Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm replying to Rhomylly's post here in "Teaching & Learning", because it's an appropriate place, and I hope the Topic will continue.

 

...I am not going to get any better or ever learn decent ornamentation if I don't start learning cross-row fingering.

 

Of course, after 18 months of playing ITM on the G row, this is not easy. In fact, what I really think about switching I probably shouldn't say on a public forum...

Switch to the English? An excellent choice! :D

 

Well, maybe not. Adding the English to your repertoire might be worthwhile, but there's no need to abandon the anglo. :)

 

But now to be more serious:

 

I need sympathy  :(  and encouragement that yes, this is the next natural step to take.

Absolutely. I've always advocated learning cross-row fingering as a way of expanding one's capabilities, but now I'll go even farther:

 

I think it's a good idea to start out learning cross-fingering... and maybe even a bad idea to start out restricting yourself to in-a-row playing. Here's some of my reasoning:

 

. 1) Stay-in-a-row teaches as fundamental a concept which is in the main invalid, i.e., that tunes in general can be played on a single row.

.. In fact, this is true for only two key signatures out of a possible twelve.

.. Even in those two "keys", it's not true for any tune that includes accidentals.

.. Nor is it true of many tunes in those two "keys" which go below the middle button in the left hand.

.. Thinking in terms of "rows" doesn't so much give one a strong base to build on, as a too small foundation which doesn't provide adequate support for further extension.

 

. 2) Once you leave the single-row constraint for any reason, trying to stay within a single row as much as possible simply on principle, seems artificial and pointless.

 

. 3) If you want to play not just melody, but harmonies and chords, you may need to go outside a single row just to get the right combinations of notes in a single bellows direction.

 

. 4) By limiting the options of which buttons to use, it limits one's ability to control expression (legato vs. staccato, connection vs. separation, accenting, etc.).

.. E.g., playing a triplet of F#-G-A all on the G row tends to force a "bouncy" style, while using the 3rd row to get all three notes on the pull allows a more flowing style, if it's wanted. (I could give many other examples, but that would distract from my main point.)

.. All too often, failing to learn expressive control at the start often makes it more, not less difficult to learn it later, because one becomes used to having the in-the-row style control the expression, and it can then be difficult to switch habits from being controlled to being in control.

 

. 5) Aside from issues of expression, restricting the fingers to a single row can reduce control, and possibly even be less comfortable.

.. I find that in cross-row playing my fingers are generally more spread, and that this gives me more flexibility and control.

.. To illustrate this, I'll extend my above example: Once you go to the 3rd row for the G in an all-pull F#-G-A triplet, there's really no need to return to the G row for the A. Try it that way, and then try ending the triplet with the C-row A, instead. Work on getting both smooth before deciding for yourself which is more comfortable. In fact, you might opt for one or the other (or even the all-G-row triplet) at different times, e.g., depending on what notes follow the triplet.

 

A final caveat: I find that my own comfort and control -- especially when staying within in a single row -- can be significantly affected by my posture, the alignment of my shoulder, and even the muscle tension in my abdomen.

 

To all brand-new players: start cross-row fingering NOW!

I guess agreeing at this point would be redundant. :)

  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

This is an interesting thread because for a beginner practising on your own the whole issue of which fingers to choose is quite daunting and I, for one, am constantly wondering whether I am making the right choice. For me, it is less a question of going across the rows (after all there are 30 buttons why use only 10) but to what extent you should push-pull and to what extent you should choose buttons because this gives you extended sequences on a push or a pull.

 

I started learning with Mick Bramich's book. He teaches the fingering for scales going across the rows and for each scale he teaches an alternative method where you "pull the notes out of the box". This gives the impression that he only used such sequences on the pull and not the push. However, he also introduces this at the point in the book where he gives up notating the tunes with the buttons to be played shown as well. I ended up ignoring this therefore and after a month with the book my technique was essentially. Push/pull along the C row with F# on the G row of the left hand and anything above the E on the right-hand was then down on the G row. So I virtually didn't use the G row on the left hand at all.

