Jump to content

How Accidental Was Your Choice Of System?


Recommended Posts

I have never held an English and have never even been curious to do so. I was suspicious of what I read about the English system but the Anglo was love at first sight. I wonder if the English system is more attractive to those into musical theory and dots on paper, aspects of music which I can happily live without. Is there anyone out there who plays both systems ? I doubt it.

 

I play both systems, no problem. I have played Anglo for nearly 20 years and switched to English a few months ago. My motivation for doing so was the desire to play classical music and not playing for Morris any more. I have adapted to the English system relatively quickly and painlessly, certainly a much less steep learning curve than the Anglo was. I play both systems by ear and by written music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take on it is that the Anglo is best for people who can hear a harmonic structure beneath a given tune. This makes it pretty obvious whether you have to press or draw the bellows.

And if the harmonic structure they "hear" isn't available on their anglo? Or maybe is available in both directions, though with different fingerings? That may fit with your own way of thinking about the instrument, but I have doubts about it being generally true.

 

Bisonority, I would think, would get in the way of dot-to-note correlation.

Bisonority in and of itself, I don't think so. The common (mouth) harmonica is bisonoric, and there's only one dot on the staff that corresponds to each of its notes (unless you start playing games with enharmonic "names"). Duplications are another matter, but in my experience, not a difficult one.

 

The Crane, with its "one dot, one button" rule and its accidentals in the outlying columns, is much more staff-oriented and thus easier to sight read for.

Okay, in one sense I'm picking linguistic nits with this one, but I do think that the way one views a thing can affect the ease or difficulty of learning. I would not say that the Crane is "oriented" toward the staff, though it most certainly is "correlated". The fact is that both the Crane and the staff are built for music based on the diatonic C scale, extended to the chromatic scale. The unsurprising result is that they work well together.

 

But so do the staff and the other duets, and the English, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first instrument was diatonic harmonica which I played reasonably well at folk club nights and for the Morris.

 

I then learned to knock a tune out of a 2 row melodeon, but never really enjoyed it.

 

I had heard various concertinas and never particularly liked the sound.

 

One day I had a random urge to look up concertinas to see if I could understand the difference between Anglo and English. One thing led to another and I decided I wanted a concertina.

 

Logic told me that the English was more versatile, fully chromatic and in some sense "better".

 

I borrowed an English and after a month I could play a scale, but not a tune.

 

Then in consecutive nights I heard and Anglo played well (Keith Kendrick) and an English played well (Dave Ledsam) and I realised it was the Anglo sound I wanted.

 

I can now play Anglo reasonably well in the harmonic style, albeit with a small repertoire. Strangely, I can no longer knock a tune out of a melodeon, except in the upper register of my one row Hohner, but I can still play harmonica.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that feeling comfortable with the English leads one to want to use "dots", though a couple of "opposites" may be true. I.e., working from "the dots" on the anglo -- especially when playing more than one note at a time -- is not always simple or even possible. Because of this, folks who are already used to using written notation (abc notation is no better in this regard) may be inclined to avoid the anglo, while dot-free anglo players may be inclined to avoid learning to read notation. (Note: Being able to read notation is not the same as being dependent on it, though the second is impossible without the first.)

Jim, lucid explanations and differentiations as always..., love reading 'em! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose this is contributing to thread drift, but one advantage of the EC is that in playing from music, all the notes on the lines of the staff are on the left side of the instrument and all the notes in the spaces are on the right side. Looking at a note, I'll at least know what side it's on! Of course, that means that any note switches side as one goes up an octave.

 

It's clear from this discussion that some of us carefully looked at the different systems (or at least two of them) and made a decision, and some of us just fell into the system we play. A few switched systems, or play multiple systems. I think the common thread is that whether as a result of a careful search or happenstance, when we find and instrument that is right for us, most of us are happily at home. I'm glad that there are many mansions in the house of the concertina!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to go with "semi-deliberate". I was looking for a folk instrument for sessions. My primary instrument at the time was the synthesizer, and I was tired of having to phone ahead to determine if I'd be lynched for showing up with a small synth.

