Middle row versus Inner row

[Robin Harrison]

I was going to add this to Michael Sam Wild's topic, Anglo Accompaniment but think it is interesting enough to have it's own topic.

Anglo Irishman posted this.....

the key of the middle row IMO offers the easiest and most interesting arrangements

 

I wonder if this is true ?

It is cetainly true for me at the moment due to my greater familiarity of the middle row......... I haven't spent as much time using the inner row.

I aspire (and perspire) to be as adept on the inner row as I am on the middle row. Is anything missing from the inner row to prevent one from doing on the inner row what one does on the middle row? ( I play a 38 keyed instrument)

 

Is it just lack of ability ( or practise ) or a limitation of the instrument?

 

Cheers

Robin

[Lawrence Reeves]

I think it would be different with respect to the lowest button, and may vary based on Jeffries vs Lachenal/ Wheatestone. On most Jeffries based fingering charts you have a low A / B on lowest button of the inner row. And, on the middle row you have low C / G, giving the ability to play a low G as either a push or pull. On some concertinas the inner row gives a D on the pull of lowest button as opposed to a low A. Your chord shapes and patterns will not transfer across the rows.

[bill_mchale]

I was going to add this to Michael Sam Wild's topic, Anglo Accompaniment but think it is interesting enough to have it's own topic.

Anglo Irishman posted this.....

the key of the middle row IMO offers the easiest and most interesting arrangements

 

I wonder if this is true ?

It is cetainly true for me at the moment due to my greater familiarity of the middle row......... I haven't spent as much time using the inner row.

I aspire (and perspire) to be as adept on the inner row as I am on the middle row. Is anything missing from the inner row to prevent one from doing on the inner row what one does on the middle row? ( I play a 38 keyed instrument)

 

Is it just lack of ability ( or practise ) or a limitation of the instrument?

 

Cheers

Robin

 

An F natural?

 

I think it depends on what you want to do and what style playing you want to emulate.

 

The biggest disadvantage, as far as I am concerned, with playing the Melody on the G row is that so much of it is played by the left hand... your right only gets to play a few notes in most tunes (on melody). Still this is the way that Chris Droney plays and I think everyone would agree that he is a great player.

 

My preferred method is to play across the rows as much as possible. My basic principle is that if a note is available the index or middle finger of either hand, then I choose to use that one unless there is a compelling reason to use one that doesn't fall under those fingers (Which happens often enough).

 

--

Bill

[Bill N]

The biggest disadvantage, as far as I am concerned, with playing the Melody on the G row is that so much of it is played by the left hand... your right only gets to play a few notes in most tunes (on melody). Still this is the way that Chris Droney plays and I think everyone would agree that he is a great player.

 

 

I've been working on a lot of Newfoundland tunes, mostly in D, on the inner row of my G/D Morse. Maybe because it is pitched lower than a C/G, I'm able to keep the melody on my right hand, reaching up into the G row for lower notes, rather than dropping down to the left hand. This presents a challenge when chording and oom-pahing with the left hand though, since the "borrowed from the G row" notes aren't always on the "right" bellows direction, if you see what I mean.

 

I've found it easier to try to play in other keys from the middle row, as it's not such a reach to the accidentals.

[hjcjones]

If you're playing "English style" then the middle row usually offers more interesting options for chords and more nice runs down the bass notes. I usually prefer to play a tune in C on the C/G or G on the G/D.

 

However, for some tunes the reverse is true. For example, I like to play "Stoney Steps" on the inner row, partly because the tune covers quite a range and it then doesn't have to go to much into the left hand, but also because it provides some nice bass notes and runs, especially in the B part. However I usually play it in D on my G/D rather than G (which it is written in) because on a C/G it reaches the high notes that only dogs can hear.

[Robert Booth]

I started out on Anglo before I found this site, or any other tutorial material, and the left hand seemed to be the most logical place to start. I found mt C and my G on their respective rows and launched from there. The inner row sounded best on the little Stagi, so I taught myself most of the basics on that row.