 

Then I got the MadForTrad tutorial and this seemed to advocate, in general, playing the A part of tunes essentially on the C row (unless it got high) which is essentially what I had been doing, but then for the B part moving to the G row - i.e. this differed from what I was doing because I was playing all the high notes with my right hand across both rows instead of with two hands on the G row.

 

Now I have a hybrid approach where I am much more prepared to use the G row of the left-hand (which I found quite awkward at first) but if the tune suits I still quite often play the B part just with two fingers on four buttons of the right hand - it is amazing how many different tunes you can sound with just these fingers!

 

But this is a very push-pull technique. It seems to be quite close to what Niall Vallely does but, on the other hand, I often read it advocated (for instance in Simon Well's tutor) that you should try to pick out a sequence on the pull followed by a sequence on the push. On the other hand again, I read that it is the push/pull that gives the music the Irish feel. So it is very confusing. My impression is that the push-pull often does sound better than pulling sequences of notes but I may be mistaken. What we need is some software which allows you not only to slow CDs from the professionals down but also to determine on which button each note was played!!!!

It is something that I am always thinking about and is always a question mark in my mind.

 

Just my random thoughts,

 

Ritchie (by no means qualified to give an opinion on this!)

Edited by Ritchie_Kay
Posted
I think it's a good idea to start out learning cross-fingering... and maybe even a bad idea to start out restricting yourself to in-a-row playing.

 

Absolutely correct, in my view. Learning to play only in the native rows establishes patterns that are extremely hard to change and which greatly limit your capabilities as a player.

 

Playing scales is important, as Ken said. Playing them repetitively, following different routes, can also be helpful.

 

After I've learned a tune, I find it helpful to practice it using different fingering patterns, which I think makes it easier for me to pick up music on the fly at sessions. I also like to take a tune I know well and play it in different keys.

 

Rhomylly, you have my symapthy, but believe me, this isn't that hard to fix. Scales! Different patterns!

Posted
But this is a very push-pull technique. It seems to be quite close to what Niall Vallely does but, on the other hand, I often read it advocated (for instance in Simon Well's tutor) that you should try to pick out a sequence on the pull followed by a sequence on the push. On the other hand again, I read that it is the push/pull that gives the music the Irish feel. So it is very confusing. My impression is that the push-pull often does sound better than pulling sequences of notes but I may be mistaken. What we need is some software which allows you not only to slow CDs from the professionals down but also to determine on which button each note was played!!!!

It is something that I am always thinking about and is always a question mark in my mind.

 

Just my random thoughts,

 

Ritchie (by no means qualified to give an opinion on this!)

 

Ritchie, from my own admittedly limited experience, I think your approach is just fine. I don't think any two really proficient players play in exactly the same manner, some will play more on the pull, others will have a more in and our approach, etc. For my own part I experiment with the tune, I figure out several ways to play the basic tune but then tend to settle on the method that allows me to play the tune quickly (if I need to), that is air efficient...I don't mind using the air button, but I prefer doing it when I have a longer note to work with, that adds punch in just the right spots and allows me to ornament the tune effectively. For example, one some tunes I like using the b on the G row as opposed to the C row because I that makes doing a b roll easier... if the b is only very short though I will just use the right hand one on the G roll since my right index finger is probably my best finger in terms of strength and dexterity. The push A on the accidental row gets used by me fairly often since it often provides a good point to use the air button (I pull slightly more on the pull then the push... I can't think of a single tune I need to use the air button to expand the bellows.. just to contract them.. particularly since i don't like to open them more than about half way.

 

Anyway, those are my thoughts. Take them for what you feel they are worth :)

 

--

Bill

Posted (edited)
I need sympathy  :(  and encouragement that yes, this is the next natural step to take.

Rhomylly

 

You have my sympathy and you should take this step!

From my experience I can advise you to start cross-fingering in a slow and natural way. I took a tune, that I played in G on the G-row and identified the "places" where I had difficulties with fingering/bellow changes. For those "places" I explored for alternatives on the C- and Accidentals row till I found a pattern that felt much better.

