Dana Johnson

The Dipper might hold it's value better than the condo in this market! Hope you got into the condo after the prices had started dropping. Make sure you give each a fair test before deciding if you have to part with one or the other. The current one might be the winner. Congratulations! Dana

Interesting how an important clue can be so easily discounted. Not a reflection on Mike's work or the writer's intelligence, only on human nature. Leathers very often have surface treatments and coatings, oils etc. that can get sticky. Shiny surfaces are usually coated surfaces. Many modern adhesives ( and some old fashioned ones ) degrade in contact with the oils that are usually part of the manufacture of the majority of leathers that help keep them pliable. A glue that may work well for years with a leather with little or no oil in it may degrade and penetrate the porous leather with a higher oil content as mentioned by Dave. Leather with oils in it doesn't feel oily until the content gets fairly high. Coated leathers often get sticky on their own, but unless they are left in close contact with some other surface for a while, the stickiness doesn't have time to start to bond and you don't notice it. This is especially true of the vinyl coated leathers where the plasticizers in the vinyl can make it tacky. Just another example of the complications of concertina making. Dana

Smart man! Dana

I had a chance to see and play Wally's #28 C/G a week ago, and it is one of the best concertinas I've played or heard. I know people think highly of Suttner and Dipper as well they should, but Wally's instruments have come a long way since # 6 (in a remarkably short time I may add ) and given what look to be very uniform manufacturing methods, I expect they will be this good or close to it from now on. Basically if you want a concertina that is the equal of the best Linotas out there You better get on Wally's list. The price is steep, but in this case, I believe you are getting what you pay for, perhaps more. Do I have any complaints about the instrument? Nothing that isn't just personal preference. Little details here and there, but they are the same complaints I have with all Linotas, and I have none with they way they play. Perhaps one person might like them set up slightly differently, all depends on what you are used to or your playing style, but I don't think there is a player out there that can out play the instrument. Suttner and Dipper's best may be it's equal, but I doubt if they have done better. I can't wait to hear what they sound like after a few years of playing. Best of all, they aren't all worn out! Hats off to Wally Dana

It would be really useful if us concertina makers understood what made a really good concertina. We wouldn't bother making anything else! Sadly it isn't an exact science as yet. Consequently, while the really good makers will make their average instrument better than somebody's with less talent/ experience, they still have variations between their instruments that are hard to explain. Certainly attention to detail especially in the reeds counts, but you will find great concertinas with both loose and close fitting reeds ( within reason ) and mediocre concertinas with quite good reeds in them. Individual pieces of wood vary enough to make or break a concertina at the higher levels, and just because one type of laminated wood makes terrible reed pans, doesn't mean all laminated reed pans are inferior. For each type of concertina be it Dipper, Suttner, Jeffries, Wheatstone or whatever, You might say there is an ideal where they are at their maximum of responsiveness, range of volume, clarity of tone... Everything comes together in one instrument, but to the naked eye and even in dimensions, they might seem identical to much poorer instruments. What makes the difference? Those who know aren't telling. Neither Colin or Jurgen's instruments are more uniform in my experience than the other. Colin doesn't make copies of other instruments while Jugen has both Wheatstone and Jeffries models. The tone difference is a matter of taste period. Stephen Is likely in the know about the Ireland concertina scene, but I expect waiting time has a lot to do with it. Jurgen's wait is shorter and his output is higher. New players are more likely to have a good Suttner to play before they turn grey, and their concertina heros are more and more playing them since they do the job admirably. Given the circumstances, they will end up dominating the market. Speculation about what makes a good concertina is all well and good, but unless you get it from Colin or Jurgen's mouth, Speculation is all it is. I can speak with moderate authority about my own instruments, but not theirs. The most knowledgeable people I know don't have all the answers. Dana

