Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tony

  1. tony

    summer sale

    I could be interested in an English. What do you have?
  2. Now that's a strange looking EC. It only seems to have three columns of button plus an odd one at the top and it has a full hand strap as opposed to thumb straps.
  3. What Dirge said. I play a lot of melody only on my 46 key Maccann and there is very little I can’t play providing I have the dots.
  4. Popup menues don't work in IE9, they used to. Is this down to C.net or MS?

  5. You can verify from the pics of the concertina for sale that it has no low E in the LH. To make it easy, the names of the notes are on the heads of the keys, the LH end is shown in pic no 12 (only). Diagrams of 39-key Maccann key layouts in Maccan's own New Instruction Method and Gaskins chording book on concertina.com show no E, though Gaskins' wording gives some indication that this may not apply to every specific instrument. Every 46-key I have seen has this E, and it is shown in the diagrams in the same books mentioned above, though I think some early models may lack it. Yes Ivan, I think you are right. The attachments are not very good but you can probably see there is no low E in either the 39 or 47 Key.
  6. Why on earth would someone "mainly interested in playing single line tunes" buy a duet concertina? Why not? It has a number of advantages over an EC or an anglo and the Maccann goes a good way to having the best of both.
  7. I couldn’t possibly agree with you Ivan. The “white keys” as you call them are identical on the 39 key as are on the 46 key with the exception that the high notes E,F and G in the right hand of the 39 key are missing. The 39 key plays very well in the keys of G and D, so if you are into Irish music and are not happy with the anglo then this could be the instrument for you.
  8. 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
  9. Noooo! Not for English music. That's one opinion I suppose. Remember it is chromatic and, if like me, one likes to play from the written music, without having to transpose, blah, blah, blah.
  10. Hi halimium, I have a B/C box you can have a look at if you're anywhere near Birmingham. I don't use it these days since I went over to a CBA.
  11. That's not the way I'd play the piano either... Neither would I. Many do though. How would you play a PA or CBA or even a melodeon?
  12. Another factor is that a 48-button Crane is quite useful, while I believe that Maccann players don't usually recommend a Maccann with less than 57 buttons. Now that’s not true Daniel, some may but they are probably the ones attempting to play it like a piano, that is to say harmony in the left hand and melody in the right hand. Some of us, especially when we play the smaller instruments, play it the way it was designed to be played.
  13. The contact details at the bottom are given as: William Stamp Unit 1 Avalon Park Bancombe Road Business Park Somerton Somerset TA11 6SB United Kingdom Phone: 01458273813 Email: sales@gbcyclesltd.co.uk Has anyone tried contacting them to see what they say about it?
  14. Not sure I agree with that - I am a learner and slow sight reader, but I tend to play by a mixture of relating the lines to a button, and the interval. I think I play faster and more smoothly when my brain gets into "interval" mode, and I have to stop and think to actually name a note. And I am not a singer - I haven't sung since school days. Just goes to show, perhaps, we all have different ways. Malcolm Yes, but with enough practice that may go. You will probably see the dot/interval, hear the sound with your inner ear and press the key.
  15. Let me put the question: If you're learning to play the concertina, why should you need to be able to read music independently of the concertina? I'm a very poor sight-reader, so I've thought a lot about sight-reading. And sight reading has two aspects: 1. The ability to name the notes on the lines and spaces, recognise the durations of the notes, count out the time signature, recognise which notes are sharped or flatted according to the key signature, identify the chord that a group of notes represents, notice whether the notes represent a waltz or a minuet, etc., etc. All this I can do! 2. The ability to see a dot (or dots) on the stave and immediately finger the associated keys (or frets or buttons or holes) on an instrument. This is something I cannot do! It's something that you're supposed to learn at piano lessons, but I lacked the motivation back then. I have a good ear, and any music that I want to play, I can play by ear. Over the years, I've learnt to "spell out" the notation slowly and laboriously on several instruments - piano and mandolin mainly - but this is not sight-reading as most understand it. The instrument I've had most success at sight-reading for is the Crane Duet. Which makes my point: sight-reading is different for each instrument (unless they have a common layout, like piano, harpsichord and synthesiser, or violin and mandolin). The allocation of dot to fingering is even different for the different concertina