 

To illustrate this: About two years ago, I tried to play the Kesh Jig (very cross row) as teached in Mick Bramish's book. Due to a very strong orientation that I had from the past (harmonica playing) I got completely lost and even started to "hate" the tune. So I did not play the tune any more, but started discovering cross row playing with other tunes in my own (slow) way.

 

Last week, during a session the Kesh jig was played, and I could play along without too much problems! I discovered that I used some cross-rowing that I learned myself with other tunes. So the alternative patterns are now remembered by my fingers. :)

 

So do not force it, but start doing it in a way that suits you.

 

 

 

 

Finally to illustrate some extremes in cross-rowing, I quoted a part of a previous mail, where three finger pattern for the scale of G on a 30b G/C Anglo (Wheatstone lay-out) are shown.

 

 

G major on the G-row:

scale_G_Grow.gif

 

 

G major all pulling!

It's really a zig-zag so EC players will like it :lol: .

scale_G_pull.gif

 

 

 

G major almost all pushing:

scale_G_push.gif

 

Edited by Henk van Aalten
Posted
...I am not going to get any better or ever learn decent ornamentation if I don't start learning cross-row fingering.

Of course, after 18 months of playing ITM on the G row, this is not easy. In fact, what I really think about switching I probably shouldn't say on a public forum

To all brand-new players: start cross-row fingering NOW!

 

I’ve watched this discussion with some interest, and growing concern with the somewhat narrow direction it is taking. Cross-row fingering is not the only way to become a skillful player in the Irish style, far from it! Before throwing out along the row playing as “mostly invalid” and “limiting”, let’s think this through a bit. Before I dig in, let me say one thing to start however…I believe there is no right or wrong way for any of this. The choice of style is a very personal thing, and should reflect both who a player is and how s/he wishes to sound. It should not, in my humble opinion, be a choice made simply to follow the crowd, which these days is heavily cross-row oriented in workshops.

 

First, consider the basic design of the instrument. When Carl Uhlig built the first anglo in 1834, it was a simple one row instrument of ten keys. The general idea was to saw the keyboard of a melodeon in half, and give one half to each of the two sides of the “Konzertina”; its basic design was meant for playing along the row. A second row was added soon thereafter. Until fairly recent times (say, the 1960’s or so), the bulk of Irish players had two row instruments, and they pretty much all played along the row. The picture was similar in England, and it was driven by economics; the two row instruments were more affordable. William Kimber played a two row until later in his life, and so far as I can see he only used the third row in ONE of his many recorded tunes, even when using a three row instrument; all those chords are played just on two rows. He played only in C and G, along the row. So if we are strictly speaking of old timey traditional playing anywhere in England and Ireland (and for that matter the US, where the old nineteenth century tutors all were for along the row style), we are pretty much talking about along the row playing.

 

But back to Ireland. There were/are four dialects of Clare playing, according to Fintan Vallely’s 1999 treatise on ITM:

1) Southwest Clare: “highly rhythmical, melodically simple, with single-row fingering techniques on (two row) Anglo German instruments”. Some of the best known recorded players are Solis Lillis, Elizabeth Crotty, John Kelly, Sonny Murray, Bernard O’Sullivan, Tommy McMahon, and the late Tommy McCarthy. Some pretty fantastic stuff….have you listened to their recordings?

2) North Clare: “most…favoured melodically simple music and single-row fingering, accentuating the inside or G-row….The overriding feature of this dialect was its emphasis on rhythm for the set dancers.” Great recorded examples are Chris and Anne Droney. If you have not heard Chris’ first album (The Flowing Tide, on the old Free Reed label, sadly now not in print), then you have missed some really hard-driving reels in what we in Texas call ‘high lonesome’ sound. Chris never seems to have had any trouble playing along the G-row! Frank Edgley’s tutor, by the way, is for this style of along the row playing.

3) East Clare: “(Two row) German concertinas were played here…played mainly by women who seldom played beyond the confines of their own kitchens”. This dialect has an “archaic repertoire and ethereal settings”. The best known recorded musician of this style today is of course Mary MacNamara, who like the others plays in an along the row style, mostly in C and G (or, on a G/D instrument, in G and D). This style of concertina playing has so permeated the local repertoire that even many fiddle tunes are played there (by fiddlers) in C and G settings! If you’ll read through Mary’s website, or listen to her playing, you’ll see that she favors soul over speed and technical fireworks.

