Jump to content

Wheatstone Mccann Duet 57


Ampico
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok, I give up. I assumed my beautiful Wheatstone was worth about £1200 but it's not sold. What price would I have to ask to sell it? Any suggestions would be helpful. Brianpost-11888-0-27160200-1443767333_thumb.jpegpost-11888-0-07488400-1443767367_thumb.jpeg

 

Call 07784 713 866

Edited by Ampico
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patience is necessary. The concertina market is small, and the market for Maccann duets is even smaller. As well as the price being right you need to find someone who wants this model, and has the cash to buy it. Condition of the instrument is important too. I'm guessing from the missing end bolt that it is in need of some work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian,

 

The button pattern makes me think that this is not a MacCann Duet. The symmetrical pattern of the buttons with two groups of three buttons per row.

 

If it is not a MacCann, I wonder if it's the same as Crabb´s Victor model, or an extended version, as Crabb made them with max. 42 buttons. In that case, it makes the concertina more unique, it is possible that this is the only wheatstone concertina build of its kind, so collectors might be interested, however, I think that (at this time) no one plays this system...

 

Marien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A note chart would settle exactly what system it is.

25156 was made in 1911 so it couldn't possibly be a Crabb Victor system, which was invented around 1945.

Could be one of Dr Pitt-Taylor's ideas or an unknown special.

 

Inventor.

Edited by inventor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have sorted out the sticking notes so here is the scale compared to my Steinway Grand.

 

Left side with serial number.

First row on left starting nearest strap. D2, A2, E2, B3

Second. C2, g#2, D# 3, A#3

Third row E2, D2, A#2, F2, Middle C4,

Fourth G2, F2, C2, F2, C#5.

Fifth F#2, C#4, G#4

Sixth row B2, D4, G4, A5

 

Right side with label and air button.

First row on left D4, A5, E5, B6, G5

Second row C#3, G#3, D#, 5, A#6, F6.

Third row E4, D#4, A#5, F5, C6, F#6

Fourth row G4, F4, BB5?, F#5, C#6, G#7

Fifth row, F#3, C#5, G#5, D#6, ?,

Sixth row, B5, D5, G5, A6?, E6.

 

The numbers refer to the octaves but are subject to some revision I am sure. Most notes work well in and out, a few have a squeak one way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Left side with serial number.

First row on left starting nearest strap. D2, A2, E2, B3

Second. C2, g#2, D# 3, A#3

Third row E2, D2, A#2, F2, Middle C4,

Fourth G2, F2, C2, F2, C#5.

Fifth F#2, C#4, G#4

Sixth row B2, D4, G4, A5

 

Right side with label and air button.

First row on left D4, A5, E5, B6, G5

Second row C#3, G#3, D#, 5, A#6, F6.

Third row E4, D#4, A#5, F5, C6, F#6

Fourth row G4, F4, BB5?, F#5, C#6, G#7

Fifth row, F#3, C#5, G#5, D#6, ?,

Sixth row, B5, D5, G5, A6?, E6.

 

There are gaps and some duplicated notes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believed that I have discovered the solution to the system that this concertina was meant to be, although it is not any system that I had previously come across before.

Firstly I drew out the columns so that they were at right angles to the hand rest and the curves went from left to right. It didn't make any sense to me; however I noticed that the columns mostly went upwards in rising fifths. Then I saw that columns 2, 3, 4, & 5 were mostly sharps and columns 1 & 6 had most of the natural notes - most odd.

Then taking into account that this instrument was made in 1911 when standard pitch was almost a semitone higher than modern concert pitch, the instrument might be in old pitch. So I rewrote the system one semitone down. To my surprise it suddenly made sense !

I am not very good at modern electric organ octave number notation and in order to understand a system I have to write it out in old fashioned organ builders notation (c' is middle C, - c" is an octave above middle C, - c is tenor C and C is bass C; the lowest note of a cello.). The result of the right hand side is written below in the octave that makes sense.

 

 

(f#"') ( e"' ) ( f"' ) ( g"' ) (c#"') (d#"')

 

(a#") ( a" ) ( b" ) ( c"' ) ( d"' ) (g#")

 

(d#") ( d" ) ( e" ) ( f" ) ( g" ) (gb")

 

(g#' ) ( g' ) ( a' ) ( b' ) ( c" ) (c#")

 

(c#' ) ( c' ) ( d' ) ( e' ) ( f' ) (bb'}

 

(d#') ( f#')

 

 

Inventor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting! The system looks quite logical, but I doubt that it would work well musically...

 

I had a quick go on a conversion to Hayden ( there may be bugs in it ):

 

post-7162-0-87439200-1444334492_thumb.jpg

 

First of all the changes a quite substantial. Secondly does Hayden not work well on straight lines ( try the key of G ).

 

Pity, it would have been nice to own a 1911 Wheatstone Hayden;-)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

however I noticed that the columns mostly went upwards in rising fifths.

and with the break between B and F in the same way as the English, so presumably whoever devised this system had the EC layout as a starting point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hayden system is not ideal on straight columns at right angles to the hand-rest., although this was done on the "Cheeseman" system.

I have been to too many general concertina workshops and "all duet" workshops, where the main discussion centred on fingering consecutive notes directly above or below each other, which seems to be a perpetual problem on Maccann and Crane Duets and the English Concertina. This problem does not arise on Hayden and Jeffries Duets or Anglos.

 

It would seem a pity to alter a one off unique instrument, which really should be preserved in a Concertina Museum like the Horniman.

 

There seems to be something slightly odd about the register of the Left hand side of the instrument. The next to highest note is clearly labelled "Middle C4" which would give no overlap between the left and right hand sides. If this had been been labelled. C5 which I believe is an octave above middle C, as is the C#5 next to it, this would give the quite expected full octave overlap.

 

Inventor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...