Dirge

Dunno really. I'm told the elise is a splendid thing but it's a Hayden, so I've never taken any interest in it. Never even thought about the range of it. I can't remember the layout of a 39 either, but I do remember working out which buttons were left out from a 46 to get down to 39 and thinking that it really was too sparse. Whether that stops a beginner having some fun with one I seriously doubt. Your argument seems inescapable I agree. Interesting thought. Also although I've never touched an elise I have tried a jackie out and on that basis even a cheap antique instrument would be hugely preferable in size tone and general playability.

Hey, you could pour your hot chocolate into your cup, pot and all. Or how about a chocolate-covered manhole cover? But seriously, with 30 % more notes than the Elise Hayden duet from Concertina Connection, including G#'s and D#'s, I'd say it's at least as useful and should be worth at least as much if it's in good condition. More, since it's a Lachenal, with typical "vintage" construction and "concertina-type" reeds. It's also smaller, and I suspect lighter. And though there aren't any internal pictures, the external appearance and that of the case suggest that it's been well cared for and quite possibly needs no restorative work. (Are any of our members located where they could easily visit the seller and report back?) While it doesn't go down to middle C in the right hand, as the Elise does, its top in that hand is a fifth higher than on the Elise, giving it enough range for (among other things) nearly all Irish tunes. And occasional crossing between the hands for particular notes will likely be a necessity on the Elise as well as on this Maccann. Both have limited overlap... 5 buttons on the Maccann, and 7 on the Elise, though the overlaps cover different ranges. Make no mistake, I'm not knocking the Elise, but I do think it's seriously unfair to deride even a 39-button Maccann, at least as a starter instrument. Edited to add: And for the Maccann, the upgrade options are still much more varied and even generally less expensive than for a Hayden/Wicki. My thoughts exactly Jim Yes, good post Jim, lots of truth in it, but I'd personally save those thoughts for a 46. There are lots of 46's and those extra notes don't cost you a huge amount more but are worth a lot. I can speak from personal experience here. I am having a huge amount of fun with my 46. On the big duets I play the fancy stuff you've heard; on the 46 I try and bash out any old tune I can think of with vamped harmony. It's a completely different thing, but it's a very useable and charming litttle instrument, and I hadn't realised how much you can do with them, having swallowed the oft repeated 'It really needs to go down to C on the RH' line in the past. I don't think I'd tell anyone that these days. (I still play it a lot in C but an octave higher, incidentally.) The 39s are a bit too stripped, I think. A step too far. I wonder if Messrs Lachenal were aiming at players who were mainly interested in playing single line tunes when they produced the 39? So I wouldn't want it or encourage anyone to buy it, but 'chocolate teapot' is probably overstating it too, Ivan!

Sorry you took that badly at first; it was as you worked out purely a throw-away joke comment. Hope you're feeling better!

I'm thinking it was Dirge too. How dare you Madam!

Wow!

I think a lot of us are quite used to having to post our instruments away to get them sorted. Have you tried having a chat with one or two of the speciallists who hang around here with a view to posting the one you have away to be fixed? It would be better than having an accordion man do it anyway, we are told and I think we have a couple of canadian repairers regular here. (You can look them up I'm having a crisis of confidence and not going to name names in case I get them wrong!)

Where do we see the details?

There are times when playing chords when you will have to swing your hand through almost 90 degrees in the straps to reach the notes, and you need to be able to slide quickly in and out of the straps too. If you're playing standing up this may not be very easy. Certainly I always play sitting using one knee; never having learnt to play standing. You need room in the straps to do this sort of thing, and I have enough space to get the fingers of my other hand part way into the straps as well as the hand that is supposed to be there. Then you take this slack up by bracing your hand out into the strap against your thumb. . Perhaps you have small hands, but I don't think you should come to it already defeated. You need to do it, so you must find out how to do it. Full stop, no excuses. I give a problem manoevre serious thought until I find it is possible after all if I do it 'like that'. (It always has been possible) Then I can settle down to practice and get it right. Don't forget the overlap area and the option to take a few notes into the other hand either. That often unravels things magically.