I don't think that this perception is erroneous, when the concertina is compared to other instruments: It doesn't have any where _near_ the variation in tone, pitch and (probably) volume control of the bowed string family. There simply is no comparison here... the concertina makes up for it a little in being able to play multiple notes at once more easily, but why listen to a concertina playing 4 notes when you could hear a cello playing just one?! Same argument as above for almost all wind/brass instruments, though there are a few instruments that don't really rise much above the concertina (in my opinion... without naming names!) - this is when comparing the best players of the instrument (and, in the case of the concertina, trying to imagine what it's really capable of). The guitar beats it, imo: it has a similarly rather uninteresting sound, but there is more tone control available to a guitarist, and, multi-part music works so much better being able to control the volume of individual notes that are playing simultaneously. I think this beats the concertina's advantage of being able to change the volume of a note after it starts. Keyboard instruments beat it in terms of the complexity of the music that they can play - all concertinas limit the note combinations more than piano-type keyboards, I think. Piano obviously has the individual note volume advantage. Harpsichord doesn't have this... but then many would not consider it too seriously either (wrongly, imo). Concertina is more portable... but that's not consolation when it comes to being "serious". Another problem with the concertina is that it is _always_ out of tune - not only can it not adjust to subtle pitch changes when playing alongside other instruments, but the pitch changes with pressure and there's no way to compensate. In terms of tuning there's the horrible expression "good enough for folk".... in this case perhaps true. The advantages it does have maybe explain why it's generally an "amateur" instrument - it always plays in tune (well, sort of), it doesn't scratch/squeak like a fiddle, it's portable, it can play multiple notes at once so self-accompany etc. However, these aren't the properties that are needed to make instruments "serious". In terms of virtuosity, I don't think that there are any players that have anywhere near the virtuosity and total command of the instrument that you find on other more standard instruments. There are some very good specialists (especially in Irish music). I've played the cello since age about 10 and even so there are some cellists that make my eyes/ears bulge in wonder and I know that I could never reach their level in terms of technical and musical mastery. I've never got that feeling with concertina - it's all just pushing buttons and squeezing, and honestly it's not that hard. I don't know if that's because there simply aren't many full time professional concertina players, or if it's just that there simply isn't much that you can do with the concertina... but I suspect both. For me the concertina is a "fun" instrument, and the cello is serious (and immensely fun too!). When other people (outside the concertina world) see it that way too, perhaps they're not wrong. i think the limitations you speak of are what make the concertina such a perfect candidate of being capable of virtuosity. virtuosity is so remarkable because of it's difficulty, not despite it. look at this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=4gFdX1__zNc it is a virtuoso performance because of it's difficulty, and how the player has mastered this difficult to create something beautful. what is even more amazing is that she is able to show such a wide range of expressiveness while--in effect--not using any dynamics besides terraced dynamics. the same goes for this video of matt molloy: http://youtube.com/watch?v=SHcDY76a_eY . you cannot tell from the video, but the flute he is playing is a very difficult instrument. i have an antique flute just like it, and it is extremely out of tune, difficult to play, and finicky. if you do not adjust every note on the flute, each note will be anywhere from 20 to 100 cents off from actual pitch. what makes matt molloy a virtuoso is that he makes it seem so easy, as if it is nothing, just like the harpsichordist, wherein reality both instruments are much more difficult to play than their modern counterparts. wille clancy was a virtuoso of an instrument which has none of the virtuoso-capable qualities you specify: . the uilleann pipes have no dynamics and the accompaniment notes are limited to short, stoppy, regulator notes. however, when he and other great pipers play, it seems like there is something missing from musicians who have the full gamut of expression capabilities in their instruments. what makes players on the concertina virtuosi, like noel hill, is that they are able to take an instrument which is so limited, as you describe, and pull multiple tone colors out of it, and variations in pitch, dynamics, which you contend to be missing from the instrument. noel hill, , does all the things which you specify a virtuoso as needing to do--which is very little, as you say they must only vary tone, pitch, and tone color. the video i have shared of noel is very good, but i have seen him many times very recently, and he is even better now than he was then. i will talk about noel because he is the concertina player i have spent the most time listening to, both in