Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rlgph

Consistency Of Nomenclature For Hayden Duets

Recommended Posts

 

And as I said in #9 what to do with a similar system based on another central key than C ?

 

 

Hayden/Wicki systems don’t really have a central key. My 46-key Haydens have C as the lowest (bottom left) note, but I find the easiest key to play them in is G, followed by D. Someone else might find another key easiest.

 

Hmm...this is the normal/ordinary note layout : http://www.concertina.com/hayden-duet/index.htm - is it not?

That is no doubt arranged with a central octave block in two (four) rows presenting the diatonic scale in C and thus they have an orientation making C the central/basic key

 

f g a b

c d e

f g a b

c d e

 

You can do this is 11 other ways according to *some* other "central/basic" key, right? Same with the English system, the Crane or Maccann, they also obviously have C as the central/basic key in the standard note layout. IF you make an *infinite* layout of the Wicki/Hayden ( or Janko, or button accordion, or Wheatstone "double" or some other isomorphic system) they may become key indifferent but not when limited to the real/produced common instrument number of buttons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm...this is the normal/ordinary note layout : http://www.concertina.com/hayden-duet/index.htm - is it not?

 

In a word, no. You are wrong. The diagram shows a concertina with 67 buttons. 34 on the right and 33 on the left. Most existing Haydens do not have 67 buttons. My two Haydens (a Wheatstone and a Bastari) each have 46, Stagis have 46, Elises and Peacocks have fewer.

If you look at the photograph right below the diagram you link to, you will see a Hayden concertina with 25 buttons on the exposed side. Here it is again:
Wh-Hayden-W200H176.jpg
This is the right side of a 46-button Hayden. The bottom left (lowest) note is middle C.
FYI, here is the 46-button layout:
|        LEFT HAND            ||        RIGHT HAND
|                             ||
|                             ||  Bb  C   D
|   F   G   A   B             ||    F   G   A   B   C#
| Bb (C)  D   E   F#  G#      ||  Bb  C   D   E   F#  G#
|   F   G   A   B   C#  D#    ||    F   G   A   B   C#  D#
|     C   D   E   F#  G#      ||     (C)  D   E   F#  G#
|                             ||
|(5th Finger)       (Thumb)   ||  (Thumb)       (5th Finger)
| ======HAND STRAP========    ||   ======HAND STRAP========
|
|(C) = middle C (both hands).

If any arrangement must be referred to as "the normal/ordinary note layout" (a doubtful premise), I would think this is it.

 

[Edited to remove an apostrophe that my iPhone added surreptitiously]

Edited by David Barnert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hmm...this is the normal/ordinary note layout : http://www.concertina.com/hayden-duet/index.htm - is it not?

 

In a word, no. You are wrong. The diagram shows a concertina with 67 buttons. 34 on the right and 33 on the left. Most existing Haydens do not have 67 buttons. My two Haydens (a Wheatstone and a Bastari) each have 46, Stagis have 46, Elises and Peacocks have fewer.

If you look at the photograph right below the diagram you link to, you will see a Hayden concertina with 25 buttons on the exposed side. Here it is again:

David, you say: "In a word no.You are wrong"...Why this strong opposition?? Ok that your own instruments have 46 keys and this particular application of the system actually does have D instead of C as the most "central" key. Nevertheless the *system* IS usually presented just like the diagram I referred to shows with the block in C in the middle and Brian Hayden himself has described the system that way for instance in "The New Hayden Concertina Keyboard system"- one of his earliest manuscripts:

"The rows of buttons are placed...in such a way that flat notes appear on the left of each keyboard, natural notes in the middle, and sharp notes on the right"..."First look at the keyboard Diagams to see how the naturals are laid out (The key of C ) ..."

 

You may also read another of his manuscripts here:

http://www.concertina.com/hayden-duet/Hayden-The-Hayden-Concertina-Keyboard-System.pdf

 

And why not the UK Patent application GB 2131592 which describes several layouts : 46 keys ( fig 1 and 2), 78 keys (fig 3 and 4) 28 keys ( fig 6 and 7) 54 keys ( fig 8 and 9 ), 108 keys ( fig 10 and 11 ), a 60 key variant for accordion ( fig 12), and a 113 key organ keyboard (fig 13). All these with the "central" key, or as BH describes it, the "natural" key in C.

