Ritchie_Kay Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 (edited) (Richard, if that's not right, please correct me.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well first of all I am still learning so I don't feel particularly attached to my technique. I don't quite understand Stephen's distinction to be honest. What I do at the moment is a pattern which would handle any scale. If I need B or E flats I would add them in as appropriate. This might force me to decide to play some of the notes that I might otherwise play on the Crow elsewhere. I.e. if I played a B flat on the accidental row on the left hand and then needed an A I would play it next door on the accidental row rather than dropping back to the Crow to avoid two notes on different buttons with the same figure [you see Stephen I do know my accidentals row well, more or less). But I would still consider that to be consistent with my described style - i.e. it is a deviation from the default row. I suppose there may be tunes where there is so much deviation that it is not obvious that there is a default row but I still feel that that best describes my approach. Edited March 8, 2005 by Ritchie_Kay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashkettle Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 I'm with Ritchie on this. I've mostly learned from the same resources and I use the CRow as my "home row" for any key. Of course, I often leave that row when I need to. That spoken, I'm currently working on learning GMaj as all pulls and the All-but-one-note-push. I feel if I can get a good feel for GMaj in all three scale progression patterns, eventually I'll feel comfortable enough to switch between them as necessary. That's when I feel I'll become good enough to really add ornamentation and make the song really my own. Of course, all this is subjective and personal opinion. If I wanted to, I imagine I could have purchased an anglo with G/D and stayed primarily in the rows for playing. I prefer the understated styles of Mary MacNamara (or for a perfect example on whistle, Micho Russell) to Noel Hill's style (though I gasp at his technical perfection) when playing. Playing in the rows would likely be very possible for this type of music. However, I don't want to limit myself in any way to express the tune how I feel at a given moment. Once again, this is just my take on it and I'm a self-admitted novice. I still spend more time with scales than I do with actual tunes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchie_Kay Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 (edited) OK maybe I do understand Stephen's distinction although Jim's colourful description of my current style is, I think, consistent with what Stephen is saying. Each scale follows a particular pattern (or patterns) which does not correspond to an in-a-row manner of playing. So you could think that each scale has a home key pattern. Never-the-less, I might still view the Crow as the home row because I consider all these patterns to be deviations from the Crow even when there are more buttons that deviate than don't. I suppose it is just a way of looking at. But still this is very different from an approach where Grow might be the default to which deviations might be applied. The way I play all the scales would be very different in that case. So my main interest is a: is that a valid technique? (if I was the only person playing like that then I would say that it isn't ) and b: I would tend to deviate for ergonomic reasons - i.e. A next to Bb - but not in order to avoid too much push-pull. Mine is a very push-pull orientated style at present. I would be very interested to have feedback on the latter point. Edited March 8, 2005 by Ritchie_Kay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Mills Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Stephen, that's your conception...<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Absolutely, and it may have caused more confusion than enlightenment. Consider that there are 72 possible ways to finger a C scale beginning on middle C (288 ways to finger the G scale just above it!). Our 2 Rich’s have sensibly chosen the most straightforward C scale, and probably the most productive one for simple harmonies. What I’m suggesting is that at the end of the day, there really is no home row, just home scales. I should not have said this, as it presumes my framework and engenders confusion. Most people would call this a home row; I just view it as a subset of many possible home C scales. The first C scale we all learn is probably the most useful single scale out of the 72 possibilities, but sometimes a fragment of one or another C scale might be better for a specific purpose. Practicing a select 1 or 2 others, say pull- or push-only scales, will increase fluidity, suggest alternative fingerings and harmonies, teach the fingerboard, and prevent stagnation. Whether this 1 scale will suit your future needs is not possible for me to say. Try to envision what your goals will be. If, like me, you will not be happy without playing some harmony notes and perhaps some semblance of a bass line, then you may eventually find C scale #1 limiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhomylly Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 whew! having unwittingly started this blizzard discussion of techniques, perhaps I should clarify a few things about my own playing and ambitions: 1. My primary instrument is a 24-button, two-row Edgley. For those of you unfamiliar with the layout, basically all accidentals are buttons 6 and 7 on each row. The rest of the layout copies the usual 20-button layout with the addition of the a below middle c on the first button of the G row. This means I have no 3rd row, although I do like the suggestion of playing scales in all keys every day. I will likely start to do that. I ordered the Edgley in the first place because I have unusually small hands even for a woman, and he designed the 24-button for people who play ITM and have small hands. (and the sound and action happen to be fantastic, btw) 2. I will shamefacedly admit that I have not yet listened to Mary MacNamara's playing, an oversight I will correct as soon as I get to a computer that has both internet and a sound card, probably at the library 3. The main reason I am starting the torturous process of re-learning how to play with cross-row is in preparation for someday attending a workshop that favors cross-row, and hoping that doing cross-row already will give me an easier time of it. At this time, Noel Hill is my concertina guru. I look forward to going to a workshop week, either one of his or another, mostly for the fellowship, but I look forward to the learning as well. 4. I will also shamefacedly admit that until reading this thread I was unaware of the distinctively different traditional styles. It appears that I should stop buying concertinas and start buying concertina CD's. 5. I hope to move back to civilization someday (i.e. someplace with a regular session closer than 2 hours away). I think ornamentation would be helpful for this. Or am I wrong? Is straight tune playing the preferred session etiquette? 