Trial and error showed me that I could reach up into the middle right hand for some accidentals and then continue the runs from there.

Though I have expanded since then and use the C row more often, I still prefer the mellower sound of the left hand. The G row gets a lot of excercise, as I find it to be easier to make fluid runs that contain acidentals. I've gotten to the point where I teach myself new material usually on the inner row, then try to transfer to the middle. Might be whacky but it works...prettygood... for me!

The nice thing about concertina is that there are so many alternate fingerings. It's like finding a room in your house you didn't know was there, but there it is, with furniture and everything!

[David Levine]

I don't think about rows. I play in accord with Noel Hill's system, with its default fingering system.

[Daddy John]

I don't think about rows. I play in accord with Noel Hill's system, with its default fingering system.

I don't know anything about Hill's fingering system, but, I LOVE the 20-button concertina. I discovered by trial and error that, for a 20 button, the primary row for fingering MUST be the outside row and, IMHO, the only keys worth considering are D-A or G-D. The C-G 20 button isn't as effective as the other two configurations because dance tunes often employ notes from the scale of the 5th. In other words, a tune in D Major will many times have a G# (scale of A, the fifth).

 

Originally, I think most tunes on a C-G 20 button were played in C Major or A minor. A fiddler would simply tune down a step from D to C since the concertina was in a fixed pitch. The development of standardized folk repertoires fixed in the keys of A, G & D, or their relative minors, appears to be something of a latter day revelation. It is the etching in stone of certain keys for certain tunes that has made the C-G a poor choice if it lacks a C# accidental. The fifth of G is D. The scale includes a C#. I am reasonably sure the way we play the C-G concertina today isn't like the methods used by early musicians. You play on the outside row (D on the D-A box) and use the A row for quick smooth runs in D or to play tunes in A Major. While the A row notes go too high too quickly, G-D boxes, from my experience anyway, tend to have notes that sound too slowly in the base due to the size of the metal reeds. To me, the perfect 20-button is a D-A. I have two Lachenals like that (one was a C-G that is currently being re-reeded for D-A) and I play the D-A as much or more than I do my 30-button Lachenal C-G. Why? Because you have a root scale and its dominant scale available. If I had to choose one accidental for the D-A it would be D# since that is the mssing note for E Major, dominant of A. In music I often see a dominant scale of the root key's dominant being used.

 

Anyway, from a music theory point of view, the outside row of a 20 button would be the one you wanted to use, not the inside row.

 

Daddy John

[Azalin]

In other words, a tune in D Major will many times have a G# (scale of A, the fifth).

 

May it depend on the type of music you're playing? In irish music, D major tunes with a G# are quite unfrequent. I'm sure there are, but I don't think I know any.

[Daddy John]

In other words, a tune in D Major will many times have a G# (scale of A, the fifth).

 

May it depend on the type of music you're playing? In irish music, D major tunes with a G# are quite unfrequent. I'm sure there are, but I don't think I know any.

True statement regarding Irish music, but I play American Contra Dance music and that is an amalgamation of many ethnic genres that reached America's shores, plus genres that developed here as well. You tend to get more accidentals than in Irish music. Generally, they are accidentals from the major scale of the root's fifth, and, now and then, the fifth of the root scale's fifth.

 

Daddy John

[david_boveri]

i dont think you can make blanket proclamations about which row is better.

 

here is a recording i made of winstor gallop in c: http://daiv.boveri.googlepages.com/gallopinc.mp3

 

and here is the same tune in G: http://daiv.boveri.googlepages.com/galloping.mp3 (sorry for mistakes).

 

both recordings were made only use 20 buttons. i like it in both keys. how could you say one row is better than the other?

 

i think each row offers it's advantages, but neither is better than the other. normally i am an across the rows player, but i think that learning how to play in multiple styles in multiple keys really opens up a lot of doors. take winstor gallop into the key of D on a G/D, and you'll completely change the tune (in a good way).

