to the G above, still fully chromatic.) On my 55-button Maccanns it's a fourth, from G above middle C to the next C above, also fully chromatic. (On a 46-button Maccann it's the same, except that the Bb is missing from the left hand.) The overlap on the 46-button Hayden is nearly an octave, but as noted above, it's missing three accidentals. So the duets have more overlap than the anglo, though in different ranges. The top note on the anglo is B nearly 3 octaves above middle C, but the next-highest note is the G below it, and even below that G a couple of notes are missing from the chromatic scale. The 55-button Maccann reaches to the C above that B and is fully chromatic all the way. Because it goes lower in the right hand (and therefore has more overlap) the 55-button Crane only reaches the F below the anglo's high G, but that's more than high enough for most tunes, unless you're trying to play an octave higher than written. And it's fully chromatic all the way up to that F. The 46-button Hayden goes only to the D below that, though that should certainly be adequate for most players, especially since it goes *down* to middle C. On the low end, the Crane is chromatic all the way down, as is the 55-button Maccann. The 46-button Maccann lacks the low C# and D. The 46-button Hayden lacks the low C# and D#. The anglo lacks the low C#, D, D#, F#, and G#. The above suggests that any playing style used on the anglo should also be possible on any of the duets, with differences only in detail. As one might expect, the common Morris style works just fine, but consider also the common Irish anglo style: It's just as easy to play only melody, or melody with just occasional harmony notes, on the duets as on an anglo. And the greater overlap provides more opportunities to choose between right and left hand for particular notes or phrases. Well, the English is also my main squeeze, and I suspect it always will be. But there are some things I can do with the other systems that just aren't feasible on the English, so I expect I'll continue to play with them, too. [Edited this old post, because I just rediscovered it and noticed an error in quoting. Now corrected.]

I hope that's either a mistake or a joke. If it takes two 40-hour weeks to make one concertina (I don't know how long it takes, but you said "a couple of weeks"), then selling it for $2000 would be $25/hr... assuming *no* expense for 1) materials, 2) tools, 3) rental or mortgage on the shop, 4) electricity & other utilities, 5) insurance, etc. After expenses/overhead it would probably be more like $10/hr or less. As I recall, there are more than 2000 individual hand-crafted pieces -- of different metals, woods, leathers, papers, fabrics, and possibly plastics -- in a single concertina. Now what does a plumber or electrician charge these days? A good concertina maker is at least as skilled. It's amazing they don't cost more.

My Jeffries-made metal-ended Crane duet and my ebony-ended Edeophone Crane duet are essentially the same size, both with 7-fold bellows of virtually equal extension. But I find the Edeophone bellows much more difficult to control -- except at nearly full extension, -- even though the Jeffries is much heavier. The Edeophone displays a strong tendency to bend at the slightest imbalance in pressure from the hands, while the 6-sided Jeffries actually shows some resistance to non-parallel flexing, even though it has deeper folds. I believe the geomety *is* a factor in this difference. The Jeffries also has slightly thicker leather, and I'm sure this has some effect, but watching and feeling the behavior of the two bellows, I'm convinced that it's not the dominant factor.