6. I also hope someday to actually (gulp) perform. If I could figure out good ornamentation and mostly stick to the rows, I would do so. But I think freeing up a couple fingers (mostly) by cross-rowing near the top of the concertina opens me up for ornamentation possibilities. Until reading this thread, I thought cross-rowing near the top was the ONLY way to achieve ornamentation possibilities. Any alternate suggestions? btw, this is a fascinating thread, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhomylly Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 And yes, Jim, I do want to add English to my repertoire/collection. Probably primarily for song accompaniment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 What I’m suggesting is that at the end of the day, there really is no home row, just home scales.I should not have said this, as it presumes my framework and engenders confusion.Most people would call this a home row; I just view it as a subset of many possible home C scales. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Stephen, my take on what you're saying is that it's a mistake to use the word "home". I.e., your "...many possible home C scales" should just be "...many possible C scales." The "home" concept implies one configuration that is used significantly more than any others. One could conceivably have a different such configuration/pattern as "home" for each key, but having several different-but-equal patterns for a given key would be contrary to the "home" concept. Also, I think those who have a "home" row have a home row, not just a home pattern. I.e., on a C/G it would be either the C row or the G row. Some might consider them both to be home -- the C row for the key of C, and the G row for the key of G, -- with all other keys considered departures from one or both of those two. That's the way I've previously interpreted the "along the rows" concept. There are indeed many different ways to conceptualize playing. While I can see that many of the scale patterns given in Mick Bramich's book could be interpreted as being centered on the C row as "home", I don't recall him using such a characterization. He does, however, say that his method is his own, and not derived from any prior Irish tradition, though through his book and CD, it seems well on its way to becoming part of the "Irish" tradition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Day Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 I do not play Irish music but do play mainly across the rows on right and left hand to play the music I like .I do however recommend that you have a listen to the playing of Phillipe Bruneau who plays French Traditional music on a one row melodion for some incredible single row playing. Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henk van Aalten Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 2. I will shamefacedly admit that I have not yet listened to Mary MacNamara's playing, an oversight I will correct as soon as I get to a computer that has both internet and a sound card, probably at the library<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I advise you to listen to Mary MacNamara's playing. IMO her playing is quite the opposite of the playing of Noel Hill. Her style is very relaxed and gives you (or at least me) the idea that with some effort you can come close to her playing (one day). Noel Hill is (as I see it) a master of ornamentation. Fascinating, but very far from my possibilities. In my opinion Tim Collins is more or less "in between". 5. I hope to move back to civilization someday (i.e. someplace with a regular session closer than 2 hours away). I think ornamentation would be helpful for this. Or am I wrong? Is straight tune playing the preferred session etiquette?<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I would advise to focus first on straight tune playing. Ornamentation, while playing in a session can be very different (depending on player and instrument) and can result in "some unstructured noise" (in the worst case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Mills Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 (edited) Stephen, my take on what you're saying is that it's a mistake to use the word "home". I.e., your "...many possible home C scales" should just be "...many possible C scales." etc. Home is where the heart is. If you’re strongly tied to the C row, so that you feel uncomfortable when away, and use a C row note where an alternative would be more fluid, then perhaps you should consider getting out more. I take it as a good sign that Ritchie Kay plays the A next to the Bb, rather than retreating back to the C row. I think of it as similar to shifting up and down the neck on a guitar. You establish a new home, with new scalar patterns, when you choose a new position. On the concertina, there is generally a home tonic scale for me that defines the most probable choice of buttons for me, but it often shifts in a later part of the tune to a different set of choices for the same scale, a different home scale, if you will, that fits that section better. I think now, however, that it would have been better to have made a few concrete suggestions than to set my own idiosyncratic cognitive framework forward. edited to add: However, this was fun. Edited March 8, 2005 by Stephen Mills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Worrall Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 