 

i agree--30 buttons is a must. you can get by with only twenty, but it severely limits your options. currently i'm working on playing in all 12 major keys. i can do it more or less, but will only play a few keys outside of the house right now. i'm hoping in a year or two to have them all "up and running," so to speak. you can't really do that with less than 30 buttons, and actually you can't even do it WITH 30 buttons satisfactorily, either.

[David Levine]

Some "Irish" tunes in D with a G# -

 

Chuckling in the Bunk (Josie Marsh tune)

Primrose Polka (Kilfenora Ceili Band) - composed by an Englishman but if the KCB plays it, that's good enough for me.

The Wonder Hornpipe

City of Savannah (Matt Molloy) - I haven't played this on the concertina but it's great on the flute.

[michael sam wild]

John Kirkpatrick said once that we have several instruments in an Anglo. I use my 26 button C/G along the rows or cross the rows and with or without chords depending wht i'm trying to play. Still a long way to go. I think 20 is just too few but still great for a lot of Tunes. William Kimber started with one ( 20 button not one button!). That would be monotonous but easy to play

Edited November 6, 2009 by michael sam wild

[Larryo]

I have to confess that with regards to playing Irish trad music, I have more or less failed to completely understand the cross the rows description and indeed the whole concept of Noel Hills default system. Yes I do understand that both in the past and in the present, players have favoured a certain way of playing over another, whether to facilitate certain fingering or whether to get a specific sound but even then, certain tunes will require movement to another row even if for just one note. Is playing up and down the rows exclusively only possible on a certain number of tunes or a certain number of tunes played in certain keys and can it only be practiced exclusively if one is prepared to either limit ones repertoire or the keys one plays in? So as soon as one crosses on to another row for whatever reason is it still possible to say that one is still playing up and down the rows or is that a description of a style of playing as in Donegal style of fiddle playing ?

Maybe that description is used to describe the sound that one player gets or how it is got? Obvious and most well known (to me) examples that come to mind are Chris Droney and Frank Edgely , but even looking at Franks tutorial you can see where he will advise/suggest using notes on the middle row that are available on the G row, as a way to make the tune sound better/nicer and/or to facilitate ease of playing. Kitty Hayes (R.I.P.) had a certain sound and she preferred to play mostly on the C row/and or in the key of G and C. On the other hand, in the playing of the cross the rows system, if you like to play the big D major tunes, then proficiency on the G row is essential because of the structure of most D major tunes. These tunes a lot of the time will have high D, C#, high D sequence usually, or more often than not, followed by the note of A and maybe then a F# which will require the use of the A on the G row and will sometimes also have a run going from F# through A to high D which likewise will require the ability to use the A on the G row.

Then there are certain tunes that require the use of the B on the G row (I am talking left hand here) and if you have to know how to use both of these notes -A and B - easily and at any given time, and seeing you need to use the F# on the G row, sure you might as well become proficient on the G row and learn to use all the notes there at any given time. Other tunes and types of tunes, to my mind, sound much better on the G row although they can possibly be played easier on the across the rows system. Polkas and slides come to mind. Yes they can be played across the rows but to get that lift, the G row in my opinion offers better options. There are also runs in tunes where you end up coming from the C# to a B and where B is the better played on the G row and also where there is an A coming after or shortly after or a run where there is B, C# high D (Silver Spear) where it doesnt make any sense to go back out to the middle row for the A and it is actually easier (if practiced) to go to the A on the G row, thereby playing portions of the tune in a up and down the rows style. If a player decides that he or she likes to play a certain style or predominantly play a certain type of tune then I would agree that one could classify themselves as playing a certain way but if you want to be able to play a large selection of tunes and in a large selection of keys, then surely it is more accurate to say one just simply plays the concertina?