 

It was supposed to be an additional instrument, so I didn't want to spend a lot of money. I also didn't want to buy an instrument that would lose value rapidly, so that ruled out the lowest end instruments. Ironically, had I realized that the Button Box would hire out instruments, things might have gone differently. But as it happened, Chris Algar had a Lachenal 20 button that was being restored, and also tuned from Ab/Eb to G/D.

 

It rapidly displaced the synthesizer as my primary instrument, and when we had a good year at work I started thinking about upgrading to 30 buttons. I thought about switching to a C/G, and I also talked to Bob Tedrow about a G/D Bass. He did some experiments, and regreftully informed me that it would be the size of a hubcap and still be slow to sound. I did know that Bob played an inverted D/A, and so ended up designing a G/D with the D down a 4th instead of up a 5th. I made a few tweaks to the layout over the years, and then eventually acquired a Dipper of the same layout (which is for obvious reasons my main squeeze).

 

I also have an 1855 Brass-Reeded English from Greg Jowaisis (in the original high-pitch meantone). It is a lovely voiced instrument, but I just cannot wrap my head around the layout. For that one, I content myself with being the custodian of an instrument that is still in the original voice (and even has the original bellows).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhat accidental, I suppose....Probably around 1981 I read the description of concertina systems in the Elderly Instruments catalog and got curious. I didn't have the funds then to buy one of their Bastaris (I was a student). Ironically, I was in NYC and should have gotten up the nerve to look in some of the secondhand shops - maybe I would have one of those amazing stories. Also surprising I didn't run into Jim Lucas at the Eagle Tavern (maybe we were both there, who knows).

 

In 1992 I finally encountered a 20-button red Italian in C/G at a sale and started on it. An only slightly newer 20-button Stagi took me to Noel Hill school two years running (to his credit he never criticized it, just encouraging me to get 30 buttons some day). If that first box had been an EC I probably would have started that instead. Around 2001 I was offered a serviceable EC at NESI and bought it to try the system. I don't find it any less intuitive than AC and if I put in some practice I'm sure I could do as well on it as anglo. Oddly, I do Anglo from music more often than English. Somehow EC works by ear for me (at least in less exotic keys). The way I learn instruments parallels what Jim Lucas describes - once I know where scales and notes are, I just map it in my head somehow to the music reading ability I already have (like him, developed from trumpet and other instruments). I never had a "total disconnect/I can't fathom this" when trying a fingering system; seems to me enough practice would make any of them work. Maybe I'm wired up funny (left-handed, after all).

 

Whatever works for you, go play it!

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhat accidental, I suppose....Probably around 1981 I read the description of concertina systems in the Elderly Instruments catalog and got curious. I didn't have the funds then to buy one of their Bastaris (I was a student). Ironically, I was in NYC and should have gotten up the nerve to look in some of the secondhand shops - maybe I would have one of those amazing stories. Also surprising I didn't run into Jim Lucas at the Eagle Tavern (maybe we were both there, who knows).

 

In 1992 I finally encountered a 20-button red Italian in C/G at a sale and started on it. An only slightly newer 20-button Stagi took me to Noel Hill school two years running (to his credit he never criticized it, just encouraging me to get 30 buttons some day). If that first box had been an EC I probably would have started that instead. Around 2001 I was offered a serviceable EC at NESI and bought it to try the system. I don't find it any less intuitive than AC and if I put in some practice I'm sure I could do as well on it as anglo. Oddly, I do Anglo from music more often than English. Somehow EC works by ear for me (at least in less exotic keys). The way I learn instruments parallels what Jim Lucas describes - once I know where scales and notes are, I just map it in my head somehow to the music reading ability I already have (like him, developed from trumpet and other instruments). I never had a "total disconnect/I can't fathom this" when trying a fingering system; seems to me enough practice would make any of them work. Maybe I'm wired up funny (left-handed, after all).

