Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lachenal74693

A Tale Of Two Anglos

Recommended Posts

Take two Anglos:

 

1: 26-button C/G Lachenal. G-row, LH button 5 has B/A (blaw/sook). The A (as opposed to the more

usual D, see below?) effectively extends the range in the key of G.

Accidental row RH button 2 has A/G.

 

2: 30-button C/G George Jones. G-row, LH button 5 has B/D. According to my (limited) understanding,

and to Mick Bramich's 'In-between Anglo', this is the more usual configuration.

Accidental row RH button 2 has G#/G (MB has A/G for this button).

 

So, I have two instruments with different non-standard layouts...

 

There are other differences - for example the G# on the accidental row of the 26-B instrument is on

button 3 (G#/Bb), and on the 30-B instrument, I haven't yet quite sussed out the accidental LH buttons 1&2

and RH buttons 3,4&5 (my ear is not that good).

 

I hope all of that made some sort of sense.

 

MB discusses different layouts briefly in the book (and defends himself against criticisms for sometimes

getting layouts 'wrong').

 

Given what I'm seeing on these two instruments, MBs arguments seem perfectly OK, and he discusses

the options available when one acquires an instrument with a 'non-standard' layout.

 

My question is: How common are these differences and what should one do about it if one has more than

one instrument? What is the opinion of the 'body of the kirk' on this one? Experience tells me that I'll get

some sensible and thought-provoking answers here...

 

It's relevant to me because I now have enough instruments that changing them all to a 'standard' layout

would be expensive and time-consuming. It would also be (IMO) a sort of low-level 'vandalism'(*) - some

of these instruments have been kicking around (and in some cases been kicked around!) for upwards of

a century. Why change it...

 

On a personal level, I think I find the idea of picking up one instrument and having to play a tune differently

because the layout is different is challenging, and makes it even more fun (if that's possible).

 

I only twigged this when I started playing the first few bars of a tune I'm learning which has a couple of G#s and

had to go for a different button on each instrument. I thought it was me at first...

 

Any thoughts?

 

Thank you.

 

Roger

 

(*) A bit strong maybe, but I couldn't think of a better word.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your variation in the lowest pitched button on the G row is typical. My Lachenals tend to have B/D, but the B/A on my modern instruments is more useful for me (others feel the opposite). On the right side accidentals A/G is typical Wheatstone/Lachenal in my experience, while G#/G is a bit of the Jeffries layout someone may have set up on your Jones in the past.

 

At first I needed a consistent layout (C# was the issue for me), but later I got a Jeffries layout Morse and learned to use the contrasts with a Lachenal. I can now switch layouts with a conscious 5-minute brain reset. My wife prefers Lachenal layout, having worked out tunes with the higher G# that she expects to find in one location.

 

Moving notes around is a personal decision. Some of us do it, others don't, depending in part on the vintage and history of the instrument. Its all part of the madness, you find what works for you.

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've moved notes around in vintage instruments (Jeffries) partly because I already know that previous owners did so -- the instrument I have is not 'just as it was a century ago' already, it's been changed and changed again to suit many players. There's no reason not to do the same (within reason). 'Within reason' means I'm not going to change any of the woodwork in the reedpan, but I'll happily move reeds around or find substitute reeds (and store the others, with notation of where they had been, in little envelopes in the instrument's case). In a few cases, I dropped the pitch of Jeffries reeds with solder (which is reasonably reversible).

 

I find the B/A (LH button in question) far preferable -- otherwise there's no draw A. There's already a perfectly good draw D on the C row, and I've no need for a duplicate. Other players with different styles and repertoires may well very much want that duplicate D; but it doesn't suit me, and were I to come into an instrument with that, I would seek to change it. (Or, were I to be offered such an instrument, this would count as a mark against buying it and would have to be outweighed by other positive factors.)

 

I likewise prefer the Jeffries layout on the RH accidental row, though I can switch between the two. When playing on the Wheatstone/Lachenal layout my arrangements are simpler, my repertoire reduced. I don't have any tunes that are enhanced (or only possible) in this layout, whereas I have a great many such tunes that require the Jeffries layout. But I recognize that there are many players who have equally strong preference for the Wheatstone/Lachenal layout and do fantastic things with it!

 

If you can swap reeds among the reed slots to achieve the same layout -- whichever you like better -- on your two instruments, in ways that are reasonably reversible, I say give it a try (just take notes on what you did so you can revert later if you ever want to). The instruments predate us and will live on after us, but in my opinion there's no reason each player shouldn't adapt the instrument a bit (as well as adapt to the instrument as it is) -- the two of you are working together as a team to make the music :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you - food for thought there.