person and on cd. noel does things that are highly virtuosic--many complain, even, too virtuosic. sometimes he cups the palm of his hand, and i kid you not, is able to mess with the resonance of a reed in his hand to make it sound like he is getting a full glissando from f natural to f sharp, by seeming to create the missing pitches between the notes, making it therefore irrelevant that the instrument is missing natural glissandi that the violin or cello have. this may seem hard to believe, but i saw him do it, saw him explain how to do it, heard the results, and have been unable to replicate it. just as willy clancy (and other pipers) was able to make it sound like he was using dynamics (if you have never noticed it, there is a psychoacoustical effect that makes changes in note length sound as if they were slight changes in dynamic), noel and other good concertina players can trick your ears into hearing a sound, tone, or pitch that your ears do not in fact hear. through altering note length, dynamics, adding notes in the upper harmonics, you can make an accompanying note sound as if it is quieter than the melody, even though it is not, or make your listener hear a note your are not playing (this last one, again, is a psychoacoustical affect; you can drop a note in a harmonic series, and the listener hears it as if it is still there. this is how opera singers are able to sing over the orchestra: they dont. as i understand, you just hear the top harmonics and your mind fills in the bottom). as far as pitch variation, the reeds in a concertina only stay in pitch within a certain range. players such as tim collins, noel hill, and mrs. crotty purposely hit notes to make them flat, which changes the tone colour, which makes them sound in tune. it is precisely because the concertina is so difficult that it can be a very serious instrument. i play the flute, which is intensely difficult to get a sound out of, but i view the concertina as being much more difficult, overall this is because, as you state, the concertina can be so easy to play--you just pull and a note comes out. the ease soon disappears, however, as one tries to gain control over the bellows, and to learn how to control the tone color of all the reeds (all 60 reeds act differently, and need to be treated differently to coax a different sound out). i find it much easier to sit in front of a mirror for a few hours and figure out how to get that new tone color out of your flute than to figure out how the heck to use your arms and shoulders to make a concertina produce that new effect, when all it seems to do is want to play the same sound, regardless. i would like to say that your idea of virtuoso is very limited and moot. if someone is only a virtuoso because they have more variations in pitch, tone color and dynamics, than classical violinists are not as virtuosic as hindustani musicians. i think, for example, that heifetz playing the paganini caprices is very virtuosic, , but according to your criteria, i would say that ravi shankar's playing-- --is much more exemplifying of virtuosity, as ravi uses much more variations in pitch, tone color, dynamics, rhythm, and melody--in fact, ravi is using notes and variations in pitch, microtones, which do not even exist in classical music. however, your definition of virtuosity is inaccurate, as heifetz's music does not require him to go for the same constant fluctuation of pitch and expressiveness. heifetz is amazing, just as ravi shankar is, because of the effect that they can create in the instrument, through their limited instruments and limited styles (if heifetz started to do some of what ravi was doing, he would sound horrible, because it would be inappropriate, and vice versa). when you get right down to it, willie clancy, noel hill, heifetz and ravi shankar are all equally expressive, equally virtuosi, equally moving, and equally complex, if you look beyond the mere technical aspects and look at the feelings they are trying to express, the amount of time, passion, and dedication they have given to their arts, and the sublimely profound effect they have on their audience. seeing ravi shankar live was overwhelming. barely unable to walk, he was able to take several thousand people and get us all on the same wave length, entwined in his sense of tension and emotional story telling, only using his instrument. beethoven's 9th symphony had the same effect on me, and in my opinion, hearing noel hill play tabhair dom do lamh live is equally overwhelming and emotionally impactful--i want to burst into tears every time the piece ends, because i dont want it ever to stop, just as i want the 4th movement of beethoven's sympthony to last forever. this is because the true virtuoso is not constrained by their instrument, but transcends it, to reach directly to the listeners mind through his or her ears, and play with the expectations and reactions of the audience like it is putty. great painters do it. great musicians do it. great actors do it. great authors do it. the medium is irrelevant. that being said, i dont even thing virtuosity is important. perlman is a virtuoso, but not my cup of tea. i prefer joshua bell or heifetz, regardless of who is the better violinist. in fact, most times, i would really prefer to listen to a nice old lady from ireland, scratching away on a fiddle, and telling me stories about her life than listen to a virtuoso of any sort. there Beautifully said, Thanks, Dana