That's a start, since I can now ask a few more questions. 1) Would she really want to play only melody? PA (piano accordion) players almost never play only melody. The whole point of the left hand is to play chords. So she might well be thinking of playing melody *plus* chords or some other sort of harmony. 2) Is she the kind of person who could teach herself by experimenting with the instrument, or would she need a teacher? 3) What's your budget? Now for some additional comments, without waiting for your replies: A: Because of her previous PA experience, I would steer clear of the anglo. I'm not saying she would necessarily have trouble with the different-notes-on-push-and-pull feature, but she might. It would be less of a departure, and therefore less of a gamble, to go with an instrument where bellows direction doesn't matter... an English or duet. The English has the quirk that adjacent notes in the scale are on opposite sides of the instrument. That's also a bit of a gamble, since the brains of some people -- though very few -- seem unable to cope with that arrangement. B: There are some good, new instructional materials for the English concertina. Some also for the anglo, but those are mostly restricted to Irish-style melody playing. Next to nothing for the duets; those that exist are old, and I think all are out of print. (David Cornell has some nice arrangements for Maccann duet, but no tutor for beginners.) So I'd steer away from the duets and toward the English if she's not a good self-teacher. But if she can teach herself without the assistance of books or teachers, a duet might be an excellent idea. C: For strictly melody playing, the English can't be beat, but chords vs. melody in the stereotypical PA style is nearly impossible. However, it's well suited to various other kinds of harmony, and really quite versatile in that respect. It's easy to do harmonies on the anglo in some keys, and the separation of the right and left hands is more like the accordion, but there's no consistent pattern for changing keys. Duets can do arbitrary chords and harmonies, and accordion-like separation of the two hands is possible. But both hands still play individual notes, like a piano, so non-chord harmonies are also relatively easy. D: The note layouts of the Crane (same as Triumph) and Hayden duets and the English conform to consistent patterns which make changing keys relatively easy. The Maccann duet is less consistent in this respect, the Jeffries duet even worse, but the anglo is the worst. This may or may not be a matter of concern. E: With prior musical experience, she will probably not be happy with a really cheap instrument. If you have a limited budget, the less expensive but not utterly crap instruments are the Stagis... anglo, English, or Hayden duet. Now there's also the "Jackie" -- an English-system starter model -- from Concertina Connection in the Netherlands. If you can afford a new mid-range ($1500-2000) instrument, there are several quality brands of anglos, a couple of Englishes, and currently no duets. If you can afford a good vintage intrument, you can get all kinds... except the Hayden duet. In top-quality instruments, Englishes tend to be more expensive than duets, and anglos most expensive of all. Hayden duets are an exception, being quite rare, and very expensive if you can find one. F: I think the idea of a "gift certificate" is a great one, since it will allow her to help choose the right instrument. A visit to Bob Tedrow in Alabama (or the Button Box in Massachusetts, but that's a longer trip) would be especially helpful, because then she could try more than one instrument. The caveat here is that there's a good chance they won't have any duets to try, with the possible exception of a Stagi-made Hayden duet. G: Of duets, I personally like the Crane/Triumph duet, but with the keyboard only 5 buttons wide, one has to reach further for the higher notes. If she has short fingers, the Maccann or Hayden would probably be less of a problem in this respect. --> So here's what I recommend: For various reasons the English would seem to be the all-around best bet. You can get good instructional material. You can get an inexpensive starter model, and still be able to upgrade to a mid-range or top quality vintage instrument. You could even rent one first (same with the anglo), to see if it's going to work out. But if you have the budget for a good vintage instrument *and* your wife can teach herself by experimenting and improvising, then I would seriously recommend a duet... a Crane or Maccann (but not a Hayden or Jeffries, because starting cheap and upgrading later isn't really an option with those two). *If* you decide to go with a duet, you should contact Barleycorn Concertinas (Chris Algar) in England. Not only is he an honorable businessman, an expert on concertinas, who sells instruments in top condition and with a warranty, he's the only one I would expect to have a selection of duets to choose from. I hope this helps.

That's worth knowing. I personally think it's wrong -- like having mandolins enter in the "fiddle" category, -- and I suspect it's due to those setting the categories being ignorant of the distinctions among concertinas. But if that's the way it works and *if* I ever enter a competition with my English, I guess it will be in the "concertina" category. Fair enough. By the way, is there also only one category for "accordions", including all of B/C, G/D, and PA, or are they separated? Certainly not, which I know very well, but neither am I. If I've given anyone the idea that I thought you were, I seriously apologize, as that wasn't my intent at all. One purpose of my comments has been to emphasize that in spite of our long experience, each of us is still familiar with only a small part of the very broad and varied corpus of Irish traditional music and musicians, and the apparently great differences in our experiences, views, and conclusions merely serve to demonstrate that fact.

If the advice we've given to various others in this Forum over the last couple of months hasn't been enough, I'm not sure we can help you further. Maybe if you quoted specific items that you didn't understand? The three main kinds of concertina are as different as a fiddle, banjo, and guitar, so what you've said is somewhat akin to saying, "My wife wants to play a stringed instrument. Which one should I get her." An informed decision requires that you be more specific. The most important question to answer before making a decision is... "How does she intend to use the concertina?" I.e., what kind of music does she intend to play?

I generally use two different fingers. Which ones would depend on the tune, i.e., the surrounding notes. For those two buttons I would most likely use, in order from greatest to least probability: 1) ring finger on the accidental row, little finger on the middle row; 2) middle and ring fingers, respectively; 3) index and middle fingers, respectively. Most likely I'd use my middle finger for all the B3's and ring finger for all the others. But on my instruments that results in what I consider to be a strange sequence of notes. What *are* you trying to play? And I agree with Dave that more information would be helpful. E.g., what speed are you playing? Are these sequences intended to be all in the same bellows direction, or are you reversing the bellows at certain points? And if you're a "novice player", how can you be so sure that those are the "right" button sequences. Dave mentioned alternate fingerings, and that idea should at least be considered, to see if it might provide another solution.

