"playing In Any Key"

[Anglo-Irishman]

Whilst I do not see a problem with learning a tune in 'any key' I would suggest it is probably best to learn a tune in the key you intend to play it. Currently I use the key range from 3 flats to 4 sharps and play pieces in all those keys on the EC but I don't generally play any one tune in many keys...

 

Geoff,

 

I think this is a very reasonable view. As I see it, there are several criteria for choosing a specific kes for a given tune or piece:

 

1. For me as a singer, the main criterion is what key(s) I can sing the song in. The melody should be in the middle of my voice range, eliminating notes that are too high and scratchy, or too low and rumbly. With the folk songs that I mostly sing, which have a range of only about an octave, I have a certain latitude in the choice of key. I can sing most songs in C or D, and most of the rest in F or G - so a C/G Anglo does me fine for accompaniment. In the case of operatic or oratorium arias, however, I would have to sing and accompany baritone arias in the keys the composer chose for them - but that's not really concertina territory!

 

2. As a group player, I have to play the pieces in the keys that are amenable to the other players - in particular guitarists and fiddler. Their favourite keys are C, G and D, which are the home keys and easiest adjacent key on my C/G Anglo. Additional muti-key capability doesn't add anything. Once a piece is arranged in a particular key, the group sticks to that.

 

3. As a concertina soloist, I have similar criteria to accompaniment, except that it's the mid-range of the concertina that I want to emphasise, steering clear of its squeaky upper and rumbly lower notes. This may not be the same key that I'd choose for singing the same tune, so sometimes I sing the first half of a song in, say C, then play an instrumental verse in G, and then sing the remainder in D. (I mostly do this with the autoharp, which has its strong points in a different range from my voice.) But once I've found a key that's suitable, I have no need to learn the piece in another

 

4. Accompanying other singers is the only situation in which I would need to play a given arrangement in different keys, i.e. transpose it. A bariotone and a soprano wouldn't both be comfortable with the same key. This is something I rarely do, but I could imagine that a small selection of keys would suffice.

Community singing (e.g. hymns at church) is another matter. Hymns and similar pieces are set in keys that allow mixed voices to sing them more or less comfortably in unison, and it's a good thing for an accompanist to be able to play them as written. This is where the Anglo falls down, because it is chromatic only with regard to melody, and accompaniment really calls for harmonies. But, here again, when you've learnt the tune in one key, you seldom need to transpose.

 

Bottom line: what the capability to play "in any key" boils down to is the increased opportunity to play with other people. Singers have their vocal ranges, string players have their sharp keys, and wind players have their flat keys.

To my mind, it's the cromaticity of the EC and the "traditional" Duets (Crane and Maccann) that gives you this added value, not the "simple transposing" of the isomorphic systems.

 

When I took delivery of my Crane Duet, I was looking forward to my escape form the 2-key Anglo system. But up to now, I really only exploit the circle of fifths from one flat to two sharps. The difference is that I can transpose on the Crane - perhaps not as simply as on the Hayden, but without difficulty. With the Anglo, I had to make a virtue of necessity and work out a totally different arrangement for a different key!

 

Just my view,

Cheers,

John

[Rod]

I reckon that the Concertina is always at its best as a solo instrument and seldom if ever at its best when played in combination with other instruments, even other Concertinas. Strict tempo stuff can be enhanced by some sympathetic rhythm accompaniment from piano or guitar or banjo or percussion of one sort or another but I doubt whether Wheatstone ever envisaged the instrument as a component of group or band playing.

 

( How's that for going off at a tangent ? ! )

[sqzbxr]

...I doubt whether Wheatstone ever envisaged the instrument as a component of group or band playing.

 

Care to elaborate on your sources for this, or is it just more speculation on your part? One really has to wonder why concertinas were made in so many different ranges if they were meant to be only played as an unaccompanied solo instrument.

[JimLucas]

I reckon that the Concertina is always at its best as a solo instrument and seldom if ever at its best when played in combination with other instruments, even other Concertinas. Strict tempo stuff can be enhanced by some sympathetic rhythm accompaniment from piano or guitar or banjo or percussion of one sort or another but I doubt whether Wheatstone ever envisaged the instrument as a component of group or band playing.

 

( How's that for going off at a tangent ? ! )

 

I don't know that it's much of a tangent, but I do think it's wildly speculative nonsense, and I'd say the evidence against what you "reckon" is overwhelming.

 

Although "its best" must always be a matter of opinion, there have been several threads here over the years extolling how well the various concertinas blend with and complement practically any and all other instruments.

 

Should I take your post to mean that you think the group recordings with Jim Besser, Randy Stein, Jody Kruskal, Mary Humphries & Anahata, and numerous others aren't very pleasing?

 

As for what Wheatstone "envisaged", the various "voices" of English concertinas Wheatstone produced while Charles himself was alive make it clear that he did consider them appropriate for ensemble playing, including (among other things) string quartet arrangements. I'm not sure when concertina marching bands became popular -- I'm guessing after Charles Wheatstone's death, -- but they certainly were popular, and the Wheatstone company even made instruments specially engineered for them.

