advantage and disadvantage of the amount of the button of duet concertina?

[luli]

hi,everyone,could you tell me the advantage and disadvantage of the amount of the button of duet concertina?

Edited January 30, 2023 by luli

[David Barnert]

I can only speak about the Hayden Duet, although some of these points undoubtedly apply to all concertinas or all duet concertinas.

 

Advantages:

 

More buttons means greater range, fewer gaps in chromatic scale available, less need for enharmonic equivalents (playing, for instance, a D# way over on the right side of the layout when you really want an Eb on the left). By the same token, more keys that you can play in without running off the edge of the layout.

 

Disadvantages:

 

More buttons means more expensive. Heavier. More bellows pressure required to play. Easy to get lost in the larger field of buttons. More moving parts and longer levers means more frequent need for repairs or adjustments.

 

That’s all I can think of at the moment. Does that answer your question?

[Łukasz Martynowicz]

To what David wrote, I would only add, that heavier and larger box isn’t a straightforward disadvantage. I have two boxes: 8 2/3” 66b button heavy one and 7” 45b featherlight one. The larger one is way easier to play accordion arrangments on, because heavier means sturdy and LH side simple doesn’t move at all. This makes large jumps between chords way easier. Also - larger diameter bellows indeed requires a bit more effort to move, but also provides enormous amounts of air. I don’t have to think about phrase lengths and reversal points at all on my big box, because phrases are typically way shorter than my bellows travel and there is always a margin left. I can also feed large chords or four note legato poliphony without any problems. 
 

From my perspective the main disadvantage is price, and second important disadvantage is reduced portability. They are still smaller than melodeons, but significantly harder to travel with.

[gcoover]

From my experience with various sizes of Jeffries Duets, the smaller ones are much more nimble, the larger ones more stately - think motorboat versus ocean liner. 

 

More buttons give you more range, but take a hard look to see if you actually need that additional range. For example, on the music I play on my English concertina, I never play the higher squeaky buttons so they just sit there pretty much unused.

 

Gary

[Łukasz Martynowicz]

2 hours ago, gcoover said:

From my experience with various sizes of Jeffries Duets, the smaller ones are much more nimble, the larger ones more stately - think motorboat versus ocean liner. 

 

More buttons give you more range, but take a hard look to see if you actually need that additional range. For example, on the music I play on my English concertina, I never play the higher squeaky buttons so they just sit there pretty much unused.

 

Gary

 

I don't know about other systems, but with Haydens buttons are extended downwards and sideways, and very little upwards. That is you get lower notes and more accidentals/enharmonics/overlap. The highest note available is F6, on Wakker H-2, while the highest note on a "standard" is D6. My large box goes from F2 to E6 and I could use couple of bass notes more and those four Ab links I'm missing.

It all boils down to desired repertoire really. If you want to play rich accordion-like arrangements or classical music, larger box is better. If you want to play mostly trad music, smaller box will likely be enough and come in a lightweight and small package.

 

[gcarrere]

I play  the MacCann Duet, and in my experience (I've had an 81 button, then a 64 b., and now a 57 button) I prefer smaller boxes, that I can play on in a more "punchy" style. Bigger ones are too static in my opinion. I dont  mind the lack of bass notes in the left hand side.

[seanc]

From my limited experience. I think that after establishing your repitoire, playing style and kind of getting an idea of how you play your chord voicings.

 

I think that you may come to an ideal amount of buttons.

 

but, until then, at least for me, I think I am always wanting more buttons.

Speaking from a 55b crane experience. I am always wanting it to go lower on both sides.   Ideally, I’d like to see both sides go down from C to a G.

 

 

[RAc]

Another disadvantage of more buttons is that more buttons make it easier to get lost on the keyboard, eg accidentally play a row above or below your intended row on a Crane. Iow, a smaller keyboard maps out the position of each key more clearly. To me that is a real life saver, in particular when it comes to stress situations such as playing full combat speed on a Scottish ceilidh. I only play my large 55 box when working on solo pieces that require the full range.

[seanc]

There are all valid considerations .

 

but IMO. Hands down the biggest advantage to more buttons is if you are reading and playing from a sheet is to be able to play as written. and there is far less chance of getting lost as you are not trying to transpose on the fly.
 

There are many instances where I find a 5-1-3, moving to a 1-3-5 and then 3-5-1. Or 7-1-3, 7-1-4 to 7-1-5. Places where flipping just does not sound right. And numerous times where doing a walk down is what you really need  5,4,3,2,1 not 5,4,3,9,8.

 

 

[RAc]

38 minutes ago, seanc said:

There are all valid considerations .

 

but IMO. Hands down the biggest advantage to more buttons is if you are reading and playing from a sheet is to be able to play as written. and there is far less chance of getting lost as you are not trying to transpose on the fly.
 

There are many instances where I find a 5-1-3, moving to a 1-3-5 and then 3-5-1. Or 7-1-3, 7-1-4 to 7-1-5. Places where flipping just does not sound right. And numerous times where doing a walk down is what you really need  5,4,3,2,1 not 5,4,3,9,8.

 

 

Also valid. Yet In dance accompaniment, you frequently have to work around written scores anyways; also, sight reading dance accompaniment music is generally considered a bad habit, so I would argue that your point does address different use cases than mine (which does not make it any inferior or less valid).

[Łukasz Martynowicz]

3 hours ago, seanc said:

There are all valid considerations .