Do *you* feel intimidated? Other people don't seem to. (Then again, I'm probably not seeing posts from those who do. ) Chris Timson already has an excellent Concertina FAQ, at http://www.concertina.info/ And I hope you know that there's much more to concertina.net than these Forums. Special sections include "Learning", a "Buyer's Guide", and "Links". Theses can answer many questions, though maybe not about dogs and girlfriends. As for what concertina you should by for playing sea shanties: Shanties should be sung, not played. Hauling lines is really difficult if your hands are occupied in playing a concertina. Ah, but that's an entirely separate topic (or Topic).

Fair enough. I stand by mine, too. We have different points of view, which I presume are based on different perceptions, which I further presume are based on different experiences. I'm sure there's a reason. I'm just not convinced that the reasons are what you suggest. There's much more to Irish music than competions... or sessions, or stage performances, or recordings. There are many different facets to Irish "traditional" music, and few people are participating in all of them. Not all good musicians participate in competeitions. And while I have considerable experience with Irish music, I have never even observed a competition. But on the subject of competitions, I wonder which category an English concertina player should enter. I personally think it should be "miscellaneous instruments", if there is such a category, since except in appearance the English is no more like an anglo than a fiddle is like a banjo. And as Eric said, there's currently no category for English concertina. Is there a category for bouzouki? If not, then lack of a category or competition can hardly be dependent to prevalence of the instrument. But if there is, I'll point out that the bouzouki is generally acknowledged to have first entered Irish music in the mid 1960's, yet these days it's omnipresent and "traditional". Who knows what will happen over the next 10-15 years? Agreed. Which is why I never suggested such a thing. Even if one were to make such a statement, I don't agree that it implies what you say. "Most appropriate" is a matter of personal taste, not some law of nature. Before the 1960's "most appropriate" for Irish music did *not* include the bouzouki; now it does. The same is true for all those wild chords used these days by Irish backup musicians. Would you claim that the Irish before that time didn't "have the sense", but now they do? I think not. Maybe the English concertina will never become really popular in Irish music, but I don't think there's any a priori reason why it shouldn't. If one or more superb exponents of the English in Irish music (something I firmly believe is not an oxymoron) brings it to the public's attention, I think it will take off like a rocket. (And unfortunately, so will prices, just as they did with the anglo.) It hasn't happened yet, and maybe it never will, but my personal prediction is that within the next 20 years it *will* find a significant place in Irish music. (Of course, if I'm wrong, we won't know for 20 years. ) But *not* as a substitute for the anglo. By the way, I have thought of one well-known "Irish" group that has recorded with English concertina: The Boys of the Lough. However I wouldn't call either Robin Morton (from Northern Ireland) or Dave Richardson (who is English) a "superb exponent" of the instrument. I'm sure the fact that their playing hasn't increased the English's popularity among Irish musicians is due more to their playing than to the instrument itself.

For me, at least, figuring out where the notes are is not the same a being able to *play* the tune. I can still have problems on the anglo playing the two you mentioned, because if I'm not paying close attention I may send the bellows in the wrong direction... which means I get the wrong note.

I think one major loss in this new Forum format is the old format's standard header, with links to other parts of concertina.net. Used to be that from any page in c.net I could just click on a link at the top to get to Links, User Search, or whatever. Now those links are gone, and I tend to forget that they even exist. I have to explicitly go to the Home Page first to go anywhere else. It's like having two coimpletely separate web sites, concertina.net and concertina.net[new forum]. A significant step backward, in my opinion. I fear that many newcomers to the new Forum won't even get around to discovering the rest of concertina.net.

Civil War re-enacters must get very huingry. (Well, I guess that *would* be period. ) I guess Wonder Bread is also out, but how many of the 1860's vegetable varieties -- tomatoes, lettuce, *wheat*,... -- even exist today, much less are available to the average re-enacter? And antibiotic-fed meat animals certainly aren't period.