Some time ago we acquired a very clever troll who did a slow stalk and took a while to spot. Fellow Cnet members; I think we have another one. Harpomatic you'll probably want the last word and you may have it secure in the knowledge that I won't be replying, so go for it...

I believe that was our member m3838. He hasn't been very active, lately, but you could try asking him. My own recollection was that he was able to get some interesting, even impressive results, but that it didn't create an able-to-do-everything instrument. And I don't recall anyone else saying that they copied him. Jim, you are absolutely right, what a memory! It was m3838, now I remember it, too. Such tuning is probably good for melody, not a chord instrument, though. Probably more of hand-pumped chromatic harmonica, though that is one capable instrument in itself. Some heavy retuning, I'm sure, is involved - I don't know if I'd decide to work on C or G row, but inervals are a bit more than i like to retune a reed to. A curiosity, but on the other hand I think i'll stick to my 30b, as the smallest instrument, otherwise my octave tuned 52b chemnitzer is really where it's at, for me. But I don't want to advertize these beautiful instruments too much here, as I still enjoy wonderfully "under-appreciated" market for them... Could you take this somewhere else please? I usually enjoy a good thread drift but it hasn't much to do with whether a beginner could be advised to buy a vintage 20b really, has it, and that was all getting quite interesting.

And yet, so many of the old players -- and tutors -- did just that. It's also what's sometimes taught, specifically on a 20-button box, as the "German" style. Acsh'ly, I just realised that something I wrote about choice of harmonies was wrong, but as noone picked up on it, perhaps I should keep quiet! Well it's not going to be me noticing it, is it? The chordal point is well made; that's what he heard and admired. But surely a 2 row 'self accompanies' fairly easily? Isn't that one of the good things about any Anglo? That was a good part of my basic conclusion that an Anglo made most sense for him. (This may be a rhetorical Q by now but I'm interested to pursue it if you can cope?)

I saw him today and it wasn't mentioned so I'm guessing the moment has passed but i will ask him. I think on balance the average view is what I thought, that an antique 20b is a contender. If it comes to it I shall probably explain the choice but point out that the old ones may not be so versatile but sound so much nicer... Ok forgetting the learner bit now: I learnt to play on a 61 key duet. The first time I tried a 46 I thought it was hopelessly inadequate. More recently I bought another one and have had to work a bit to get something nice out of it, so I feel completely in sympathy with Mike's comments about 30B vs 20B instruments above. But I wonder, Mike, if we have both been spoilt? Perhaps if you had started on a 20B and me on a 46 we might not think like this? Getting used to extra notes on a Wheatstone duet is not difficult, they just add in to what you know already. Wouldn't it be much the same for a third Anglo row? I suppose what I'm asking is, is it easier to start small and go big rather than vice versa with these things?

Interesting stuff Mr Cush. As to air travel; every year I fly from NZ to England and back with at least one concertina. The first year I got a receipt from my local customs office to prove that I had owned the 'box here in NZ in case I was challenged on return and asked to pay duty. I have never botheered since. No one ever bats an eyelid. (I'm pretty sure they simply have no idea what they are worth) If asked what it is I say 'It's a concertina'. Sometimes I have to explain further; once I was asked to play something, but I think we'd passed the inspection by then and they were just curious. (Even an 81 key aeola in its box will go in the overhead locker by the way, and it gives you something to do while they refuel the 'plane.)

No that really explained it Mike, thanks; I'll print off a bit on the rochelle and give it to him.

Thanks both; as I thought. I just had this idea that someone had been saying that a 2 row vintage was comparable price and as good a bet as a rochelle, and I'm not sure how limiting a 2 row is if you're just playing 'ordinary tunes by ear' which I think is all this man is after. I do know even a basic Lach sounds better to my ears and is smaller, lighter and more handsome than a modern.