 

Similarly with the so-called Noel Hill default system and I do not mean here to be in contradiction solely with Davids comments above. How can there be a default system in the playing of Irish music?? Yes I understand that Noel invented an efficient and easier way of teaching (especially in a class environment), a system that means everyone in the class is playing the same button and thereby eliminating all the stopping and starting and delays which come from what button should I play here type questions but to my mind as one learns it becomes a bit like a see-saw- one starts with playing a certain group of tunes using certain buttons as default but as the repertoire broadens, then the use of other buttons becomes a necessity and surely then there is no default system and one is almost level or using the different buttons equally. If for example and for argument it was possible to get classes from Noel every day for a month and in that time, again for argument, say it was possible to learn say seven hundred to a thousand tunes. Very quickly and especially if one was learning session tunes in session keys, the it would become clear that the high D for example was to be used as much on the right side and it is on the left. An example would be the Merry Blacksmith reel. This is a commonly played session tune and unless you wanted to specifically play it on the G row, it makes more sense and ease to play in starting on right side. And there are many other tunes where the exclusive use of buttons, which are classified as Noel Hill default system, buttons do not make sense. So why say there is a default system term because if it were possible, again for argument sake to shorten the learning of a thousand tunes to a week of summer school, then by weeks end the use of a term default system would be redundant and erroneous? Yes, when going to a class and learning a hand picked number of tunes in a hand picked number of keys it is possible to say very initially that there is a default system but practically speaking how long can one say that one plays in a default system? Is it more accurate to say that there is Noel Hill default system of teaching?

 

I of course respect everyones right to describe how they play in whatever terms they choose. If Chris Droney says he plays up and down the rows, then I respect his use of those words (that I admire and respect his playing goes without saying) but they dont make sense to me. Similarly if anyone wants to say they use the Noel Hill default system (and again I am not specifically referring to Davids comments) then I respect that but for me I dont believe that there is a Noel Hill default system way of playing. Teaching, yes, but playing…?No.But I could well be out of step here..again !!

Edited November 6, 2009 by Larryo

[david_boveri]

I have to confess that with regards to playing Irish trad music, I have more or less failed to completely understand the “cross the rows” description and indeed the whole concept of “Noel Hill’s default system”. Yes I do understand that both in the past and in the present, players have favoured a certain way of playing over another, whether to facilitate certain fingering or whether to get a specific sound but even then, certain tunes will require movement to another row even if for just one note. Is playing up and down the rows exclusively only possible on a certain number of tunes or a certain number of tunes played in certain keys and can it only be practiced exclusively if one is prepared to either limit one’s repertoire or the keys one plays in? So as soon as one crosses on to another row for whatever reason is it still possible to say that one is still playing “up and down the rows” or is that a description of a style of playing as in “Donegal” style of fiddle playing ?

Maybe that description is used to describe the sound that one player gets or how it is got? Obvious and most well known (to me) examples that come to mind are Chris Droney and Frank Edgely , but even looking at Frank’s tutorial you can see where he will advise/suggest using notes on the middle row that are available on the G row, as a way to make the tune sound better/nicer and/or to facilitate ease of playing. Kitty Hayes (R.I.P.) had a certain sound and she preferred to play mostly on the C row/and or in the key of G and C. On the other hand, in the playing of the “cross the rows “system, if you like to play the big D major tunes, then proficiency on the G row is essential because of the structure of most D major tunes. These tunes a lot of the time will have high D, C#, high D sequence usually, or more often than not, followed by the note of A and maybe then a F# which will require the use of the A on the G row and will sometimes also have a run going from F# through A to high D which likewise will require the ability to use the A on the G row.

Then there are certain tunes that require the use of the B on the G row (I am talking left hand here) and if you have to know how to use both of these notes -A and B - easily and at any given time, and seeing you need to use the F# on the G row, sure you might as well become proficient on the G row and learn to use all the notes there at any given time. Other tunes and types of tunes, to my mind, sound much better on the G row although they can possibly be played easier on the ”across the rows “ system. Polkas and slides come to mind. Yes they can be played across the rows but to get that lift, the G row in my opinion offers better options. There are also runs in tunes where you end up coming from the C# to a B and where B is the better played on the G row and also where there is an A coming after or shortly after or a run where there is B, C# high D (Silver Spear) where it doesn’t make any sense to go back out to the middle row for the A and it is actually easier (if practiced) to go to the A on the G row, thereby playing portions of the tune in a “up and down the rows” style. If a player decides that he or she likes to play a certain style or predominantly play a certain type of tune then I would agree that one could classify themselves as playing a certain way but if you want to be able to play a large selection of tunes and in a large selection of keys, then surely it is more accurate to say one just simply plays the concertina?