RHomylly, This is good advice from Henk; I agree. Ornaments and speed are technical things that are way secondary. Learn the tune first and play it well enough to feel what it is saying; this is music first and foremost of the heart, not the brain, muscles and adrenalin glands. All the rest can come later as you progress. Most Noel Hill students will play a 30 button, three row instrument, although Noel points out on his site that a two row will do for starters. The story I heard on the particular and unusual 24 button extended two row instrument that you own (told to me by Harold Herrington) is that its fingering pattern was suggested by Jacqueline McCarthy, a young player of the old west Clare style, and then executed by Frank Edgley and his colleague Harold Herrington (they share a lot of design ideas, and both sell these), as you say specifically for Irish music. You probably know that Frank's own playing style is of the older anong-the-row type (patterned after the style of Chris Droney especially), and this particular instrument reflects that, in my opinion. Because of this, and a bit because of your newness and your current isolated location in New Mexico, I would point you toward Frank Edgley's Irish Anglo tutor...perhaps you already own it? There is a good section on ornamentation that is well suited to your instrument. I had sensed that you were not yet, as you just mentioned, well versed in various styles of Irish playing; hence the advice I gave you earlier to explore these a bit before locking into any one particular style of playing. Mary MacNamara you have now heard of. Try also Jacqueline McCarthy (especially since she seems to have had a part in designing that keyboard!), as well as a CD recently released of her late father Tommy McCarthy; both lovely players. Also recently re-released is an older recording from the concertina revival period of Bernard O'Sullivan and Tommy McMahon. Real farmer music and very captivating. And another old classic also recently released on the playing of Mrs Crotty. All these are in print still and can be Googled. Having heard some of the regional styles, and of course the viruoso playing of Noel Hill and the many younger players of that fashion, you will be in a good situation to shape your own approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchie_Kay Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 Home is where the heart is. If you’re strongly tied to the C row, so that you feel uncomfortable when away, and use a C row note where an alternative would be more fluid, then perhaps you should consider getting out more. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't mind being away from home. I just like to know where home is. However, as I described in an earlier post if I played down a G arpeggio [DBG] I would normally play it on the Crow because that is my default. If I considered the Grow to my default I would play it all there. (As an aside with a G row default I guess for a lot of tunes you would never leave home whereas there is no tune where I don't find quite a lot of the buttons away from "home"). Now the difference is that means that I pull-pull-push whereas I could push-push-push. (Of course if I went up to the Ac row I could pull-pull-pull but in that case I would consider that to be lazy). If this arpeggio was in a jig then I would want to play it with the proper rhythm and I might find this easier for now on the Grow. But I don't want to play it on the Grow just because I find it easier now if it is reasonable to expect that I will get better at doing what I am doing. This isn't a great example because there is no real possibility for going across the rows but it does illustrate the same button selection dilemmas. Do I gain from trying to make it easier for myself when I am learning?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted March 9, 2005 Author Share Posted March 9, 2005 Do I gain from trying to make it easier for myself when I am learning?<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes. But you gain more if you practice other, more difficult techniques, as well. I think the most important consideration should be musicality. If doing something the "easier" way allows you to sound more musical at a given stage, then that's the way you should play it. But if you think that practicing a more "difficult" technique will eventually lead you to a sound that's even more "musical" -- once you master it, -- then by all means you should practice that, too. The easier way will hopefully add to your inspiration and enjoyment (and ability to play with others) while you're getting the more difficult style to the point where you like how it sounds. Besides, I don't think any decent musician uses a particular technique or style because it's more difficult. Even if it seems more difficult in some way, it's almost certainly because in some other way they feel that it makes it easier (at least in general) to get the (a?) result that pleases them. "Musical" is, of course, in the ear of the beholder. If you're worried that playing something the easier way will prevent you from learning it the "better" way, I think the worry is misplaced. Learning to play the same tune in two different ways should be no more difficult than learning to play two different tunes. In a sense, that is what you'd be doing, except that the two tunes will sound remarkably similar. Now about that d-B-G arpeggio: Playing it on the G row may well be easier if you want to play the notes all evenly, but its apparent simplicity may actually make it more difficult (at first) to vary the emphasis or timing, if that's an effect you want. E.g., playing it in jig time on the G row is great if you want a "did-dle-y, did-dle-y" sound, but the bellows reversal of playing it on the C row can help you get a slightly increased stress on the third division of the triplet, a "did-dle-dum" sound, if/when you want that. Another thing you could do is play the d and B on the G row, but the G on the C row. (That's an example of true cross-row playing, of the sort that can be done even on a 20-button.) This substitutes your index finger for your ring finger, a substitution that most people find easier to control, In a reel, on the other hand, you might have a "dee- -did-dle" (8th note, 16th, 16th) pattern, and there playing