Boney

Typing is much more like playing a single-line melody on the English, I think, what with the letters of words distributed between both hands. Also, rhythm is not important and there are no dynamics. Well, some play the concertina that way too...

Here's a detailed picture:

She is only 16, a lot of kids are skinny at that age. Here's a larger version: http://dakota-fanning.org/gallery/albums/clippings/VogueItalia/DakotaVogueItaliaScanFeb2010008.jpg

I tend to use the fingering David describes as a "home" position, but I also use the little fingers on both hands a lot. Doing so makes Klezmer scales in several keys quite accessible. It's also very useful for playing more than one note at a time, like runs of parallel thirds, or playing four-part harmonies with two parts in either hand. And of course for playing chords or scales that don't fit in the core keys of the 46-key instrument. Or really, whenever I feel it just works better. I find I keep my three longer fingers curved more than the little one, so they line up pretty well. But my pinkie can get tired if I play a tune that uses it a lot. I also suspect a layout with the keys parallel to the handrest would be better for me, and possibly a bit of a curve would be ideal.

Nice, thanks for the recording!

Thinking? What are you thinking about? You need to know your instrument and the tune you're playing well before you can play it at speed. Think of touch typing at a keyboard. You don't think about where each letter is.

Note: This thread is SEVEN YEARS OLD, some posters may no longer be following it.

I have heard this said on occasion too, but I don't believe that it's correct. No, they're quite different. In addition to what was said above, the button spacing is also better on the Rochelle, and the air button is much more accessible.

Thanks! I entered it and couldn't help reformatting it: X:1 T:Hommage à Gilles Laprise C:Philippe Bruneau Q:1/4=75 R:Reel M:4/4 L:1/16 K:D fga2-aagf egfe fgaf | dfed efge cAde fgag | fga2-aagf egfe fgaf | dfed efge cAdf ecd2 :| |: AAAf edB2-BBBg fea2 | aaAf edcA ceag egfa | fdAf edB2-BBBg fea2 | aaAf edcA ceag ecd2 :|

Ooops, I thought it meant they weren't wearing underwear.

Hint: look for a long shot up to a balcony, and a metal-ended box. Fun tunes and a good time, much better than most in-joke flash mob stuff. See the concertina just a bit after 2:30:

The Ballad of St. Anne's Reel. The version I heard was by Tommy Makem & Liam Clancy. http://www.emusic.com/album/Tommy-Makem-and-Liam-Clancy-The-Makem-and-Clancy-Collection-MP3-Download/11421397.html

Why not on the back side of the fretwork?

Maybe it means "high pitch," as in, above A440, but still approximately a fifth below a C/G box. Hm, maybe not though, if it's 5-7/8" across.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Check out this interview with Caleb Clauder, who plays very traditional old-time fiddle tunes with Foghorn Stringband and who also has an old-fashioned country band, and Joel Savoy, who is a big name in traditional Cajun music. They each talk about their influences, how many different kinds of music they like, and how they think of music as a living tradition, not something they're "preserving." They obviously aren't excluding folks or trying to create a "slavish copy of what has already been done." There's a bit of Caleb's country band here, then the part of the interview I'm talking about: http://www.kexp.org//streamarchive/archive_time.asp?fldDate=7/7/2010&fldHour=7&fldMinute=37&fldAmPm=pm Here's a bit of what Joel said:

I don't think most people use the term "pure drop" the way you are. I think of it as referring to playing in a traditional style, without overt jazz, rock, or other more "pop" influences. That doesn't mean the music can't be creative and innovative. And I'd say many people into the "hard-core" traditional style (whatever you want to call it) use their ears a lot more than you're implying. They will accept music played on many non-standard instruments -- even if they seem crotchety and skeptical, they love to be proven wrong as well. Sure, there are all kinds out there, but I've found the most experienced and knowledgeable are usually that way. Is it possible you're simplifying things a bit yourself?

Well, that came across as pretty over-the-top to me, Shaun...maybe you're just blowing off steam? This thread has had some interesting thoughts posted lately, and it seems clear that even Azalin is prepared to be convinced that an English concertina can play Irish traditional dance tunes to a high standard. People will play with whom they want to. That's necessarily selective. Yes, I've seen some long-time players suspicious of newcomers, especially if they play "certain" instruments. But I've always seen the newcomers welcomed if they were respectful, could play well, and fit in with the session. You can't force it, if others don't want to play with you, you can always start your own group. In every endeavor you will have to struggle with ego, ignorance, entitlement and the like...I really don't think traditional music is worse than others in that respect.

Some are less sensitive, but once started, the reeds tend to keep going even under low pressure. You can try starting a note or chord at normal volume, then almost immediately taking practically all pressure off the bellows. You might need to simplify your arrangement with longer tones to get this to work well. But, the "limitations" of an instrument often lead to interesting and creative sounds that you wouldn't otherwise discover!

Yes, this is a big and interesting question to me. I think a good way to start is just by doing what's as simple as possible that sounds good. A systematic approach can be useful too, but I feel like too many people use standard chords and theory as a substitute for their own ear and experimenting. If you can strike a balance between both, that's great. I may be naive, but I feel like so many musicians (even amazing ones) are too stuck on a "what chord goes where" mindset. Some Anglo players come up with interesting, somewhat quirky arrangements partially because they don't think in a rigid chord structure. I get that feeling from Alan Day's playing, for example. Anyway, I'd like to hear other thoughts and approaches. I like to steal ideas from as many people as possible.

That is a huge question, people study lifetimes and write books about it. But for me, the simple answer is, if you're playing by yourself, just experiment and find what sounds good. If you're playing with others, find what chords they're using, and use their chords (or select notes from them that sound good to you). The more you do both of those things, the better you'll get at them, but it'll probably take a while.

Er, is that what you're getting from this thread? Quite reasonable.

The "swing" rhythm of a hornpipe means that if it's written like the first measure below, it's played more like the second: Although the "swing" would often not be that strong...instead of a 2-1 ratio, maybe more like a 3-2, depending on who's playing it. There are other properties hornpipes tend to share. Some of them aren't so easy to put into words. They tend to have a "bouncy" feel to the melody. Each phrase tends to end on three strong quarter notes, often the same note (or some variation on that feel). Tunes in G are more likely than usual to have a C# in them, and tunes in D more likely to have a C-natural. Players often turn eighth-note pairs into triplets as a variation, often in long runs. And other stuff you start to get a feel for when you hear lots of them played.

Wow, check out the copious liner notes, with a lot of information on bandoneon history, keyboard layouts, techniques, etc: http://www.folkways.si.edu/albumdetails.aspx?itemid=2320

Maybe he copied it from someone instead of buying it.

I tend to do this when playing...normally Exactly...that's why I put "exercise" in quotes. I feel it's less an exercise than what I should be doing, but it feels like an exercise because it's not an approach I'm used to. Although silence can work in a group setting, I think.