I don't know where you're located, or where you would purchase at those prices, but if it's the Stagi you want I recommend that you buy from the Button Box (www.buttonbox.com). Even including shipping costs, their prices appear to be lower ($295 for the C1 and $335 for the C2). More importantly they specialize in concertinas, rather than being a music store that just happens to carry a couple of concertinas among many other things. The Button Box will insure that the instrument is in the best possible condition -- including being in tune -- before shipping it to you, and they stand behind what they sell. This is worth much more than the convenience of a local dealer, who is unlikely to know how to service a concertina. Bob Tedrow's Homewood Music (www.homewood.net, I think) is another reputable dealer, but I don't see Stagis listed on his site these days. Both Homewood and the Button Box also build their own "mid-range" concertinas, which are excellent if/when you want to upgrade. I think the folks at the Button Box could help you there. But from their web site I see that the C2 has two octave-tuned reeds per note. I.e., it's a very different sound, more like what most people associate with accordions. It adds a richness which some people like, but you can't switch it on and off, and it's a sound you can't get from the higher-quality anglos, unless you go the Chemnitzer/bandoneon route. (I know, I've just set you up for a whole new set of questions.) Going to a 30-button anglo you'll go from being able to play in 2 major keys (and their relative minors and modes) to -- in theory-- all keys, though the harmonic and even melodic possibilities vary from key to key. On a 20-button C/G, by the way, you won't have the C# needed for playing in the key of D. Depending on what sort of music you want to play and whether you're playing with others, a G/D instrument might be a desirable alternative. As for 56 buttons... there you're most likely looking at an English-system concertina, not an anglo. As different as a fiddle and a banjo in terms of how you play them and the sorts of music and arrangements they're most suited to. Anglos with more than 32 buttons are relatively rare, with more than 40 extremely rare. If you're willing to go to $425 for a 20-button anglo, you should note that the Button Box lists the 30-button W15 at $565, and they currently have a 30-button W15-LN for $545. A little more expensive than what you indicate, but much more versatile. And while I'm not personally familiar with the W15-LN, it appears to be similar -- in size and type of buttons -- to the more expensive instruments, which could be a plus if/when you want to upgrade. Construction quality, reflected in playing response, sound quality, durability,... you name it!

The very existence of "authenticity police" would likely get *them* in trouble with *me*.

In this discussion, neither did I. They come in numerous sizes, from 12-bass to 140-bass, with anywhere from 1 to 5 or more sets of reeds, and with various sizes of right-hand keyboard. But I thought the discussion of the PA was centered on whether or how much it is or has been used in Irish music, not how big it is. I think the Irish PA players I've known generally travelled with 48- or 72-bass instruments, though they may have had a 120-bass at home. Might be true, but it seems to me like speculation, difficult to prove. Just as likely that it's popular because it's popular, i.e., because it -- or its style -- is currently "in". That statement seems to presuppose that at least the majority of button accordion players learned to play piano before taking up the accordion. I rather doubt that to be the case. It has shaped the Irish *concertina* music. It has NOT shaped Irish fiddle or whistle music, or the style of Irish music in general. *That* is *my* point. When I say the English concertina is good for playing Irish music, I don't mean that it's great for imitating Irish-style *anglo* playing, though I've heard that done. I mean that it's good for playing Irish *music*. My own style of playing Irish music on the English owes more to fiddle and whistle styles than to anglo, and I think that is good, not bad. It seems we have very different experiences. In my experience, Miko Russel's style is an anomaly. Your labelling the legato style as "North American" and "inexperienced" strikes me as bizarre, as I've taken workshops from several different *Irish*-Irish players and listened to recordings and concerts of many others, *all* of whom seem to use a minimum of tonguing. Among these I'll include Sean Potts, Paddy Maloney, Seamus Ennis, and Mary Bergin, none of them either inexperienced or North American. In the concert I mentioned, I did not draw my conclusions about the relative status of the PA and button accordions merely from presence or absence, but from the comments of the Comhaltas MC. So on that basis you should perhaps take issue with him, not me. I don't, either, but I have been told by Irish musicians I do know that there now are at least a couple. I'm trying to learn more, and will of course report immediately if/when I have something concrete to report. Good to hear, because I wasn't clear on that. I think we're more in agreement than our discussion so far would indicate. Correct me if I'm wrong, Frank, but that statement suggests to me that your conception is of the English playing Irish music in the anglo style, something which I insist is not necessary, no more than that a fiddle should be made to sound like a mandolin. The English is not a different kind of anglo; it's a different instrument altogether. Ceilih dancing may be "bouncy"; sets may be "bouncy"; but step dancing sure as hell isn't. Even a hard-shoe reel is mostly smooth to the floor, any rises and falls legato, in spite of the percussion of the feet on the floor. And the slip jig is about the smoothest dance I've ever encountered. Even the "bounce" in Ceilidh dancing -- as I've seen it, and was taught it-- is more of a smooth up-and-down than a percussive "bounce".