There is more going on than porous absorber effect. The sound pressure also sees the whole chamber as an attempt at a resonator and imparts energy to the walls, flexing them in any way that can respond to the vibrations at any resonance close to the frequencies present in the wave form. Hard surfaces tend to reflect the sound and have higher frequency resonances than softer/ more flexible surfaces which also lose energy in flexing causing damping. Since Harold Herrington noticed a real difference, I think that it would point to some mechanism that is not so wavelength dependent as the porous absorber effect. Lots of possibilities, I don't know which is right, but empirical experiment generally trumps theory. Dana Dana

I would think so though the effect may be nil to minor depending on your instrument. Most hybrid makers have all wood chamber parts while traditional concertinas use the bellows frame gasket chamois for that part of the chamber enclosure. I would think that the addition of leather surfacing or alteration to rougher surfaces would have far less sound dampening effect on a vintage concertina than on a hybrid. HH's concertinas *do* have reed chambers, as do all other hybrids. They are constructed differently, and might appear to be quite different from traditional concertinas, but they are there. -- Rich -- Harold once told me about trying lined chambers to cut the high overtones with some success in his experiments, it should make a noticeable difference on any concertina. Mind you this is a way to turn a poor situation into a better one, but when ever you start subtracting energy from the reed's output, you start to affect their quickness to speak. Better to increase the lower overtones and fundamental rather than reduce the high overtones. Same tone balance, but now the concertina is more responsive rather than less. Most Hybrids I've heard tend to lose the strength of the fundamental and the lower overtones the lower in pitch you go. Some are still pretty good, others are dreadful. An area worth some work. Dana

When Noel plays long passages with a drone note ( not a drone button ) he generally rearranges his fingering to allow all the melody notes on the draw,( like the place in the Bucks you mention ) and or alternates between the Press and Draw versions of the drone note. He most commonly does this on the Middle D (left hand ) and uses either the one on the Middle row, or the alternate he usually has ( depending on the concertina he is playing ) on the lowest button of the G row. The concertinas he commonly plays at concerts / classes etc, don't have drone keys. As for the back beat tapping, I don't know what Mary does, but Noel uses whichever note/ button is in the correct direction for the tune at hand. Again most commonly done with the draw and press middle D. It takes a bit of time to get to where this is automatic and doesn't have to be planned out in advance, but is worth taking the time to learn. I had a C/G with a drone button converted from a C to a D, but found it no more effective than the above mentioned methods, and still involved needing to arrange the fingering in one direction to avoid the break in the note with a change in bellows direction which sounds a little clunky as compared to simply dispensing with the drone when the fingering doesn't work well with it. Some other style of playing might take advantage of a drone button better, but I found it a waste of a button on a concertina and don't offer them on mine. I found that by learning to use any button for a drone effect opened up a lot of musical possibilities that I use all the time now ( always in moderation ) If you really want a good long drone throughout a tune for a special effect, you might try what Grey Larsen has done using one of those harmoniums for accompaniment. it has the advantage of being able to have the drone be a separate volume level from the melody for better balance. I can't quite remember, but I think Grey had it set up so he could operate the thing with his foot, and it was just set with one note open. Been to long since I saw him. Dana

First thing Noel taught us was a few scales and then tunes to go with them. The scales helped us get over the hurdle of remembering the bellows direction and helped to familiarize our fingers with the Keys we were playing. Treat your scales like tunes and do them a couple times before playing other tunes or tunes in the key you are learning. Soon you'll be speedy at them and will find it much easier to learn the new tunes since you won't have to be searching so much for the notes. YOu don't have to put hours into it, just a little bit each time until you are relatively comfortable in the key. Then things take care of themselves. Dana

Years ago I experimented on a reed hardening it to a point where it would snap if bent very far. I slowly de-tempered it eventually to the point where it could be easily bent and stay bent. through out this process, it's pitch didn't change even though it's metallurgical properties changed a great deal. Stress relieving, work hardening, evening out it's bending curve all may effect the reed's tone, but since much of the spectrum of the reed is due to the non sinusoidal component of it's vibration caused primarily by the effect of the air flow accelerating the reed in half it's cycle and retarding it on the other. exactly how these metallurgical changes affect this isn't at all clear to me. There could as easily be a "bedding" phenomenon going on between the reed shoe and the wood. Certain ideas may seem obvious, that doesn't make them correct. Decent experiments are required to validate any hypothesis. Beyond that, it is worth knowing that if you buy a concertina that sounds a little harsh when new it will likely sound much better after a good bit of playing where one that sounds suitably mellow from the start may become dull with playing. You don't need to know why to make use of the phenomenon. Dana

When I finish a concertina, I spend a lot of time playing it to make sure there are no defects I can perceive and to limber up the bellows a bit. I usually notice a slight change in tone towards less harshness during this process, effecting the most played reeds more than lesser played ones. Any suggestion I have regarding how this happens is total speculation so I won't go into it. However since I offer touch up tuning of my instruments after a year of playing, I've had the opportunity to hear how they have changed over that length of time, and since I pick them up fresh, I don't have the time to adjust to them to break myself in so to speak. Invariably I find they are all "sweeter" and less harsh in tone. I often have new and older instruments to compare. My instruments are remarkably similar in tone now, with much less variation than I have noticed in other makers instruments. There are differences between them, but you have to listen to them very carefully together to hear the differences. The difference I hear to one that has been well played for a year or more is quite easy to distinguish from a new one, so I would be inclined to discount the player getting used to their instrument as being the result of better tone quality though any player worth their salt will pay attention to how their playing influences the music. Dana

