Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I would love a wooden ended tenor treble,they are however rare and expensive........ justifying spending 3500-4000 pounds to the family so I can have a low c,d and e is tricky .......

I do however have a very good treble.would it be feasible to add some solder to the 4 a flat and g sharp reeds so that I have one aflat\g sharp and perhaps an f ,d and c?

Has anyone done this or is it not a sensible idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have been doing this thrice insofar as I added a low F to both of my trebles (push and pull for each one) and a low B to the TT (and as well with one LH reed of each of my 20b Anglos). It is easily executed (I would gladly point you to the respective threads where this had been discussed in extenso). The widest alteration I applied was from D# to B, thus 4 semitones (correction: the Lachenal 20b has got an A in the place of a D, thus 5 semitones), but I reckon it could have been quite a bit more, as the reeds seemed to be working as Ab as initially "soldered". D and C would be a bit challenging but might work (I seem to recall that @adrian brown has told us about a similar alteration for some of his Anglos) - if not, it would be reversable.

 

However, adding some pieces of bisonoric "Anglo logic" seems debatable to me - I have not been that bold at least, despite my recurring miusing about such a solution. However, fellow concertinist @Little John has done that to his Crane Duet and is apparently very happy with the ouitcome.

 

To sum it up: Technically, it can be done, at least partially. The bisonoric thing for the EC is a matter of personal experience. Without that you would be gaining just one not, which would have to be the F.

 

Perhaps you could just have - or at least start with - an F/D button in the place of the Ab (which I would rather be willing to give up as the G# is an important note since it gives you the low third of Emaj). The low D (Dmin!) is of much more importance than the low C IMO (judging from my playing a TT). I would even consider an E rather than a C I guess (which would be fine on the RH side, as a G#/E button)...

 

Best wishes - 🐺

 

Edited by Wolf Molkentin
expanding + one correction (following LJ)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking along similar lines for my duet to fill some vacant slots, leaning toward the bisonoric solution, however the idea keeps popping into my head of using a single reed for both push and pull thus gaining an extra note.  The only major problem with this that I can think of is that with no valve on the draw the air would tend to push the pad open when the note is not being played.  I'm sure others have considered this.  does anyone have a fix?  I can envision  an entire instrument set up this way:  same # of buttons but half the reeds and valves.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, wunks said:

The only major problem with this that I can think of is that with no valve on the draw the air would tend to push the pad open when the note is not being played.

 

This has been discussed in extenso - I seem to recall that the dual responsiveness of the single reed is deemed debatable (whereas I can hardly imagine a pad being forced to open just by the air slipping through the clearance, as the reed would not open with the pad being closed initially...).

 

Best wishes - 🐺

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, wunks said:

I've been thinking along similar lines for my duet to fill some vacant slots, leaning toward the bisonoric solution, however the idea keeps popping into my head of using a single reed for both push and pull thus gaining an extra note.  The only major problem with this that I can think of is that with no valve on the draw the air would tend to push the pad open when the note is not being played.  I'm sure others have considered this.  does anyone have a fix?  I can envision  an entire instrument set up this way:  same # of buttons but half the reeds and valves.  

 

Normal reeds don't sound when drawing air through them in the wrong direction. I once attempted to make a special bidirectional reed but it wasn't very successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wolf Molkentin said:

I have been doing this thrice insofar as I added a low F to both of my tenor trebles ...

 

However, adding some pieces of bisonoric "Anglo logic" seems debatable to me - I have not been that bold at least, despite my recurring miusing about such a solution. However, fellow concertinist @Little John has done that to his Crane Duet and is apparently very happy with the ouitcome.

 

 

[Wolf - did you mean "treble" rather than "tenor treble" in that first line?]

 

Indeed, I do have a couple of bisonoric buttons on my Cranes, to extend the range downwards. I've done this for years and am quite used to it. Being at the bottom of the range they are used frequently enough to be really useful, but not so frequently as to cause any problems. The biggest change I've made is to lower Eb3 to A2 - six semitones. That worked just by adding solder on one instrument, but on another with particularly short reeds we had to find a longer reed to achieve it. I should point out that I've always had the work done by professionals.

 

In the case of a treble English, lowering the Ab to F is quite common (and useful). If you're happy to go bisonoric I'd suggest F and D on the Ab button and E on the G# button; or E and C if you can either lower the reed by as much as 8 semitones or find a longer alternative reed that will fit. This way the notes will appear on the "natural" sides of the instrument, facilitating thirds and fifths.

 

I know of one English with bisonoric buttons. Steve Turner plays one where the bottom row on each side has a pair of reeds tuned an octave apart.

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Little John said:

or E and C

 

sacrificing the G# entirely?

 

(and thank you for the hint, of course you have it right)

 

Best wishes - 🐺

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Wolf Molkentin said:

 

sacrificing the G# entirely?

 

 

Yes. G# could be used for a first inversion of E major, but are you likely to want that if you have the low E anyway? And low C would be really useful.

 

As a comparison, I've sacrificed C#3 at the bottom of my Cranes in favour of bisonoric B2/Bb2 (on one instrument) and B2/G2 on another. I don't need C# for first inversion A major as I have A2 on another bisonoric button (along with Eb3 which is occasionally useful in G minor tunes).