types. What you can learn by singing along with a song-book is the note durations (minim, crotchet, quaver if you're English; whole, quarter and eighth notes if you're American), and the time signatures. This is only part of the skill of sight reading - and for me as a singer the easiest part - and there's no substitute for practical training of eye/finger coordination. BTW, intervals are useful mainly for us singers, who are pitch-independent. We define a tune as a sequence of intervals from one note to the next. For instrumentalists, a tune is a sequence of notes. Each dot represents a note, and this note calls for a finger position. What I know I should be doing is getting this two-stage association down to one stage: each dot maps to a finger position, without thinking about what the note is called! Hope you get better at it than I did! Cheers, John This is spot on. Many years ago I had to learn to touch type on a QWERTY keyboard, which is just the same as point 2 above. In the beginning I thought it was never going to happen for me but in the end I qualified at 50 wpm. When you first start the eye sees the character you want to type which registers with the brain which in turn works out which finger to use , this all takes time but eventually you learn to bypass the conscious part of the mind and the signal from the eye passes directly to the finger. My wife amazes me when I see her typing; she can copy type from a document and hold a conversation at the same time. If you want to learn to sight read/touch type you have to put the time in. In my humble opinion it will pay enormous dividends in the long run. Have fun.
  16. OK Dirge, thanks for that, I'm up to date now. I'm still a Maccann player though.
  17. This is probably one of the Maccann copies that Wheatstone made after the Maccann patent had expired. I seem to remember reading that Wheatstone’s first published price list for a duet was around 1910. I may be wrong about this though. I think Wheatstone did publish a price list for a Double Duet around 1850, but that's a different animal altogether. “Fine-quality Maccann-system instruments were also made by Wheatstone & Co. after Maccann's patent expired in 1898, but Wheatstone never used Maccann's name to describe them“. http://www.concertina.com/maccann-duet/
  18. If this is true then Maccann could hardly de described as a thief: "This 'Duette' system of Wheatstone's was resurrected and enlarged by 'Professor' MacCann of Plymouth in the 1880s: he designed and patented an enlarged keyboard, and persuaded both the Wheatstone and Lachenal companies to produce the instrument as the 'McCann Duet'. These were made with up to eighty-one keys, and many examples can be seen in the Wheatstone and Lachenal sections of the C[oncertina] M[useum] Collection." The same article is available online at Neil Wayne's website (www.free-reed.co.uk), but in the ONLINE version the paragraph says: "This 'Duette' system of Wheatstone's was resurrected and enlarged by 'Professor' McCann of Plymouth in the 1880s: he designed and patented an enlarged keyboard, and persuaded both the Wheatstone and Lachenal companies to produce the instrument as the 'McCann Duet'. These were made with up to eighty-one keys, and many examples can be seen in the Wheatstone and Lachenal sections of the C M Collection." http://www.concertina.net/bg_maccann_spelling.html The keyboard of the Wheatstone Duet and the Maccann Duet are considerably different and this is probably why the Wheatstone failed and the Maccann succeeded. Dirge, to describe yourself as a Wheatstone Duet player would, therefore, make you somewhat unique, which I’m sure you are but not necessarily in this context. I shall continue to refer to myself as a Maccann player. Have fun
  19. What I'm uncomfortable with is it's my impression is that he was a bit of a ne'er do well and up for the main chance; and it seems likely that this was a bit of fraud on his part; don't know where foresight comes into it really, he just found a way of extracting money from Lachenals under false pretences. Dirge, Replace "ne'er do well" with "enterprising risk-taker" and you describe a huge portion of the pillars of history! Just off the top of my head -- Thomas Edison, Benjamin Franklin, Paul Revere, and, of course, Christopher Columbus. That puts Maccan in pretty lofty company! B And more recently, what about Bill Gates? http://apple-history.com/gui
  20. Yes Dirge, but you have to admire his foresight and that alone may justify calling yourself, and me, a Maccann player.
  21. Thanks Jim, you put it a little more eloquently than I.
  22. Not seen one before but my engineering experience suggests that the “U” shaped pieces at each end of the reed plate are wedges. If so you should be able to press them out thereby releasing the reed plate. A pair of thin nosed pliers, one side against the pin and the other against the wedge, and a gentle squeeze may suffice.
  23. I don’t have a Crane, I sold it a long time ago, but I do have a Maccann which you are welcome to come and try. I also live in the West Midlands.
  • Create New...