 

He does point out that the notes may be arranged in any other way but with the same whole note interval structure which I suggested too before, BUT the patent paper is what it is and THERE you find the arrangement with the "naturals" (= white piano keys) in the middle and the "accidentals" (= black piano keys) with flats to the left and sharps to the right of these "naturals" based on key of C. Am I wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add: Sorry, I may be mistaken about the Patent application number which actually seems to have been 8234412 20 June 1984

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again you ask "am I wrong?" and again I must say that my answer has not changed. The question was not "What is the ideal layout for a Hayden?" or "How is it described in the patent?" I've read Brian's documents and patents. But your question referred to the "normal/ordinary note layout" and I defy you to locate more than two or three instruments with such a layout. Bastari made a few in the early 1980s and Wim Wakker offers an exorbitantly expensive instrument about that size, but the layout is different and I wonder how many he has actually delivered. Note the F# to the left of the bottom F in the diagram you reference. I've only seen that in the old Bastaris.

 

To the more basic question of whether the instrument has a "central key," I would say that if it does, then that key must change if you add one button to the left end of each row. If the central key was C, it is now Bb. If the central key of the instrument in the diagram is C, then the central key of my 46 is A, because my A is where the C is on that instrument (3rd from the left on the 2nd row from the bottom).

 

Better to take my advice and abandon the notion of a "central key" on a Hayden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better to take my advice and abandon the notion of a "central key" on a Hayden.

You misunderstood what I meant by "central key" ,,,maybe I expressed it unclearly - it was not what you refer to here a central "button" but the *key* = C major and the same as Brian Hayden meant by "natural key" = C major. Let's not argue about this, the point remains that Brian Hayden's initial intent evidently was presenting the natural keys =white notes in the centre and the flats to the left and the sharps to the right thereof. Maybe "Inventor" himself, if reading this, might bother to sort things out for us....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haydens are key-centric free. It is one of the delights of them.

If you mean that you can play equally in any key that is a relative statement. It is correct if you have an infinite keyboard ( or maybe something like a Janko piano - almost "infinite"...) as I said in #19. But with the limited number of buttons - like the David's 46 - you do have 3 chromatic octaves allright but you can neither use the same fingering when playing single note melodies nor isomorphic chord patterns but occasionally, and not in more than a couple of keys...C or D firstly...possibly G and A, much depending on the tune, and if you use left hand for melody or not. As a matter of fact the Wicki-Hayden system would have its greatest potential for a "piano" or an accordion or "organ" - something Brian Hayden also has suggested in the patent paper. This because the foremost advantages with it can be practised only with much larger keyboards than "our" concertinas may provide.

Arthur Rubinstein for instance has said that he much regretted that he did not come across the Janko piano early in life and most pianists likely would say the same if not being unfortunate having spent years learning the common instrument. The Wicky-Hayden system might work just the same. But for concertinas as we all know there are numerous variants of keyboard layouts, all with their individual usefulness. Due to the restrictions from instrument size it is meaningless saying that one system is generally better than another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Getting back to the early postings I notice the above and get much confused. The "slant" seemingly means the angle between the transversal axis of the keyboard and the handbar, is that so? In that case the "slant" ( which is not present with the Wicki layout) means that the distant buttons on the little finger side get even *more* distant and more difficult to reach than if the keyboard was straight, or why not slanted the other way - so that the short little finger gets better options to reach its part of the keyboard. It is the same on both sides with common Hayden layouts.

So..what is the reason for this slant? The patent figures show the same alignment and "slant" but I don't find it described and simply don't see the point with it.

Someone who can tell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's ever been made completely clear. Inventor wrote something once about being able to play octaves in the bass using the last two fingers of the left hand, but surely that's not enough of an answer. However after playing with the slant for 30 years, I do find the unslanted version awkward and disorienting. Perhaps the reverse would be true if the hand were on the other foot, or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's ever been made completely clear. Inventor wrote something once about being able to play octaves in the bass using the last two fingers of the left hand, but surely that's not enough of an answer. However after playing with the slant for 30 years, I do find the unslanted version awkward and disorienting. Perhaps the reverse would be true if the hand were on the other foot, or whatever.

Hm...everything becomes natural once you get used to it...it is about the same with anglos....if you don't have rather long hands the distant buttons are hard to reach with the little finger and many players let the instrument rotate making it easier. I felt it oughtt o be the same here and an opposite slant might make things easier....so,dear "Inventor" come and assist or send a messenger...Can it possbly be that it suits players with fairly large hands perfectly?

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...