4) Which brings us to mid-west Clare, where the “…style uses cross-row fingering, intense melodic ornamentation, and has a large repertoire of dance tunes”. The cross-row fingering here is a fairly recent development (post WWII), attributed to Paddy Murphy. Noel Hill took this style and further advanced it, becoming a famous, professional virtuoso in the process. In his popular classes, he has spread this style to a whole generation of concertina players.

 

Any of these styles can be labeled “Irish traditional”, although the nod would have to go to along the row playing if one wished to be starchily old-time traditional. But the rub is what has happened with the music in the last 20 years, and although mostly associated within concertinadom with the cross-row players, it was certainly not of their sole doing. As big mega-popular groups like the Bothy Band got fired up in the 70’s, the tempo of recorded Irish music got ever quicker, as the music played to concert venues. The older West Clare players mostly played at a more relaxed tempo or (when more quickly) for dancing the sets. Many of the newer generation play for concerts and listening, and speed and technical aspects have started to come to the fore; this probably reflects or at least is congruent with our increasingly frenetic pace of modern urban life. Back to Fintan Vallely:

 

“Clare concertina music has experienced a surge of interest since the 1980’s….But in attracting large numbers of learners, they have failed to stem the decline of regional concertina dialects. Competitive performance and commercial recording have spurred the growth of a “modernist” generic style and a meticulous imitation of professional performers. Emphasis on such technical accomplishment has generated prodigiously-ornamented tune settings and the introduction of non-local repertoires; it has also led to the separation of ‘performance’ music from ‘dance’ music’.”

 

Clue to the symbolism here: read “cross-fingering” for “modernist” and you can follow much of what is going on. Most of the older generation in West Clare simply played slower and with fewer ornaments. A listen to the Russell Family of Doolin (another old Free Reed LP), or to recordings of Junior Crehan and Bobby Casey on the fiddle, will show you what it was like.

 

Which gets us back to the crux of the matter here. Any of these styles sounds nice, and I would humbly say all are “valid”. But I would first ask, are you an extremist? If so, are you a modernist or a traditionalist? Do you want to play lickety-split reels loaded with ornaments and pyrotechnics, and amaze your friends? Cross fingering is for you; go have fun. Or do you want to follow the old, more rural ways, and/or explore the eerie and/or soulful edges of this music? Here the deck is stacked towards along-the-row older styles. And if you want simply to be somewhere in the middle, that’s great too, but be careful of throwing out along-the-row styles or of not learning them “in the beginning”…because you’ll need them. Listen to Chrois Droney and Elizabeth Crotty (or in England, Scan Tester) do octave playing….along the row. Or to Jackie Daly play some old Kerry polkas…along the row. And, since you are a woman, realize that most of the women who have recorded on this instrument that is so famously associated with women (Anne Droney, Jaqueline McCarthy, Elizabeth Crotty, Mary MacNamara, and Kitty Hayes, for starters) play in along-the-row styles. I’ll let you draw any conclusions; I’m just stating the simple facts.

 

Have fun. But don’t feel somehow inadequate in playing this instrument as it was originally designed, and playing it as generations before you have played it. Not everone has to sound like the latest red hot CD.

Posted (edited)
Finally to illustrate some extremes in cross-rowing, I quoted a part of a previous mail, where three finger pattern for the scale of G on a 30b G/C Anglo (Wheatstone lay-out) are shown. ...

As a variation on your "almost all push" scale, I had my Ceili built with two C#'s on the first button in the RH accidental row, but on the second button I have a pull D# (I didn't feel I needed two of that) and a push F#. So in that octave I can get an entirely push G scale.

 

And on the highest button in the RH G row I got F# in both directions, so I can also do an all-push G scale in that octave, and with my pull D at the top of the RH accidental row I can get that scale all on pull, except for the top G.

 

I don't try to do whole tunes all in one direction, but in shorter phrases I like being able to choose whether to do all push, all pull, or a mixture. I haven't regretted those button choices, and I often wish I had a push F# in the left hand.