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure - in fact I'm fond of the first inversion, played in Fmaj even prior to my adding the low F, and thus miss the F# (for Dmaj). In minor keys the first  inversion is not so strong, but yes, would I go bisonoric I would add the D (combined with F) on the LHS and the E (combined with the still regular G#) on the RHS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for the replies!

I'm in agreement with you Wolf...........

I like the idea of an f and d where the a flat is.

And an e and g# or a c and g#

Edited by scoopet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, scoopet said:

I would love a wooden ended tenor treble,they are however rare and expensive........ justifying spending 3500-4000 pounds to the family so I can have a low c,d and e is tricky .......

I do however have a very good treble.would it be feasible to add some solder to the 4 a flat and g sharp reeds so that I have one aflat\g sharp and perhaps an f ,d and c?

Has anyone done this or is it not a sensible idea?

Scoopet,  I do not think this a good idea  at all.    The reason being  that  playing  a keyboard instrument  has a lot to do with paterns  and  logic  of fingering.  When you go altering the  logic of the layout  it can turn you into a single instrument  player....  only being able to make sense of this one altered keyboard. 

   

Some people  have  changed  the  low  Ab or G#  to  an F  on their EC  trebles  and  I  really do not like it when  I've  bought  an instrument with this  alteration  because  I  have  often owned  Tennor Trebles  and  beyond  where  that  F natural will occur  in its  correct location.  Even in  single line melody  playing it can be nice to change octaves , a  lovely device  often used   where  two fiddlers  play together  and one drops down an octave  , and the Tennor Treble or Baritone  Treble  allows  to do this    by    mirroring ( or reversing)  of the button patern  in  the player's head.  So to  cement  the  logic  of the  EC  keyboard  layout  into one's  brain, coupled with a bit of  practice  can expand  playing pleasure  greatly.

 

 

 

So,  in my opinion,  fiddling with the standard layout  can   mess  with  one's future progress  and enjoyment...... of course in times past  most players would have only the one instrument  and  a modification  to increase the range  would be  seen to be beneficial...  

 

 

Edited by Geoff Wooff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Is this Geoff because you have a vested interest in me "buggering up" my /your lachenal new model!!.....🤔

I do see your logic however........but if I can't afford a tenor or baritone treble then do you agree it makes sense as a last resort.

 

Edited by scoopet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, scoopet said:

but if I can't afford a tenor or baritone treble then do you agree it makes sense as a last resort.

 

This is exaxtly what I‘d been reclaiming all the years - however now that I have a TT at hand I still value the low F of my ET which I keep playing (and any other treble I have or might acquire) - and I expanded the concept doing a similar thing with the TT (low B).

 

I can anticipate your reacting Geoff: of course I could go for a BT - but I reckon I would give her an F,  just one octave lower, then, asf. ad infinitum...

 

For me, it‘s just too tempting only having to sacrifice this single enharmonic duplicate, which is not strictly needed, in order to have one more „bass“ note...

 

Finally, I find it important to point out that the different positions of the low F on the (E)T (you know which one, scoopet) on the one hand and the TT on the other hand are not getting in my way when switching back and forth between the two types.

 

Best wishes - 🐺

 

Edited by Wolf Molkentin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Geoff Wooff said:

 

So,  in my opinion,  fiddling with the standard layout  can   mess  with  one's future progress  and enjoyment......

 

 

... at the expense of one's current enjoyment, presumably!

 

I understand your point, Geoff, but if this "fiddling" is confined to the margins I don't see much harm. My first Crane was a 35 button which only goes up to G5. As on many such instruments the Eb5 was repurposed to A5. I played this for two years and when I got a larger instrument there was no difficulty in changing to A5 in the standard position.

 

Is there really anything wrong with being a one-instrument player? If it does what you want and the others don't why would you want to play others? The modifications are reversible, so you can do the same to any new instruments you acquire (I've done this) and others who buy your instrument can revert to standard if they wish.

 

LJ

 

Edited by Little John
Clarity
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I do not think  you  have intentions  of  'buggering up'  The  New Model    but  I'm more thinking of the overal picture.  The idea of  upsetting  the  patern  is  my main  concern.  Ok  I understand  about not being able , or comfortable , to spend the money  but prices  do appear to be softening  on the concertina market.  I so much enjoyed  the first time  I took the Baritone Treble to an Irish session  and found  I could  drop  the ocatve  on any tune  , almost automatically,  BECAUSE  I had  absorbed  the  finger  paterns of, at least  , the common keys.

 

I think what you are  proposing is quite radical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, alex_holden said:

 

Normal reeds don't sound when drawing air through them in the wrong direction. I once attempted to make a special bidirectional reed but it wasn't very successful.

Alex, do you mean the reed it's self or the reed/shoe combination?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wunks said:

Alex, do you mean the reed it's self or the reed/shoe combination?

 

The reed assembly. The tongue alone wouldn't do anything if it wasn't clamped to the frame. It's the regular interruptions to airflow as the tongue is sucked down and temporarily blocks the opening that generates the sound of the reed. If you blow air through it the other way, the tongue just lifts up a bit and it makes a quiet hiss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall that someone had been successful insofar that the reed would eventually sound both ways, but far from any sufficient, let alone pleasing tone...

 

Best wishes - 🐺

Share this post


Link to post
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

×