 

Similarly with the so-called Noel Hill default system and I do not mean here to be in contradiction solely with David’s comment’s above. How can there be a default system in the playing of Irish music?? Yes I understand that Noel invented an efficient and easier way of teaching (especially in a class environment), a system that means everyone in the class is playing the same button and thereby eliminating all the stopping and starting and delays which come from “what button should I play here” type questions but to my mind as one learns it becomes a bit like a see-saw- one starts with playing a certain group of tunes using certain buttons as “default” but as the repertoire broadens, then the use of other buttons becomes a necessity and surely then there is no “default” system and one is almost level or using the different buttons equally. If for example and for argument it was possible to get classes from Noel every day for a month and in that time, again for argument, say it was possible to learn say seven hundred to a thousand tunes. Very quickly and especially if one was learning session tunes in session keys, the it would become clear that the high D for example was to be used as much on the right side and it is on the left. An example would be the Merry Blacksmith reel. This is a commonly played session tune and unless you wanted to specifically play it on the G row, it makes more sense and ease to play in starting on right side. And there are many other tunes where the exclusive use of buttons, which are classified as Noel Hill default system, buttons do not make sense. So why say there is a “default system” term because if it were possible, again for argument sake to shorten the learning of a thousand tunes to a week of summer school, then by week’s end the use of a term default system would be redundant and erroneous? Yes, when going to a class and learning a hand picked number of tunes in a hand picked number of keys it is possible to say very initially that there is a “default system” but practically speaking how long can one say that one plays in a “default system”? Is it more accurate to say that there is Noel Hill default system of teaching?

 

I of course respect everyone’s right to describe how they play in whatever terms they choose. If Chris Droney says he plays up and down the rows, then I respect his use of those words (that I admire and respect his playing goes without saying) but they don’t make sense to me. Similarly if anyone wants to say they use the Noel Hill default system (and again I am not specifically referring to David’s comments) then I respect that but for me I don’t believe that there is a Noel Hill default system way of playing. Teaching, yes, but playing…?No.But I could well be out of step here..again !!

 

well, first of all, i agree with you: i would not say that chris droney or frank edgley play in the rows, but "more" in the rows. i reserve the term in the rows for players who only play in either the G or C row. my great aunt did this, and this was how my grandma's cousin (her daughter... the words are confusing, as technically my grandma's cousin is my first cousin, twice-removed) learned to play as a child. she does not remember how to play, but has a basic idea of how it was done. when she saw me play, she was very surprised. she said to me, "you use more than one row at a time!." she didn't even think this was possible, yet of course she had seen accordion players do this her whole life.

 

now to deal with noel hill's system. i would not say that there is a "default" system. what does that mean? i dont think noel would say it either, and i understand that you were only using that term because david levine did. when i read it, i knew what he meant, but thought it was a strange way of phrasing it, i would have said "proscribed fingering system" or just "noel hill's system," and then add some qualifiers. that being said, i think your understanding is inaccurate on several points. noel hill does not have a teaching system and a playing system: he teaches people how to play with the system he uses. perhaps you do not realize this because you have never taken lessons with him (extensively), but yes, if you took a lesson with him every day for months there would be definite patterns, and the "teaching" system would not break down. there is a default scale he does use (but not a default system, if you understand the difference), which is a main component of his system. every player has a default scale they use to grab for notes, if we consider a tune out of context. usually, however, one would call it the "noel hill" scale, or the scale "as i learned from noel hill," or some other descriptor. although you might think it foolish to have a scale to default to, it actually saves a lot of time and energy and planning. noel hill's system does not stop at basic scales, yet goes on to have very specific solutions to very specific problems. this is what i would call the system, not his scale, and again, i would not use the word default--if you wanted to, i would say there are specific alternate fingerings you default to in certain situations. noel hill doesn't have a teaching system AND a playing system, but rather he has a style of teaching and a style of playing, which he teaches as a system.