 

Whatever works for you, go play it!

Ken

Ken,

I don't get this disconnect thing either. I took to the mouth organ like a duck to water, and when the Anglo arrived, I took it in my stride. This didn't stop me understanding the Crane, which came along much later. I've never had my hands on an EC for long enough to gauge whether it likes me or not, but I have devised a stringed instrument that has a zig-zag scale like the EC. Haven't built it yet, I'll keep you posted. Suffice to say, zig-zag is just as "logical" as push-pull.

 

BTW, I'm not left-handed, but I am a Geminii. A typical Geminii trait would be to find both the Anglo and the EC both "logical" and "intuitive"! :)

 

Cheers,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A typical Geminii trait would be to find both the Anglo and the EC both "logical" and "intuitive"! :)

 

Apart from the stars, that's my belief too, but regarding the Anglo only for the two ("German") inner rows ... :ph34r:

Edited by blue eyed sailor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A typical Geminii trait would be to find both the Anglo and the EC both "logical" and "intuitive"! :)

 

Apart from the stars, that's my belief too, but regarding the Anglo only for the two ("German") inner rows ... :ph34r:

 

I believe there's also logic -- though not the same sort of logic -- to the third row on a 30-button anglo, both the Wheatstone-Lachenal and Jeffries versions. But I've already spent too much time here tonight, and it's approaching 1:00 in the morning where I am, so I'm off to bed, and my explanation will have to wait until tomorrow... if somebody else doesn't beat me to it. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A typical Geminii trait would be to find both the Anglo and the EC both "logical" and "intuitive"! :)

 

Apart from the stars, that's my belief too, but regarding the Anglo only for the two ("German") inner rows ... :ph34r:

 

I believe there's also logic -- though not the same sort of logic -- to the third row on a 30-button anglo, both the Wheatstone-Lachenal and Jeffries versions. But I've already spent too much time here tonight, and it's approaching 1:00 in the morning where I am, so I'm off to bed, and my explanation will have to wait until tomorrow... if somebody else doesn't beat me to it. B)

 

I don't doubt that Jim - so as for me you would have to explain it being "logical" and "intuitive", and all the more in association with the other two...

 

Seriously, the Anglo is so obviously a great tool for music making that I'm not inclined to dispute the reasonableness of its keyboard layout in any way. In general, I've learned to leave the discussion of other systems to those who actually play them - here I just sort of relied on my own short experience with the Anglo, in order to make a step forward from my horrible 20b Stagi - and the third row did really puzzle me... (which I most likely would have overcome at some point, which I didn't because I swapped the Anglo with the English as you all know...)

 

Best - Wolf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A typical Geminii trait would be to find both the Anglo and the EC both "logical" and "intuitive"! :)

 

Apart from the stars, that's my belief too, but regarding the Anglo only for the two ("German") inner rows ... :ph34r:

 

I believe there's also logic -- though not the same sort of logic -- to the third row on a 30-button anglo, both the Wheatstone-Lachenal and Jeffries versions.

 

I don't doubt that Jim - so as for me you would have to explain it being "logical" and "intuitive", and all the more in association with the other two...

 

Hmm. I think we're now getting into issues of philosophy. ;) In my response, I didn't say the anglo's third row (or anything else, for that matter) was "intuitive". In my experience, a person's intuition is built upon prior experience, which differs from person to person. But if one becomes aware of a purpose -- a "logic" -- to a pattern or process, that awareness can become the basis of future "intuition".

 

I think that in your present state, you might have found an anglo I once owned (and now regret parting with) more "intuitive". A standard 30-button in appearance, the third row was a half step higher than the middle row. As a C/G instrument (I think mine was A/E, though I don't remember for sure), that would have made it a C#/C/G (going from outer row to inner), with the C# row having essentially the same intervals as the other two rows. (I don't remember what happened below "middle C", where the normal C and G rows don't have identical intervals.) Compared to a standard 30-button C/G, the reverse G-A buttons were gone, but some other reversals of individual notes appeared, and all the accidentals were there (except at the extreme high and low ends), and in "obvious" places.