The driver of a 3 wheel 'V8 trike' came up to me today. He does tourist rides too so we see each other most days. He said he was enjoying hearing me play and how much was a concertina like mine worth? That stopped him in his tracks, but we chatted on and I learnt he has no musical skill to speak of, has played with various instruments in a lightweight sort of way (including the mouthorgan which he got on 'OK'with.), and fancies a go on the concertina, chiefly for folkie sort of stuff. It seemed to me that an Anglo was his best choice. I thought 'rochelle' and volunteered to print off a bit of info for him to follow up. Do we still think the Rochelle is the best first step? There was discussion about buying vintage 2 rowers at one stage, and stagi has been bandied about recently.

This was because Morse code was comparatively simple compared to the two systems devised by Wheatstone. Wheatstone's first telegraph system, based on an earlier German telegraphic code, required you to alternately push or pull the telegraph key, but with occasional changes to the the sequence. So for example, for the letter C you would push the telegraph key down, D you would pull it upwards, and so on. Many people found this irrational, although a lot of sef-taught telegraph operators claimed to find it intuitive. His second system, which was entirely his own, used two telegraph keys: one for each hand, and the letters alternated between left and right hand. While it made perfect logical sense, some people found the whole left hand/right hand thing difficult to coordinate. nice!

Of course you should think about trying a duet. They're both more versatile and cheaper than Anglos. The catch with a Hayden is you have to believe you'll never want a better tone or wider range than the elise because moving on is usually pricey because there's no pool of fine vintage instruments to draw from. If you can convince yourself of that, dump all the others on Ebay and go for it. If you think you are likely to want to take even duet playing a bit further, STILL get rid of the Anglos and have a look at going straight to a 46 key 'Maccan'. (Someone who doesn't play 'Maccan' will now tell you how difficult they are to get on with and justify it by saying they gave up when they tried. I can play a bit and think they're not as incomprehensible as an Anglo for starters.)

I have a little 46 key with brass reeds that travels about with me when I'm worried about conditions, and I have a job as a commentator on a tourist ride. It's a 'duck', amphibious and takes to the sea so the brass seems important. So there I was sitting on a bench amusing myself with the 'box waiting for 'work' to drive up when a young man comes up to me and gives me a dollar. "Oh!" I said, "I wasn't expecting that! Thank you!". "That was bloody brilliant mate!" he said. I'm not sure I agree with him but it was all very pleasing. No hat, no open case, no deliberate attempt to raise money of any sort on my part please note. Perhaps I should try it properly.

Oh you can't compare that with Mudcat. ("Mud by name, mud by nature" in my limited experience, which is whenever someone says 'Have you seen what they are saying on Mudcat!') People got surprisingly heated, I agree, but they're already apologising...

It's true. Our 'normal car' has a 'check engine' light on constantly. Stupid thing. The Morgan has a charging light, that's it. I got rid of the others when I tidied up the dashboard...

That'll teach you! I'm told that at one stage the motorcycle makers Triumph fitted oil pressure guages to their new machines (in the 1930's) but got so fed up with people contacting them concerned about the various readings they got that they replaced it with a mechanical version of an oil presssure light instead. Happy Xmas to you too Mike!

If Chris can afford to buy it, pay for someone to do it up AND make a living you shouldn't be worried by that.

Are you looking at the chamois rather than the walls, Don? If so that often strays a bit. Looking at the pics again I was reminded that I was suspicious to see what look like new valves, yet missing and broken buttons. Has someone started something and cut and run? And what on earth are those plates on the sides of the ends for?

I'll believe you; I had a mental block and assumed it was based on a keyboard starting at middle C; entirely me having a condor moment. I suppose so; there's a spare Eb on the other side remember; I use that quite a lot, and isn't the problem of one button above another a general one?