 

if we look at the tune you reference, noel would deal with it in a different way than you would. that is why it is a system, and not a default way of doing things--if it was default, it would be the easiest, most automatic way. this is not always the case--sometimes it is unintuitive, but if you look at things in the longer-term, they make more sense, and actually are very beneficial, solving problems which you might not yet realize exist. noel would actually start that tune on a d push on the LH side (using abc notation capitalization). from the d to the A, noel would recommend going down to the A on the third finger. this would be an alternate fingering, a fingering that is not in his scale or even on the scale charts. i would actually put that on a scale chart, marked as a non-scale, alternate fingering; i say this to further illustrate that his teaching system is separate from his playing system. the reasoning why he uses this finger are too complex to go into here, but suffice to say that this is not some "random fingering" that disproves his system, but it is rather a defining characteristic of it. the right hand d is used within the noel hill system, but not as a standard note on the scale, but rather as an alternate fingering. i would go so far as to say it is a "standard alternate fingering," insofar as it crops up very often in very specific circumstances.

 

this may all be hard to understand without dozens of examples, but give me an irish tune and i can look at it and tell you how to do it within noel's system. this does not mean there are no variations: sometimes there are multiple ways to approach the same problem, but there are certain things noel would never do, nor would he teach. for example, i have never seen him use the accidental row G and A for a melody note--EVER--and i doubt he ever does, as long as we are considering the keys of C, G, D, and A (it is very useful for Eb, and i have never studied his Eb fingering). using the pull d at the beginning of merry blacksmith is also something he would not do and would not teach, unless of course he was pulling a low D against it, by that i mean that the chord was sustained, and not just concurrent with high d. i say this to illustrate that although there are variations, it is not a free for all, and that it is very systematic.

 

noel does not teach people to play differently than he himself does play. there are of course certain things which he might not show to beginning classes because they are too difficult, but if you stay with him long enough, they will eventually come out. his system uses specific fingerings for specific notes for specific situations. when you start to use very low notes and very high notes, or play in a different key, he likewise has specific solutions he uses for these as well, which are very different than how other people would play them. for example, when playing an inverted A arpeggio (E C# A,) in the low notes, he taught us this year to use "middle", "ring", then "pinky" middle for each note respectively (all on the push). i was having trouble doing this with strong tone (though i could hit the notes no problem), so he recommended i play "middle", "ring", "ring" in that sequence, for that particular tune. this is in direct contradiction with how you would think to play it if you did not use your pinkie--you would think you would do it as "first", "middle", ring. when i asked him about this, he said, "there are a lot of times when you're going to want your middle finger on that E," showing that out of context it seems irrational, but in the long term it makes sense. this is especially striking when you consider that in the tune he was teaching, the next note was D, which meant the entire sequence as he recommended it to me was "middle, ring, ring, ring." he did not teach me to do this because it was easier for me, as clearly it is much harder, he taught me to do this because there are many times he uses the ring finger to jump between those low notes instead of the pinkie finger, and he demonstrated that he would do so in many situations. most other players would just shift down to second position and use their first finger on the E, and it is actually very beneficial in this tune. you may disagree with his fingering, but the fact remains that he taught it as he played it, and it is based on a specific pattern he uses in specific situations--in this particular case, it was actually a pattern he usually used in OTHER situations, which he applied to the one he was teaching. and if you're wondering.... yes, this is how i fingering it now! also, i do use the same fingering scheme (based on the fingering patterns of that entire tune) in many places, and will jump notes in certain ways rather than shift down at certain times.