 

but IMO. Hands down the biggest advantage to more buttons is if you are reading and playing from a sheet is to be able to play as written. and there is far less chance of getting lost as you are not trying to transpose on the fly.
 

There are many instances where I find a 5-1-3, moving to a 1-3-5 and then 3-5-1. Or 7-1-3, 7-1-4 to 7-1-5. Places where flipping just does not sound right. And numerous times where doing a walk down is what you really need  5,4,3,2,1 not 5,4,3,9,8.

 

 

Exactly this. With less buttons I often had to move entire accompaniment up an octave to preserve those walkdowns, but it often comes with it’s own can of worms. Inversions also can go so close to the melody line, that a perfectly good large interval becomes too dissonant to work well, so you have to cut down. Because of this I will probably build an even larger box (in some rather distant future), going all way down to C2. I simply hate incomplete accompaniments. 
 

But I agree, that this kind of box would be unsuitable for typical concertina trad genres.

 

@gcarrere I agree, that larger boxes are more static bellows movement wise, but you can very much compensate for that with more dynamic fingerings, especially on LH side, BUT it requires dropping a traditional handstrap for more ergonomic handling system, that allows for independent wrist movement. After all, accordions, which are way heavier and more cumbersome than concertinas are perfectly capable of really dynamic play. 

[seanc]

10 hours ago, Łukasz Martynowicz said:

Exactly this. With less buttons I often had to move entire accompaniment up an octave to preserve those walkdowns, but it often comes with it’s own can of worms. Inversions also can go so close to the melody line, that a perfectly good large interval becomes too dissonant to work well, so you have to cut down. Because of this I will probably build an even larger box (in some rather distant future), going all way down to C2. I simply hate incomplete accompaniments. 
 

But I agree, that this kind of box would be unsuitable for typical concertina trad genres.

 

@gcarrere I agree, that larger boxes are more static bellows movement wise, but you can very much compensate for that with more dynamic fingerings, especially on LH side, BUT it requires dropping a traditional handstrap for more ergonomic handling system, that allows for independent wrist movement. After all, accordions, which are way heavier and more cumbersome than concertinas are perfectly capable of really dynamic play. 

I am definitely finding quite a lot of times where due to lacking lows. And then inverting chords. I am running the left hands chords into the melody line. Or just as often, I am diving onto the left side I find myself diving onto the left side to complete right hand chords.

 

 

[Łukasz Martynowicz]

8 hours ago, seanc said:

I am definitely finding quite a lot of times where due to lacking lows. And then inverting chords. I am running the left hands chords into the melody line. Or just as often, I am diving onto the left side I find myself diving onto the left side to complete right hand chords.

 

 

…and to complete melody as well. This is the second biggest annoyance with to few buttons - when you play a steady rhythm on the LH but must interrupt it or grow new fingers for those few odd melody notes that go below C4… One of the tunes I play is „Two guitars”, where melody line goes up to D6 and down to A3. Same with the „Riverside” mentioned above, down to A3… Or another tune, „Last Waltz” from Oldboy movie, where on 46b I’m missing just a single Eb4 on the RH. I can dive in on the LH for those, but at the expense of accompaniment fluidity. 
 

With my desired repertoire there is simply no such thing as „too many buttons”.

 

And a word about getting lost - this is where my rigid thumb „thimble” and antler handling system beats both handstrap and thumbstrap/wrist strap solutions - it has no play, what you feel on your palm, together with the angles in the thumb give you absolute positioning. I’m only having some troubles with a single, really long jump from Eb to G#, everything else is precise enough.

[RAc]

23 minutes ago, Łukasz Martynowicz said:

With my desired repertoire there is simply no such thing as „too many buttons”.

I believe the above subclause is more or less the key - "the right tool for the right job." With my "bread and butter repertoire," there are considerable advantages to reducing the number of buttons, for both logistic (weight and size) and playability (reduction of getting lost potential) reasons, acknowledging that your mechanical immobilization device may or may not relieve my "getting lost problem," but I need the mobility for sound effect generation reasons.

 

So to summarize, may I quote you from your earlier contrib in this thread:

 

"It all boils down to desired repertoire really. If you want to play rich accordion-like arrangements or classical music, larger box is better. If you want to play mostly trad music, smaller box will likely be enough and come in a lightweight and small package."

 

[Łukasz Martynowicz]

51 minutes ago, RAc said:

I believe the above subclause is more or less the key - "the right tool for the right job." With my "bread and butter repertoire," there are considerable advantages to reducing the number of buttons, for both logistic (weight and size) and playability (reduction of getting lost potential) reasons, acknowledging that your mechanical immobilization device may or may not relieve my "getting lost problem," but I need the mobility for sound effect generation reasons.

 

So to summarize, may I quote you from your earlier contrib in this thread:

 

"It all boils down to desired repertoire really. If you want to play rich accordion-like arrangements or classical music, larger box is better. If you want to play mostly trad music, smaller box will likely be enough and come in a lightweight and small package."

 

 

You are very right of course. I just wanted to comment on my "mechanical immobilization device" here - only the tip of the thumb is immobilised completely, the rest of the thumb movement is restricted to a single plane, and the rest of the hand has more freedom, than on an English with pinky rest. I don't know any technique, neither fingering nor bellows, that is impaired by this "device".

[luli]

thanks for your suggestion.i learn a lot from the text.sometimes,i hope my concertina can play all the song.maybe it is  not right. find the boundary of self is important