the d on the pull (RH C row) and the B-G on the push (LH, either both G row, or G row-C row) puts the bellows reversal in the right place for extra emphasis. If you decide to include the pull G in the accidental row, then you can find a way to reverse each of those bellows patterns, which might be useful in balancing pushes and pulls over the length of a longer phrase. This isn't a great example because there is no real possibility for going across the rows.... I hope the above shows you that's not the case. You could even do the arpeggio with three deliberate bellows reversals... e.g., push d and G in the left hand and pull B in the right. You will notice that I recommend variety and versatility as a way of giving you -- rather than an "arbitrary" technique -- control over the flow of your music. (And note that I said "arbitrary technique", not "the instrument". Tain't the instrument that controls the musicality; it's the way you learn to use the instrument.) I consider this to be long-term "laziness", and I consider that to be good. I think one's goal should be to get the best music with the least effort. When control of the instrument takes less effort, that leaves all the more for you to use in controlling your musical expression. Yes, it requires learning a bit more (do it gradually over time), but it can be like the difference between knowing one route for driving to work and knowing all the streets (or highways) that could be used. Not only does the latter help you avoid delays when you encounter a jam, it also gives you the option of occasionally taking a different route just for the change of scenery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhomylly Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 Dan, I have just ordered Frank Edgley's tutorial in honor of my recent birthday, and have asked Frank to scribble anything different or relevant to the 24-button in the margins when and where appropriate. And thanks for the listening advice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchie_Kay Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Now about that d-B-G arpeggio: Playing it on the G row may well be easier if you want to play the notes all evenly, but its apparent simplicity may actually make it more difficult (at first) to vary the emphasis or timing, if that's an effect you want. E.g., playing it in jig time on the G row is great if you want a "did-dle-y, did-dle-y" sound, but the bellows reversal of playing it on the C row can help you get a slightly increased stress on the third division of the triplet, a "did-dle-dum" sound, if/when you want that. Another thing you could do is play the d and B on the G row, but the G on the C row. (That's an example of true cross-row playing, of the sort that can be done even on a 20-button.) This substitutes your index finger for your ring finger, a substitution that most people find easier to control <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jim, thanks for that. I now realise I have been being a little blind. When I wrote that the DBG arpeggio was not a very good example for cross-row playing I did think "well I suppose you could do DB on the Grow and G on the Crow" but I dismissed that as being self-evidently stupid. Which is strange because when playing the high part of tune I almost always oscillate between the C and G rows with the first two fingers of my right hand. So why I had decided that this made no sense with the left hand is a mystery. In fact the jig I am playing goes down and back up again - DBG GBD - so I need to get the first G over and done with and emphasise the second. The bellows on the Crow does nothing to help this. Likewise on the Grow I am asking my fourth finger of the left hand to impart the correct emphasis, which it really isn't up to yet. So actually the mixed G and C row is by far the best technique. Ritchie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted March 10, 2005 Author Share Posted March 10, 2005 In fact the jig I am playing goes down and back up again - DBG GBD - so I need to get the first G over and done with and emphasise the second. The bellows on the Crow does nothing to help this. Likewise on the Grow I am asking my fourth finger of the left hand to impart the correct emphasis, which it really isn't up to yet. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Your "fourth finger"? You mean your pinkie (little finger), not your ring finger? Are you then hitting the two G's with two separate fingers? In general, I think changing fingers for each note -- even on the same button -- is best, but alternating between ring finger and pinkie is difficult to control. Let me suggest two alternatives for your down-and-up arpeggio, both of which change buttons for each note. I indicate the rows (1 for G, 2 for C, 3 for "accidental") in parentheses: .. 1) d(1)-B(1)-G(2) G(1)-B(1)-D(1) Notice that I'm using two different buttons for the two G's. Since they're both there, why not use them? Using the two different fingers in that way should give you better control of the separation and emphasis. .. 2) d(1)-B(1)-G(2) G(3)-B(2)-D(2) Here I'm not only using different buttons for the two G's, but different bellows directions for the down and up arpeggios. And I'm using only the index and middle fingers, but also using both hands. Hmm. This leads me to speculate that people who have developed -- on their own -- the style which uses the C row as much as possible for all keys -- including G -- may do so partly because it lets them use their right hand more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchie_Kay Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I should be more careful with finger numbering. For me my fourth finger is my ring finger. Interesting suggestions, I will try them both out. It is certainly true that one reasone for favouring the Crow is that it gets both hands into action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted March 10, 2005 Author Share Posted March 10, 2005 ...I need to get the first G over and done with and emphasise the second.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> And if you want to really emphasize that second G, try putting a bellows change on either side of it, like so: ... d(2)-B(2)-G(3) G(2)-B(2)-D(2) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now