 

I myself have played concertina in various groups, from duos with other instruments to an ensemble of 5 concertinas, with applause ranging from warm to thunderous. Among the pieces and arrangements have been:

• Multi-part arrangements from the Medieval and Renaissance eras and up through contemporary folk dance arrangements.
• A be-bop duet with a flautist.
• A duet with a guitarist on a piece by Heitor Villa-Lobos.
• Various song accompaniments -- including several English music hall numbers -- with my concertinas and that same guitarist.
• Various pieces by Purcell, Bach, Telemann, and other "classical" composers.
• In particular, I've played the Bach 2-part invention n D minor both with a violinist (and myself playing the lower part on my "cello" English concertina) and with a cellist (myself playing the upper part on my treble English).
• In the same concert with that cellist, I was also joined by a friend on the mandolin, but when the audience demanded an encore, we brought down the house with a completely ad lib rendition of Stephen Foster's Beautiful Dreamer on concertina, cello, and the mandolinist on musical saw.

I've also played in various dance bands and numerous sessions, and I've had singers invite me to ad lib with my concertina as part of their accompaniment.

 

And that's just me... a fellow who plays (and practices) irregularly. There are others -- including some members here -- who I'm sure can stand as much stronger examples of the various concertinas' strength as ensemble instruments.

Edited July 26, 2014 by JimLucas

[Sarah Swett]

Just home from the local slow jam, happy as can be after playing with the usual motley collection of instruments. The regulars include three concertina players -- one Maccann duet, one Anglo, and me on EC, plus a variety of mandolins, guitars, occasional drums and fiddles. Some days it is a cacophony. Often I can't tell which concertina player just made some truly 'unusual' note choice (never me, ). Other times the mix is just right. Either way we have a wonderful time and since no one is listening by us, in the end it doesn't' really matter.

 

It has been interesting to notice what things work most easily on which instruments. The Mccann player said today that she does not like the key of D because of the location of the accidentals and will choose tunes that don't require too much of a pinkie workout. The Anglo player (who plays entirely by ear always brings two instruments so he can be more versatile, key-wise), has his own moments of 'nope, not that one.' On the EC -- my own musical preferences and limitations notwithstanding -- I am mostly undaunted by key changes, at least given some time. I am, however, sometimes flummoxed by fingering, stumbling again and again where the duet player sails through.

 

As for sound --I do love my concertina on its own, but find the it particularly satisfying with one or maybe two other instruments -- violin, mandolin, cello or recorder are, I think, my favorites so far. Of course that might be because I am a melody line-stuck-in-the-head kind of person, the concertina a way I can sing without using my fiddle or voice (neither of which can stick with one note in a clean way).

 

Thanks to the TOTM, however, and all the wonderful playing and discussion I've heard on this forum, I have been practicing more self-accompanyment, which (I think), my concertina appreciates.

 

Sarah

[Rod]

In reply to Jim Lucas my ' wildly speculative nonsense ' as he chooses to call it was simply a personal opinion which I felt entitled to express.

[ceemonster]

[[i can play traditional Irish or Bach or Ellington on my box.]]....yeah, well, we all know about YOU.... :)

 

i dunno, i think i'm almost ready to start trying to take on attempting direct-ear-learning of some sets on my EC from one of the classic relaxed-speed "exotic-key" irish trad records. like, "The Thing Itself," with Peadar O'loughlin and Maeve Donnelly. a way of doing those exercises in other keys, in a super-enjoyable way...or perhaps something from the B-flat "Kitty Lie over" by Mick O'Brien and Caoimhin O'Raghallaigh....yes, you still have to work out the tunes 'til you know those keys....but, the notes are all there and you can play them on push OR pull, as you like when you like....

Edited July 27, 2014 by ceemonster

[sqzbxr]

In reply to Jim Lucas my ' wildly speculative nonsense ' as he chooses to call it was simply a personal opinion which I felt entitled to express.

 

Absolutely correct - you ran your theory up the flagpole of public opinion and he saluted as he saw fit. He appears to have provided us with much more meat for his refutation than you have for your speculation. Care to provide more details?

 

Rod, on 24 Jul 2014 - 3:15 PM, said:

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.

Here again pure speculation on a system (and those who play it) in the same paragraph where you freely admit to having zero personal experience with it! I'm finding it pretty difficult to take you seriously at all based upon these two posts...

[Wolf Molkentin]

Well, apart from discussing whether or not Rod has made a substantial point here regarding the (English) concertina and its history it might be cherished that the full potential of the concertina includes the use as such a great solo or sole accompanying instrument, whereas playing in a band is just another option.

 

OTOH it should also be noted that the pairing f.i. of fiddle and concertina doesn't banish the concertina from everything more than single line melody playing. Just listen to the wonderful recordings of Jody Kruskal and Paul Friedman...!

[JimLucas]

In reply to Jim Lucas my ' wildly speculative nonsense ' as he chooses to call it was simply a personal opinion which I felt entitled to express.

Rod, please let me apologize for misunderstanding your main point. I took it to be a general assertion rather than an expression of your personal taste, and so I countered with evidence that your viewpoint is far from universal. And I did rather strongly express my own opinion of the assertion I thought you had made. (Which is the "oops!" emoticon?)

 

I'll stand my ground, though, on the bit about Wheatstone, unless you can provide evidence that led/would lead you to that claim, since I believe I've presented clear evidence to the contrary. Your "doubt" surprised me, because in the past I've always been impressed by how well-grounded (and concise) your posts have been.

[Rod]

Jim, please put my reference to Wheatstone into the same category as the rest of my original statement. It was intended as just another personal opinion which may be considered by others to be right or wrong and may well not withstand close historical scrutiny. I leave all that sort of thing to clever fellows like you. !! Best wishes, Rod