 

this may all seem to be crazy talk... as many people think "never jump" across buttons, but i like to say, "never jump unless you mean it." take a step back, and lets look at the classroom setting. if you were learning the basic scale and were jumping in certain places, noel would correct you, and have you use an alternate note. this is not because he teaches differently than he plays, but rather he will not teach a tune he plays (even a simple one), if the decisions he makes to finger it are too difficult. i would consider jumping an intermediate to advanced technique, and definitely not a basic part of ones toolbox. i do it all the time, but only in specific instances, and only on purpose.

 

so, i hope all of this helps to illustrate why i disagree with you that his system is only applicable in basic tunes, as it is very extensive, and systematic. every year when i see him, i still learn more about his system. none of what i learn contradicts what i learned before, and the patterns pop up again and again. again, it is his system, as it is the way he himself plays, and it is so unique because most people do not solve the same problems in the same ways he does. this is why you hear so much about it--not that it is necessarily better, but so radically different. even other players who are considered across the rows (even though as i agree with you almost all modern players are across the rows) do not do many of the things he does. to repeat my earlier example, most across the rows players would use the accidental row G and A very often or at least occasionally, yet noel does not use it at all for melody notes. i personally like his system a lot, and use it as my default . i enjoy trying different fingering systems, though, and think that they all offer benefits and challenges. i also very much like the british system of playing, as taught to me by brian peters in an afternoon workshop several years ago, though i must add he taught in the rows, across the rows, and kimber style playing.

[Azalin]

for example, when playing an inverted A arpeggio (E C# A,) in the low notes, he taught us this year to use "middle", "ring", then "pinky" middle for each note respectively (all on the push).

 

But, when you follow the basic principle that your index finger should be used on the first column, second finger on the second column, etc, isn't that fingering very standard? Middle finger for the E, then third finger for the C#, which is on the third column, and pinky on the A, which is on the fourth. I am surprised to hear other people would do it differently, what is the alternative? If you start E with your index finger, then you're moving the center of your layout to the left, which might make it very hard to come back to it, and might force you to get choppy, no?

 

Nice posts!

 

EDITED: I am surprised Noel told you to go from low C# to low A with the same finger, not using the same finger for two different buttons in a row has become kind of a religion to me, so Noel is actually much less strict that I would have thought.

 

EDIT2: I realize this is what you call jumping?

Edited November 6, 2009 by Azalin

[Larryo]

This is interesting..... does that mean that say in the Merry Blacksmith that Noel would start on the high D on left side and proceed to use the G row for all notes up to E and D in the first half or is it a case of start on that high D, use A on G row and then B on middle and so on?

[david_boveri]

for example, when playing an inverted A arpeggio (E C# A,) in the low notes, he taught us this year to use "middle", "ring", then "pinky" middle for each note respectively (all on the push).

 

But, when you follow the basic principle that your index finger should be used on the first column, second finger on the second column, etc, isn't that fingering very standard?

 

yup! although i wouldn't use the word standard, i would say "first position," which most people consider "standard." if you read on, you will see that i was unable to do it. it establishes context of the next fingering, which although not his first choice in that tune, was very typical of his playing style, according to his own account.

Middle finger for the E, then third finger for the C#, which is on the third column, and pinky on the A, which is on the fourth. I am surprised to hear other people would do it differently, what is the alternative? If you start E with your index finger, then you're moving the center of your layout to the left, which might make it very hard to come back to it, and might force you to get choppy, no?

this moving of the first finger is actually what i and another student suggested to overcome the pinky reach problem. i was suggesting to do the arpeggio entirely in second position, rather than jumping fingers.

 

 

Nice posts!

 

EDITED: I am surprised Noel told you to go from low C# to low A with the same finger, not using the same finger for two different buttons in a row has become kind of a religion to me, so Noel is actually much less strict that I would have thought.

 

i am aware many people view it dogmatically. please don't think noel jumps willy nilly... it is very calculated, and only used for phrasing--it is usually more difficult than doing using an alternate fingering. it is all very complicated... i was only using it to illustrate that his system is systematic, and has many twists and turns, but that each fingering solution is not a one-off to fit a tune, but part of a larger pattern. many players have one-off solutions, and they are very effective. it is not in discussion whether or not one should have a system, but whether or not NOEL plays in a system, and specifically if he teaches the same as he plays. this example is perfectly illustrative, in that he taught something to me that was very difficult as an alternate solution in order to overcome another problem, rather than dumbing it down.