 

Edited because I hit the wrong button, posting before I was finished. :o

Edited by JimLucas
Posted
.....I haven't regretted those button choices, and I often wish I had a push F# in the left hand.

Edited because I hit the wrong button....

Just a coincidence or maybe too much wrong buttons around :unsure: :rolleyes: :) :D :lol:

Not wishing to revive an old debate, but I do find that I hit wrong keys much more often on my computer keyboard -- with it's big "buttons" -- than on my concertinas -- with their small buttons.

 

In this case, however, it was the wrong virtual "button" that I "hit" with a wayward mouse click.

Posted (edited)
I’ve watched this discussion with some interest, and growing concern with the somewhat narrow direction it is taking.

An interesting interpretation, to be sure.

In all my many years on this planet, I think that's the first time I've encountered espousing versatility described as "narrow".

 

Before throwing out along the row playing as “mostly invalid”...

[The following paragraph replaces an erroneous statement I made in my original text, based on a mistaken reading on my part.]

Sorry, Dan. I didn't mean to suggest that along-the-row playing was itself "invalid", but that there is a great deal of music for which it simply doesn't work, and therefor it isn't valid as a fundamental principle, but only as a choice of style. I thought my examples -- tunes in any but the two "home" keys, G tunes that use the lower-octave E, tunes with accidentals -- made that clear, but maybe not.

 

...and “limiting”...

Limiting onesself to an along-the-row technique is... well, limiting. If you want to discuss the pros and cons of a person wanting to limit themself to such a style, fine. You've given examples of highly respected players who did or do play that way, and to imitate their styles, it helps to imitate their technique(s). I am not -- and I don't think anyone here is -- suggesting that one should never use that technique, nor even that noone should be allowed to limit themselves to those styles/techniques.

 

What I am suggesting is that it's easier -- and yes, even better -- to learn to not mentally restrict yourself to single-row playing, but then later decide to limit yourself to that style, than it is to limit yourself in the beginning and then mabye later try to free your mind and fingers from the one-row rut. I'm not saying that one shouldn't learn the one-row concept; neither am I advocating any particular row-crossing pattern. Instead, I am proposing that it's beneficial to learn that they're all contained within a notes-are-where-you-find-them concept.

 

…I believe there is no right or wrong way for any of this. The choice of style is a very personal thing, and should reflect both who a player is and how s/he wishes to sound. It should not, in my humble opinion, be a choice made simply to follow the crowd,...

I agree completely with that statement. In fact, I consider that to be part and parcel of my suggestion. I espouse versatility, which will then allow each individual to make their own stylistic choices, including inventing their own style, if they wish.

 

…It should not ... be a choice made simply to follow the crowd, which these days is heavily cross-row oriented in workshops.

Nor should it be a choice made simply to oppose the crowd. If you like the fad, follow it. If you don't, either follow something else or blaze your own trail.

 

Cross-row fingering is not the only way to become a skillful player in the Irish style, far from it!

That's another thing that I don't think any of the rest of us said, or even implied. For that matter, none of us even used the word "Irish", and only Rhomylly -- who admittedly was the inspiration for this Topic -- mentioned ITM. And what she said was that she was finding it necessary to go outside a single row to get the effects she wanted, and that she felt that having restricted herself to single-row playing in the beginning was making it more difficult to do so.

 

If you think you can teach Rhomylly to get the effects she desires while sticking to single-row playing, please do. If you can do it here in the C.net Forum, I think we'll all learn something. But if you're just trying to raise people's consciousness regarding that style, then this is the wrong Topic. We're (well, at least I am) trying to discuss the learning process, not stylistic preferences.

 

So if we are strictly speaking of old timey traditional playing anywhere in England and Ireland (and for that matter the US, where the old nineteenth century tutors all were for along the row style), we are pretty much talking about along the row playing.

As the saying goes, that's a big "if". (The emphasis is, admittedly, mine.) Because it very much is not what I was talking about when I started this Topic. Stylistic preferences and evolution of styles would be good subjects for separate topics, though. If you want to start them, I'll be happy to add my "two cents". But beware, I might agree with some of your points. :)

 

Edited to correct/replace an erroneous statement in the above.