I haven't gotten a look inside a Rochelle or a Jackie yet, but it sounds as though they are constructed with typical accordion style reed banks, in which case it is easy to see why the extra size. My point was that all the other concertina makers who use accordion reeds have been able to fit them into a substantially smaller package without undue strain by dumping the accordion style reed banks and switching to a surface mounted layout with the reed plates fixed atop chambers. Wim has done this as well as far as I know. It isn't particularly harder to make this type reed pan / action board than it is to make the reed banks to mount on a separate action ( pad ) board, just a different style that gives better volume and response for a concertina ( also works pretty well in the Castagnari Accordion models with the flat mounted reeds ). I won't presume that Wim didn't have good reasons for choosing this type of design over others he'd already done, I would just like to know what they were.

The only thing I haven't ever been able to figure out is why since Wim designed many good hybrid 30 button concertinas of the more or less standard around 6" size, and that since all the other hybrids manage to fit the requisite number of reeds pretty easily into the small 6" box, why Wim designed the thing so big??? The large bellows makes it harder to play even if everything else is fine. Perhaps the Chinese weren't into any big re tooling. You do get a lot more for your money than with a Stagi, but It isn't the construction that makes it cheap ( unlike the Stagi) but being made in China. Perhaps Wim didn't want to undercut his other hybrids with an instrument that was nearly as good for a much lower price. Dana

My Bb/F Jeffries is a dream to play and easier than my C/G Jeffries was before I sold it. (One whole tone isn't going to make as much difference as the quality of the particular instrument ) Noel's Bb/F Jeff may have been a leaky one and hard to play for that reason. I've heard him say the same of one of his C/G Linotas for that reason. Bellows diameter also figures into the equation as well as the strength of the reeds involved. Concertinas of the same pitch can have heavy or light reeds (as well as shorter or longer and narrower and wider ones ). Light reeds play very easily but can't support as much overall volume. Heavier reeds take a little more work in a concertina of equally fortuitous construction, but can reach greater volume before they start to go flat. Other things like the shaping of the inside of the window in the reed shoe can contribute to a sense of ease or stiffness in playing. I find except for really low notes,( below the low G on a violin ) that pitch correlates more with speed of response than strength required to play. Dana

I remember once seeing someone really fan the instrument ( a Clare model Dipper ) he literally opened only half of the bellows and did it with a twisting motion of his wrist. More like opening a book. he was able to get good control of the short quick notes, but lost the use of half the bellows. Older and very flexible bellows can be controlled by a little bit of fanning which forces the flexing of the bellows to one side only. If it can flop back and forth you lose responsiveness since the flopping itself doesn't accomplish any air pressure changes. With a good set of bellows there is no need for it. On the clip (Boy is that an old one!) of Noel, on first glance it looks like he is fanning the bellows, but that is due primarily to the hand angle during playing when nearly closed and an old bellows that not easy to keep under control. If you watch when he gets more extension, it is not by fanning but by drawing the ends apart in parallel. On the press the bellows itself becomes more of an "S" shape from it's lack of firmness. When Noel isn't playing instruments with old floppy bellows, he tends to keep the motion pretty much back and forth not fanning. He is always correcting people for that in class. To fan or not to fan isn't as important as to control the bellows. simply allowing them to have their way when you press and draw will take away much of your responsiveness. In general for either way of playing, the less extended your bellows are the more responsive the instrument, but you need to open it enough so you always have enough air, so it is a compromise. Some tunes need a bit of planning ahead if you know you are going to have a long passage with a lot of presses or draws, but most of the time a few inches of extension is all that is needed once you master the use of the air valve.