 

 

EDIT2: I realize this is what you call jumping?

 

yup. i call going from one button to the another on the same finger jumping. i'm not sure if there is a better term.

 

 

This is interesting..... does that mean that say in the Merry Blacksmith that Noel would start on the high D on left side and proceed to use the G row for all notes up to E and D in the first half or is it a case of start on that high D, use A on G row and then B on middle and so on?

 

 

well, let's take a step back here: before we talk about what he would do, i would like to say that i can only predict what he would do based on the 5 years of lessons i have for one week over the summer at his camp, which means he has taught me at least 40 tunes, not counting supplementary tunes. my other information is also based on watching his hands when he plays, and by discussing with him why he does certain things, and what fingerings he would use in certain situations. i have also proposed alternate fingerings on certain occasions , and have in certain instances been advised against fingerings or told my choices were in line with what he would do. so... i say this that i cannot predict exactly what he would do, as for all i know his setting of the tune is very different, or that he makes a choice in this tune based on a principle i have not yet learned from him indirectly, as every year i show up and learn more things by watching him and learning from him.

 

that being said, i would say that within his system, the merry blacksmith presents a very simple case, with a very straightforward solution, a pattern which he has taught me over and over, and a pattern which i have replicated based on his intruction.

 

the way i would expect noel to play the first four notes would be d push, A third finger, B pull (C row), A (C row), etc. i am not going to say that he would ALWAYS play an A against a second octave d like that, but i am going to say it is a pattern, and that noel's first choice for second octave d is on the G row. because of this, the notes d and A will always present a problem, considering your "home A" is the first finger A in the C row. out of context, all options make sense (pull d, third finger A, jumping from A to d), but offer problems of either changing the finger, or being too difficult. when we put high d against low A into context, then we can start to see solutions. keep in mind i am only talking about noel's system, as in many other players' styles, they would not choose pull d (C row). the reason i am not really going into it further is that "context" is a very broad term, include among the following: what notes precede d and A; whether you are playing d to A or A to d; what chords you are against these notes, and when the chord starts and stops; how fast you are playing; what tune type you are playing; what phrasing you are aiming for.

 

now, keep in mind that noel does not present it this way. this is an example of his teaching system being a separate entity from his system of fingering, as you could teach or talk about the same fingering system multiple ways. his approach is very holistic, in that he presents you the scale, and teaches you to work with it, and in the process expands your knowledge of the scale, and learn alternate fingerings in context. over time he will teach you certain things, and recommend you do them all the time. my approach to it is very analytical, but i am not falsely putting structure to his system, but rather attempting to determine the patterns and rules that he plays and teaches. i know he does think of them as patterns, and there is an example from many years ago which illustrates it well. one time, when all of us in our particular class were still a little shaky on his chording system, i remember him distinctly saying, "every time you play F# then G, and want to hit a low G on the push, press low D at the same time." this is a perfect example, because he had indeed taught us that chord, and had also taught us to practice it both in and out of context, but had never told us the rule. then, when he said that, it made sense: he had never played that sequence of notes ( F# G), while hitting a chord on the G, without it being low G and push D. please don't think that is the only time he would use that chord, as that is not the case, but it is merely demonstrative of him having patterns and rules that he teaches but does not burden his students with unnecessarily in his teaching. this is also an example of how complicated the system is, and that it cannot be merely written up on a single page, nor have i fulled eked out it's entire structure. as a final note on this, i would like to know that as a system it is only so useful as it is a tool for making music--art--and that in the end, all his choices are based on how he likes to make his music, and the best way to make the sounds that he wants to make. other people have different systems because they want to make different music. he does not have his system in order to be strict and dogmatic, but rather because he has spent his whole life going after a certain sound, and these are the patterns which make the sound the best.

Edited November 6, 2009 by david_boveri