The new text is indicated.

Edited by JimLucas
Posted (edited)

A cross-row player rises in defense of Dan Worrall.

 

I’ve watched this discussion with some interest, and growing concern with the somewhat narrow direction it is taking.

An interesting interpretation, to be sure.

In all my many years on this planet, I think that's the first time I've encountered espousing versatility described as "narrow".

I believe that Dan is referring to the discussion as narrow, no previous along-the-row players offering a defense up to now, and that he is not referring to cross-row playing as narrow.

 

Before throwing out along the row playing as “mostly invalid”...

FOUL! ..... YELLOW CARD!

 

Sorry Dan, but no one else in this thread has used the word "invalid", nor anything like it, so your argument amounts to a false accusation.  Maybe you have heard that elsewhere, and it bothers you, but to use it against our recommendations is a low blow, however unintentional.

Sorry, Jim, but the word invalid appears in your first post on this thread.

Stay-in-a-row teaches as fundamental a concept which is in the main invalid, i.e., that tunes in general can be played on a single row.

 

Not that I disagree with your fundamental statement. Still, as Dan points out, the fact that many great musicians have succeeded so well with the home row approach indicates that their musical approach is valid.

 

No one I know is interested in legislating an approach, although various schools may demand it for the week of instruction. I am glad Dan has restored some balance to the discussion. I am very much a cross-row player, to the extent I've noticed lately that my G row playing has suffered. In my case, at least, the real culprit is allowing one's approach to become stale, rather than exploring new (or old) ways and devising practice schemes that allow one to accomplish one's goals.

 

edited for grammar

Edited by Stephen Mills
Posted
Before throwing out along the row playing as “mostly invalid”...
FOUL! ..... YELLOW CARD!

Sorry Dan, but no one else in this thread has used the word "invalid", nor anything like it, so your argument amounts to a false accusation. ...

Sorry, Jim, but the word invalid appears in your first post on this thread.

Stay-in-a-row teaches as fundamental a concept which is in the main invalid, i.e., that tunes in general can be played on a single row.

Ouch! You're right, Stephen.

 

The strange thing is that I checked before making that statement. I did a ctl-F search on the page, and it showed only Dan's use of the word. And I did that search again just now, with the same (lack of) result, but then I repeated the search, and it showed. Weird! :o

 

Thanks for the correction. I'll now go correct my original post, and apologize to Dan.

But then I'll argue nevertheless that I think he misinterpreted what I said.

Posted

I wondered whether this thread was going to illuminate the different fingering styles used by players seeing as there seems to be many possible variations but it has turned into a philosophical discussion which seems like it could split the concertina community.

Personally I would like to play the concertina well and I don't much care how I achieve that. What I don't want to do is to pick a solution because it seems easy now if that will ultimately limit my ability to play well later.

From Henk's reply I infer that he plays Grow by default but looks for alternatives across the rows. So far I tend to play Crow when the tune is low and Grow when it gets high choosing notes from other rows for ergonomic reasons - i.e. where C#s are involved I tend to use the left-hand Grow B and D or to avoid playing two consecutive notes with the same finger but I do not try to pick notes so that I get extended stretches on a push or a pull.

So some questions:

would you say you have a default row at all which you deviate from? (as I have described above - i.e. if I saw a tune which started on a low D I would play it on the Crow unless I discovered it impratical later on - it looks like some people would by default push on the Grow but might deviate if it was convenient).

 

If you deviate from your "default" row what are your prime reasons for doing so? Is it to avoid too much push-pull, to achieve different ornamentation, because it is more comfortable for the fingers or another reason?

 

How does finger selection affect your playing style?

 

As an example, I was practising a piece (a jig) from a Mary Macnamara album which at one point went down and up the G arpeggio - i.e. DBG GBD. According to my way of playing I would play that on the Crow which means a bellows change for the Gs. Now along comes Dan and suggests that maybe that MM plays these things on the G row in which case you can achieve that sequence all on a push. That may help the rhythm or it might not make much difference - I bet MM could play either way and it would sound good whereas I could play it either way amd make it sound rubbish. So how much do you feel that your choice of buttons is affecting the style in which you play? Or is it just a habit?