 

But that doesn't explain the "logic" of the third row on standard 30-button anglos. I think I should make that a separate post.

 

And if others want to discuss further the pluses, minuses, and "logics" of various anglo layouts, I suggest they start a separate topic/thread... or revive one of the old threads on the same subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that doesn't explain the "logic" of the third row on standard 30-button anglos. I think I should make that a separate post.

 

:ph34r:

As I see it, the two inner rows of a 30-b Anglo are logical, and the outer row is intuitive.

:rolleyes:

 

On my Anglo, I always know where the right notes on the inner rows should be. On the outer row, I have to poke about a bit at first, but when I find them, they're in the right place, and I can reach them easily next time.

 

By the way, philosophically speaking, logical is not synonymous with simple! :P

 

Cheers,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, philosophically speaking, logical is not synonymous with simple! :P

Absolutely not.

Nor necessarily antonymous, either.

 

"Logical" and "simple" -- as I understand the concepts -- are independent qualities. But I have noticed that there are lots of people who seem to think that "logical" is a synonym for "seems simple [or even 'obvious'] to me". B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd owned a tiny Stagi 18-button English back in the '90s that I never got too skilled on, and had sort of messed with a cheapie 20b Anglo now and then but never found it untuitive, suprising because I was decent on the 1-row diatonic accordion/melodeon.

 

When I went to Afghanistan in 2010 as a researched for Dept. of Defense, I wanted a nice compact instrument, and something multi-tone so I could better develop my sense of harmony. I just play too many melodic and/or dronal instruments. I'd recalled the CC made reputable starter pieces, and mentally was agonizing between English and Anglo, and ended up picking English (and I think the lower Jack for song accomplaniment) since I just wasn't confident in by ability to digest multi-row bisonoric.

 

However, when I went to Wim's CC site to order, I saw there was a third option: the Elise Hayden Duet. I'd aways been vaguely aware that there was a mythical "third kind" of concertina, but I'd always thought of Duets as some kind of ultra-niche following of enthusiasts bringing back odd pawnshop finds from near-death and learning arcance fingering systems with no two 'boxes alike. The Elise though was affordable, new construction, and the bit of me that understands some music theory was fascinated by the isomorphic layout. I'd been vaguely intending to learn to play keyboard someday, and I reckoned that the Elise functioned kind of like a little pump-organ with an unusual keyboard layout, but same unisonoric style, bass on the left, etc.

 

I ordered an Elise and Wim got it shipped all the way to Bagram (double-boxed for safekeeping) in just 10 days or so. And I've been playing Duet ever since, buying a Morse Beaumont at the start of this year, and keeping my Elise for travel and knockaround duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, it's time for me to weigh in on this discussion. Here's the short version of my story...

 

My older brother Tom discovered Morris dancing at an early age, took a trip to England, visited Crabb in Islington, and got himself an Anglo to learn Kimber style Morris by ear. This happened when I was 8 or so. The following 12 years, I heard his efforts. So when I was finally bitten by the concertina bug, I knew just what I wanted... or so I thought. I got myself an Anglo C/G and started to learn, by ear, all of the tunes I had heard my brother play. Such fun I was having! It wasn't until a musician buddy of mine told me that I was playing all of the tunes in the wrong keys, that I realized my problem. The easy solution was to find a G/D and then all of the tunes I had learned, were now sounding in the right keys. That's why I play mostly G/D today, because it makes the richest harmonic sounds in the keys that fiddle tunes are mostly played in. To my ear, Anglo is cool but fiddle is king, so joining the fiddle with the sound of my Anglo brings me the greatest musical pleasure.

Edited by Jody Kruskal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...