 

I had assumed that instruments were (usually) as supplied by the manufacturer and not modified later(*).

 

The idea of moving the reeds around myself had not occurred to me - I might try that.

 

Thank you folks.

 

(*) As someone said in a response to an earlier post - don't assume...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I have found the left hand lowest G row button in G/D, B/D, and B/A.

 

I think that G/D is a logical layout button, similar to C/G of the C row, for playing along the row in G key and sounding with the lowest G row button the C chord pushing and the G chord (dominant) pulling.

 

But that notes (G/D) are duplicated and in the same direction in the second button of the left hand C row (pushing) and the third button of the left hand C row (pulling), and that is the reason for changing the notes to another ones that aren't duplicated and more useful.

 

I have several concertinas with the three systems, the octave concertina has G/D, my lachenal B/D, and my suttner B/A.

Edited by felix castro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing B/D to B/A (usually with a drop of solder on the D reed) is a common job I have to do on concertinas for Irish players - who would much rather have a draw A than a duplicate draw D.

 

And B/A is a great idea on any 26-key Anglo, because otherwise you'd have no low A at all... :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the OP, I have a Jones 30-key Anglo. Like his, it has B/D on the lowest key on the left G-row, and G#/G on the second key on the right accidentals.

 

In addition, my lowest key on my left accidental row is G#/F. There are various discussions about the low B/D and the right accidentals (one old post is here: http://www.concertina.net/kc_key_layouts.html),but I haven't seen *ANY* mention of low G#/F (in place of the usual E/F on push/pull).

 

I am certainly considering permanent changes (AKA vandalism) to some or all of these. Dave Elliott is prepared to consider insertion of replacement reeds -- and since these would be Lachenal-style reeds rather than Jones-style, this would entail changes to the reed pan etc. Solder sounds easier and more reversible -- does it have any drawbacks?

 

Before I go down the road of permanent changes, I'd like to understand the thinking behind the original (or presumed original) layout. As other posters have said, there is already a low D on Pull, so what is the point of another? Even more inexplicable to me is the low G# -- what scales or chords does this serve, and wouldn't they benefit more from a low E? Can anyone speculate on the original justifications?

 

Thanks.

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the OP, I have a Jones 30-key Anglo. Like his, it has B/D on the lowest key on the left G-row, and G#/G on the second key on the right accidentals.

 

In addition, my lowest key on my left accidental row is G#/F. There are various discussions about the low B/D and the right accidentals (one old post is here: http://www.concertina.net/kc_key_layouts.html),but I haven't seen *ANY* mention of low G#/F (in place of the usual E/F on push/pull).

 

I am certainly considering permanent changes (AKA vandalism) to some or all of these. Dave Elliott is prepared to consider insertion of replacement reeds -- and since these would be Lachenal-style reeds rather than Jones-style, this would entail changes to the reed pan etc. Solder sounds easier and more reversible -- does it have any drawbacks?

 

Before I go down the road of permanent changes, I'd like to understand the thinking behind the original (or presumed original) layout. As other posters have said, there is already a low D on Pull, so what is the point of another? Even more inexplicable to me is the low G# -- what scales or chords does this serve, and wouldn't they benefit more from a low E? Can anyone speculate on the original justifications?

 

Thanks.

Ed

 

I've been busy with other things and haven't yet had time to suss out all the accidentals on my Jones

30-button C/G, but prompted by this post I have checked the lowest left-hand accidental. It also is G#/F.

I must work out a full layout sooner rather than later!

 

I hadn't really considered changing to a more standard layout, I rather like to maintain the status quo

unless there are overwhelming reasons for making a change.

 

However, I too would like to understand the thinking behind the original (or presumed original) layout - I'm

beginning to wonder if there really is such a thing as a standard layout....

 

This is 'interesting' to me because at the same time as I acquired the Jones, I acquired a 20-button C/G

Lachenal with a non-standard layout on the left-hand C-row. (http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=19173&hl=).

The only reason I can think of for this layout is that I think it would allow the keys of Bb and F but at the

expense of quite fiddly fingering (?). As stated above I probably wouldn't think about changing, but as I

already have two Bb/Fs, I am thinking of changing this to a more conventional C/G layout so the remarks

about changing the reeds are relevant.

 

Roger

Edited by lachenal74693

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...