Posted
From Henk's reply I infer that he plays Grow by default but looks for alternatives across the rows. So far I tend to play Crow when the tune is low and Grow when it gets high...

Ritchie, your comments, plus those by Henk and others raises a question for me that I hadn't thought of before. The concertina itself has two home rows, yet you speak of only one.

 

I suppose it makes sense to think of G as "the" home row on a C/G if you never play in C. But you seem to speak of the C row as if it's your home row when playing in G, and using the G row as an accessory... to be used as needed, in the same manner as the "accidental" row. So this seems to me to be a mostly along-the-row style, but not an in-the-key-row style. Are there traditional players who use this style, maybe on a 20-button instrument?

 

A separate issue is... what about other keys? Never mind (for now) keys like E or Bb on a C/G, what about D, Em, Bm, and Am, all common in Irish music? There's no way to do the first three without some row crossing, but (I feel a poll coming on) how many people

... 1) stay in the C row as much as possible, going outside only when necessary?

... 2) stay in the G row as much as possible, going outside only when necessary?

... 3) pick a sequence that alternates push and pull as much as possible?

... 4) try to minimize bellows reversals?

... 5) use different buttons and/or bellows directions at different times for the same note, maybe even within a single tune?

... 6) use some other method, or maybe don't have a "method"?

 

And there are four common "Irish" scales with a 2-sharps key signature. I don't remember the classic Greek mode names, but they start respectively on D, E, A, and B. Do people use the same buttons for the same notes regardless of the key, or do they develop different patterns, depending on where the scale starts?

Posted (edited)

That is true and, how I play at the moment, I have a default approach which I take independently of the key signature. It works equally (well or badly can't decide which :unsure: )in most key signatures.

Both the Bramich book and the MadForTrad tutorial seem to point in this direction. At least, they are my main learning resources and that is what I ended up doing. But in both cases they don't lead you through each tune note for note and so you end up guessing based on the principles they outlined but maybe you pay more attention to some principles than others. I wonder what conclusions other people who followed these tutorials came to. Certainly I don't see how you could start treating G as the default row (according to my definition) following these guides.

 

I don't suppose it much matters as well as you play well but I do wonder if I have ended up doing what nobody else does!

 

There does seem to be a satisfying logic in regarding the middle row as the default row and adding the others as appropriate. Although as I say, I would say the Crow is my default row when the tune is low and the Grow when the tune is high. There is a certain pleasing logic in that too.

Edited by Ritchie_Kay
Posted (edited)
Personally I would like to play the concertina well and I don't much care how I achieve that. What I don't want to do is to pick a solution because it seems easy now if that will ultimately limit my ability to play well later.

 

I’d like to back up a moment and take a goal-oriented perspective. Most instruments try to lay out their scales in some sort of intuitive way, the Anglo and English taking different routes, the Anglo even taking multiple routes. Eventually, when you have mastered your instrument, the location of the notes is essentially arbitrary (not true for harmony on the Anglo, I hasten to add). What I mean is that if conscious cognition intervenes, you haven’t learned the instrument yet. The fact that almost all of us are typing on a QWERTY keyboard is testimonial to the fact that great skill can be acquired on even an intentionally reverse-ergonomic setup.

 

What I’m suggesting is that at the end of the day, there really is no home row, just home scales. The G scale requires the C row for playing the lower E; the C scale requires the G row for playing the high D. I surmise that the reason Noel Hill, for example, requires specific ways of playing things is that if one does not develop stylized ways of playing in a particular scale, smoothness suffers as you pause to consider your fingering choices. This need not mean only one way per scale, however. I think that one of the strengths of the Bramich book is that it teaches multiple scales for some key choices.

 

Practically speaking, what does this mean? Speaking melodically only, any scalar pattern is sufficient if you learn it, home-row or cross-row. Learning pull- or push-only scales, while not altogether practical due to air constraints, get the alternative fingerings in your brain so that a rapid passage can be played without a bellows reversal, if that is your wish.