For some people, that is undoubtedly true. The same can be said of the English. My personal experience with the English was that the first time I had one in my hands, and with noone even hinting at what the note layout might be, in less than 10 minutes I was playing a tune (a Macedonian song, actually) in two part harmony. Thinking back to that day after I really learned to play, I realized that I had played it in the key of Eb, not in C, which many people seem to think is much easier. I don't think either is necessarily superior. Many hand straps can't be adjusted snugly enough for small hands. And the breadth of the anglo keyboard might cause problems for hands too small to reach. On the other hand, the stretch between the thumb loops and the finger plates on an English can also be a problem for small hands.

Unlikely to "solve" one's "problems", but may well lead to new opportunities and adventures. I'm not. Your post was excellent.

Many do. "Pinky" is common slang for the little finger. But calling the finger plate a "rest" is incorrect, at least with regard to the way I play the concertina. I don't *rest* my little finger, I use it to help *grip* the instrument. And Dave, finger "slide"? First I've heard that term. I don't think sliding is the primary use for either the finger or the "plate".

She's from Kentucky, which I don't think qualifies as "Yankee". And the concertina's heyday was Queen Victoria's time, not King Arthur's. But aside from that....

Pretty sure it's not so. Something with a bellows, perhaps, but neither free reeds nor held/played like a concertina. It was enjoyed by (most of?) those listening, who didn't seem to care whether it was actually "period". But hey, Morris dancing of the period is unlikely to have been anything close to what it is today, or even was in the 19th century. Furthermore, neither pirates nor Morris dancers used concertinas during the Renaissance, and I should think that any argument that allows even one anachronism should allow plenty of them. (I'll bet the fabrics used in most of the costumes didn't exist back then, either.) Go for it!

I think that's in *some* -- possibly even *many* -- keys, but not *all*. Even the Hayden has "edges", where the pattern breaks down.

I said I thought an emphasis on the PA over the "diatonic" button accordions was a passing fad, though I suspect spanning at least a couple of decades. But while it's not *dominant* these days, I don't believe that even now it's considered inappropriate or inferior, except by a few "more traditional than thou" bigots. (And in my personal experience, those with such prejudices can't *play* for beans.) Today the fad -- or media promotion -- seems to be away from such "sophisticated" instruments as the PA and the Boehm flute, but in fact there are many excellent players of each in the tradition.

I know Father Charlie. What I remember him telling me about how he learned was that he didn't learn as a child in Galway, but as an adult (on Long Island) he got himself a concertina and then tried to teach himself to play it the way he remembered his grandfather's playing. As for "style", I don't think one man constitutes a "regional" style. However... I haven't. I didn't realize it existed. In fact, its existence would seem to contradict my own experience of not having heard of styles, aside from "West Clare" and "Mrs. Crotty". I'd love to get my hands on a copy and see what he says.

Today, perhaps. But was it always so? I remember a Comhaltas concert tour of "All Ireland" champions about 30 years ago where the piano accordion was *the* accordion, and the one button accordion player was presented as unusual. As I recall, it was not a half-step (B/C, D/D#, or the like) instrument. It wasn't until some years later that I first encountered one of those. I'm somewhat guessing, but I suspect that there may have been a period (1940's-60's?) in Irish music when the piano accordion was an instrument of choice, just as piano backup was considered a requirement. (Now it seems a band isn't a "band" without a guitar or bouzouki.) But I also suspect that the piano accordion was a passing fad, with the button accordions more common both before and after, and hanging on in the homes even when Irish "culture" had more public emphasis than "tradition". But even today I've met several excellent Irish piano accordion players, who don't also play button accordion. As for the concertina, I don't think it was ever as common historically as it is today. Before Noel Hill started his campaign to popularize the concertina, traditional players were scarce and practically unknown, either isolated individuals or found in small pockets. I've heard a lot about "the West Clare style" on the anglo, but *nothing* about other regional styles... Limerick, Donegal, Kerry, or even Galway (which is right next to Clare). The concertina is used in Irish music, but it certainly doesn't *define* Irish music, and even in its recent popularity, I'm sure it's outnumbered far more than 10-to-1 by each of fiddles, whistles, and flutes.

This is why a legato style is preferred for whistles (as little tonguing as possible)and fiddles (minimal bow reversals)? No, Frank, I think you have a post-hoc argument. I suspect that the anglo and the button accordion were adopted for quite different reasons, but once they became established in the tradition(s), the characteristics of the necessary bellows reversal were re-labelled as primary, when really they're secondary. by the way, the "history" I've heard -- from more than one source, though that doesn't guarantee that it's true -- is that the anglo was adopted as a "poor man's uillean pipes", and I think the traditional playing style supports this: mainly melody, with only occasional harmony notes like the use of the regulators on the pipes. This would also seem to explain the presence of a drone key on many anglos.