I think there is a large difference between the Week long intensive classes Noel gives here in the states than the workshops other players give at things like Irish Arts Week or other venues. If you were to start out as a complete beginner with nearly any teacher, they would teach you their way of playing and the notes they used. If you go to Noel's school, presumably you want to learn what he has to offer. His "System" is not what you get the first year you are there, but the bare bones of it. It gives you a good foundation with the instrument which is not easy to get a handle on right away with all the choices of buttons and direction changes. Once you have a good foundation in any system, the next thing you do is to learn how to make it work in all situations. Now you start with a set of guidelines to choosing variations in fingering and branch out from there. Noel teaches many Middle row tunes to get you familiar with that type of fingering for it's particular effect. He uses the alternate notes constantly in his playing, but always for a purpose. Having taught for many many years he understands the importance of a good foundation and that is what he tries to get across in his classes. One thing worth noting is that Noel didn't start out with the fingering he uses now. He developed it to accomplish certain goals that came from dissatisfaction with the earlier method and it's shortcomings. As such, he has solid reasoning to back up his choices. ( including the press high D on the left ) I've heard Noel "dis" some players, and praise highly others who played entirely differently. It had nothing to do with their fingering style, but with the Musical choices they make. If anything, what upsets him most is people treating the music with a lack of respect. I have been playing and teaching Noel's "style" of playing for some years now and also have had classes with other teachers of different styles of playing the better to help students who were looking for something different. What I have noticed is that most of the styles are self consistent regarding phrasing and bellows direction. Styles that typically use the high draw D on the right as their primary D tend to be the inverse of Noel's regarding the notes on the scale close to that. They all make sense and are outgrowths of some principle of playing like doing G tunes primarily on the G row or some such thing. But each way of playing effects and colors the music one way or another. O'Raghaillaigh's (sp?) playing makes a certain set of chords the easiest to play and those are different from the ones Noel's system makes most practical. With a solid grounding in Noel's playing I found little difficulty in switching fingering to another system because I was already used to switching my fingering to get the effects I was looking for which is the whole point. I spend a good part of my classes demonstrating the different results you get by making fingering choices, and how to use them to best effect. If you want to play like Noel, take his classes and listen to what he says. His "rules" eventually open things up, not close them off. If you want to sound like Mary MacNamara or O'Raghaillaigh, Chris Droney or Tim Collins or any of the other great players out there go to them and do what they tell you. Once you have a solid foundation then you can branch off. Without some solid foundation you will find it very hard to be a really good player. Some people do find Noel arrogant. I don't happen to be one of them, If you are someone who wants to go to his classes and ignore what he has to teach you, he might rub you the wrong way. I've seen that happen too and it ends up being a waste of everybody's time. I also agree with Larry that there are some people who put Noel on a pedestal and mistake his insistence in class that you attempt to learn what he has to offer, for an assertion that there is only one right way to play. (instead of a right way to play in class ) But I have not found that to be his attitude. Dana

I passed on Fiadhna's e-mail address to you in your personal mailbox here. Do with it as you like. Dana

I was under the impression that Single jigs were epitomized by tunes like "Off She Goes" which while having some similarities to slides in that both make more use of quarter notes than is common in double jigs, slides are played quite differently with more emphasis on the first note of each group of three eighth notes and much less on the next two giving the tune nearly a 4/4 feel to it out of the 12/8 time where Single jigs tend to emphasize the eighth note after the quarter where the Long-short Long-short pattern is in effect, giving it much more of a three note orientation. almost as if it were 3/8 time. I played New England contras for many years and found the switch to Irish rhythms instead of their Americanized versions quite a challenge, While the tunes are written out the same way, they sure aren't played the same over there. I wont' pretend to be an expert on definitions, but while you can play slides as Jigs and often visa versa, Tunes written originally as slides take advantage of the emphasis placement in slides and seem to make a bit more musical sense when played that way. My opinion only, Dana

Is Fiadhna ( Feena )McEvoy there now? last I herd she was in that neck of the woods, though I'd also heard her Jeffries was in need of repair. She's a great player and a good teacher as well. Not as heavy handed as O'Raghallaigh but similar style. Like some of the best players, she grew up with the stuff, so her knowledge of the music is pretty good. Don't have her address there but you ought to be able to track her down. Dana