 

Many people do not like practicing scales, but at the beginner stage, particularly, I think they are the fastest way to learn your instrument. Once you learn the C scale, say, which only requires mastering the change in bellows pattern as you shift sides, you feel good, but can you then play a scalar pattern smoothly? 1-3-2-4-3-5-4-6-5-7-6-8 and back down. 1-8-1 2-1-2 3-2-3 4-3-4 5-4-5 6-5-6 7-6-7 8 and back down. You’ll get tripped up when you shift sides again. If you can play these with fluidity, you have made a good start on learning your instrument. (This is not to say this is the only way to learn an instrument.) The trouble with sight reading, however, is that you will fall back on your already learned fingering choices. But back to the original point, if you’ve mastered your scales, there really is no home row, just home scalar patterns, which may or may not correlate strongly with a row.

 

If you’ve got a 30 button, I further recommend that you learn all the buttons almost immediately. Don’t let a day pass unless you have sounded every reed on your concertina in context (scale, arpeggio, or tune). Otherwise you’ll find yourself one day wishing for a pressed A above middle C and not realizing you have one. (I must admit that it still takes me several seconds of hard thought to know what note will sound when I press the far upper right button on the right side of my concertina.)

 

Another great way to learn the other buttons is to add harmony as soon as possible. Trying to sustain a harmony note through 2 or 3 melody notes inevitably demands learning alternatives for the melody notes. Try playing a scale with an added fourth above. Learn to do triplets or ornaments with all notes in one bellows direction (but do not assume this is the only or best way to do them!)

 

Don’t stick to the keys of G, C and D. Play “Carolan’s Welcome” as it is in the Bramich book instead of finding it in a friendlier key. It’s not all bad medicine. I find playing in the flat keys fun and refreshing. Find “Flatbush Waltz” in Gm, a great tune, or try this air I posted once before. It almost plays as if the accidental row were the home row, and harmonizes as well as the C and G home rows, especially if you use the pulled C on the G row, left side. (Not reaching the end of the bellows is a real obstacle when adding harmony, however.)

 

But back to the original issue. Many, if not most, of the past Anglo greats learned on 20-button instruments, which naturally limited their options. Even if they had 30 buttons, it is unlikely they learned from anything but home row players and obviously they play enormously well. It’s all about getting out the music you hear. I remember a story about Art Tatum, that most versatile of jazz piano players, who was listening to a guy in a bar one night. His friend said, “Come on, let’s go. That guy don’t play nothing but straight C-minor blues.” Tatum said, “Yeah, but if I could play the C-minor blues like that, I’d die a happy man.”

 

This post tweaked repeatedly.

Edited by Stephen Mills
Posted
I suppose it makes sense to think of G as "the" home row on a C/G if you never play in C.  But you seem to speak of the C row as if it's your home row when playing in G, and using the G row as an accessory... to be used as needed, in the same manner as the "accidental" row.  So this seems to me to be a mostly along-the-row style, but not an in-the-key-row style.  Are there traditional players who use this style, maybe on a 20-button instrument?

 

I surprised that that seems surprising. The very first tune in the Bramich book is in Gmaj but he plays it on the C-row (there is no F#). In the first tune in which an F# appears he goes to the G row for this note alone. So I can't be the only person who came away with the ideas that the Grow is not necessarily the default row for G major tunes.

Posted

One quick comment before I rush off to rehearsal.

What I’m suggesting is that at the end of the day, there really is no home row, just home scales.

Stephen, that's your conception, and you're welcome to argue that it's good, or even superior, but Richard's descripton of his own playing tells me that he does have a home row. His fingers spend most of their time there (though they apparently have a vacation home in the right-hand G row where they stay when the tune spends an extended period on the heights), and it's the center of their coordinate system, whether he's thinking about what he's playing or not, and no matter what key he's playing in. From that home his fingers make occasional trips on various errands -- e.g., to play an F# or C#, -- but they always return "home", and that's where they take their rest.

 

(Richard, if that's not right, please correct me.)

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
×
×
  • Create New...