Jump to content

Richard Mellish

Members
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Richard Mellish

  • Rank
    Chatty concertinist

Profile Information

  • Location
    London, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Not a pretty sight, but presumably very functional.
  2. Whatever you end up getting, do stay on here for any further advice you may need and just for general chat.
  3. I think the bidding has a long way to go above the present $710.
  4. I thought it was harps in Heaven, accordeons in Hell.
  5. Fair enough! But do you understand the logic?
  6. Apologies to any of you who have been eagerly waiting to find out more about this beast. I started investigating it when I got home last Thursday but then became occupied with various unrelated stuff for the next few days. I haven't yet opened it up to see what it's like inside and to identify two reeds that aren't sounding, but I can now attach a chart showing all the other notes. It's actually 55-key according to normal counting, the auctioneer's quoted 56 count including the air button. I am also attaching a chart for a 44/45 key Jeffries that Gary found and sent me. It does seem to be based on that, for example in the top button on the right-hand middle row being G#5 rather than F#6 as it would be on a Wheatstone or even a basic 20-key. I have no idea what logic, if any, determined the additional notes. Some are "drones" with the same note on push and pull, which might have been intended for use as actual drones or for more choices for chords (as I use the left-hand thumb button on my G-D Wheatstone layout). One striking oddity is the duplication of the G6 push in the middle row, where it would be expected, and on the top row. If the note's there on the middle row, why would anyone reach up to the top row for the same note in the same direction? Also the left-hand end has a hole for a thumb button but nothing there. I will report again when I've investigated the insides. Lachenal 55.pdf Jeffries_key_layout-45-CG.pdf
  7. I have an English currently on loan to someone who plays that system and an Anglo that I loaned in the past and would be happy to loan again; the snag is that I'm in England 😞
  8. This is a very preliminary report. A full investigation will take me some time. I have established that the top three rows are similar to those of a 30 key C-G, with some extra buttons that are not the same as on a 40-key. So far I have made no sense of the rest. A few reeds are a bit wheezy but most seem OK.
  9. And that was to me. I am collecting it this afternoon. I will report in due course. PS. And thanks to Sprunghub for alerting us to it.
  10. I happened to speak to Steve only last night. He is OK. He has only recently finished building his second workshop and moving some of the machinery. He is waiting for someone to come and do some work on the windows, but he can now do more work on concertinas (including one of mine that is in for a service). Try calling him. I hesitate to publicise his cellphone number but the landline number is on the website +44 1449 615523. AND .. how are you? Cardiovascular system back in full working order?
  11. I'm getting tempted to put in a bid, in the hope of getting my hands on it and thus (a) being able to tell everyone here what the actual notes are, and (b) assessing whether it might actually be a useful instrument as it stands or with a modicum of swapping around of reeds. Personally I wouldn't be interested in conversion to Hayden, having dabbled with that system but given up and stuck to Anglo. Edit: I'm reminded that Gary has already bid, but if A N Other outbids him I might jump in.
  12. I can see someone being tempted to buy it cheap and convert it to more-or-less Hayden, with new reed pans if necessary.
  13. Can you point me to where you found that? It seems to me that each one experiences the same restoring force that it would when on its own, plus a force from the other one via the coupling. According to the phase of the additional force (which might depend on the nature of the coupling as well as the phase of the other oscillator), that surely makes the frequency either higher or lower. Mine (two of them) were also that long ago. I have made some use of them but not much. However we are indulging in significant thread drift here.
  14. I think I need to clarify my own thinking as well as my post above, though I haven't yet got around to the simulation. The effect of coupling two oscillators is, as I said, to create two possible frequencies, according to whether they (in this case two reeds) are in phase or in antiphase. But whichever of those modes they settle into, they are both at the same frequency; it's just slightly different from the frequency that one would have on its own. I can't work out whether in phase or antiphase is more likely. I'm also not sure of how much the coupling changes the frequency (up or down) from the frequency of one reed alone, but I suspect it's considerable, as there is coupling both by transmission of vibration through the reed pan and by the flow of air.
  15. I think I do disagree! If two oscillators tuned to exactly the same frequency are coupled, they have two eigenmodes, one slightly higher in frequency than the original and one slightly lower, according to whether they are oscillating in phase or in antiphase. (Off hand I can't think which frequency goes with which, but anyway that may depend on the nature of the coupling.) So the effect is to separate the possible frequencies rather than to pull them together. This used to be used in radios to provide a bandpass characteristic, but in that case the excitation is from the incoming radio signal. With two things, such as two free reeds, that are excited to oscillate at whatever their natural frequency may be, but coupled, I'm not at all sure what happens. I feel a simulation coming on.
×
×
  • Create New...