Tuning isn't difficult, but you can very easily ruin a reed, so knowing what you are doing is really kind of important. I'll leave Dave Elliot's suggestion for resources as a good path to take. It really helps to remember that the smaller the reed the less material you need to remove to effect it. For the highest reeds the amounts are microscopic, less than dust. Plucking a reed only gives a vague reference to it's actual pitch in a concertina since the plucked overtone series is not the same as the one the reed plays when air driven, and makes the reed "sound" sharper than it really is. Most important, if a reed shoe is not firmly seated in it's slot in the reed pan, the reed will play flatter than if it is firmly in place, so be sure your reeds are tight before you go tuning them at all. A change in the reed's "set" (the amount it sits above the window in the reed shoe at rest ) will also affect it's pitch so make sure that is right first. Info on that sort of stuff should be in that book. Lastly, the reed will play a different pitch in the fully assembled concertina than out of it, so all tuning out of the concertina should be RELATIVE to the amount the reed is off in the concertina when it is played at the normal playing pressure. Never try to tune a reed out of the concertina to a specific note on a meter. Once in a while you'll be lucky and that will stay the same when it is back together, but much more often it will be a number of cents different. ( sorry, I am a maker, not just a player ) Dana

Why? it is one less edge to telegraph through. Nothing against leather panel covers, but I am not sure what the problem is with butterflies if they are done properly. Dana

That was the same instrument he played on those tracks on The Irish Concertina. The C/G Noel brings to class is a great instrument, but is a bit leaky, has some worn lever pivots and isn't ideal for concerts. He usually brings one or two others that are in better playing shape for class concerts and any others he has scheduled. For cutting through, his D/A is pretty good. Dana

Noel has a good number of great concertinas including a C#/ G# and the afore mentioned Ab /Eb. We did a bunch of recording one year and one of the tracks got messed up after he'd gone back home to Ireland. The next year we tried to do it over again only to discover that it had been done on the C# /G# the year before! Great pity because it was such a nice set of tunes. I wasn't under the impression that the C#G# had been retuned from a C/G. It would have been easier for Tony to tune down and less destructive to the instrument. He's often played with Frankie Gavin and I believe some of his recordings with Tony McMann are done on that instrument as well. I'd never get in a tuning contest with Noel. My instrument might be Possibly more exact when it comes to matching equal temperament, but his concertina would sound better. I use his advice now in tuning my instruments. He does have an incredible ear. Dana

A domestic oven can reach the temperature required for tempering. I have successfully heat treated home made cutting tools by heating to cherry red then quenching, followed by tempering in the oven to a dark straw shade. For cutting tools I like the light (file hard ) to dark straw shades depending on what I am wanting to cut. (Light straw for metal dark straw for wood) but for reeds I feel these colors are still too brittle and prefer the purple flecked with blue stage, which is in the upper range for spring tempering which is after all what reeds are, not cutting tools. I can't get my oven ( except in the cleaning cycle ) to get hot enough to do this but other suggestions given especially the sandwich method which makes the heating more controlable is a good one. Regarding how hot to heat metal for the hardening stage, different alloys require different temperatures. This first stage is called normalizing, where all the constituents of the alloy are "dissolved" in the metal. High carbon steels like the 1095 spring steel normally used for reeds only need to be heated to about 1450 to 1500 Degrees F. which is an orangeish red color to reach the normalizing temperature. with a quench from there. I prefer oil for quenching really high carbon steels since they are a little crack prone when quenched in water. Reed steel is so thin that oil quenching is plenty fast enough. Tool steels with chromium or tungsten in them need much higher temps with high speed steel getting into the white range above 2000 degrees F. If you heat spring steels that hot, you will lose so much carbon that the outside will become quite soft ( unless you do it in an inert atmosphere ). Even in tool steels you often have to grind off the surface de-carburized layer to get to the truly hard surface after hardening. All this is just for reference sake since starting with spring tempered steel ( clock spring, spring tempered band saw blade, chain saw springs or the like will make workable reeds without any heat treatment whatsoever. I prefer harder tempered spring steels since they retain their set better than the softer ones but they are harder to file. Blue tempered shim stock is something that is available to places that supply machine shops and the like and works quite well. The alloy is right and the temper is relatively easy to file. Regarding fitting reeds, what is required is practice and you'll find a hand lens or low quality stereo microscope for geology (10-20X )incredibly helpful if you plan on doing any number of reeds. If you are going into the biz, get a really good geology type microscope. It will be much easier on your eyes for the hundreds or thousands of reeds you'll do. While there are special tools that make fitting reeds easier, you generally have to have them made at fair expense. Not worth it for someone who isn't making concertinas for a living. Practice works pretty well and comes a lot cheaper.