"misprint " (?) in a 48 keys English, Lachenal

[Thy28293]

Hello,

I am working on my "Lachenal" :

 

It now needs new valves, as can be seen :

 

On the picture, a curious detail can also be noticed...

[Thy28293]

 

As far as I can understand, the left hand side features the "G 2" note - and not the "G 3", which is on the right hand side.

This left hand side label, accordingly, should have been printed with " G sharp  2", in state of this " G sharp 3".

Nothing very important... just a curiosity.

Already seen this kind of misprinted label ? An idea of how many such "misprinted" labels made, about this era - in Lachenal (or other makes) ?

This one is n° 28293 (end 1888  /early 1889, as already said in the appropriate section).

 

Thy.

Edited May 15 by Thy28293
sharp / flat

[Thy28293]

Found in the "buy and sell " section :

this "c. 1897" Lachenal EC. One can notice the same "left hand side" label , with "G 2" +  "G sharp 3", but no "G sharp 2" , 2nd and 12th pictures.

 

🤔🤔

 

 

[Thy28293]

 

 

🤔🤔🤔🤔

The same print,   n°  40349

 

 

The source :

🤔🤔🤔

Thy

[fred v]

What do the inner row of numbers represent?

[Thy28293]

On each reed-frame is stamped

" (...) the reed-frame size-number, corresponding to the number specified on the circular pan-labels (...) "

On this picture : "14, 17, 17 ..."

Author :

https://www.concertinamuseum.com/SiteS4l.htm

 

[d.elliott]

I think you will find that the reed note value suffixes are not the same as we use as octave numbers today. The suffix defines the order of each reed of that note value. G1 is the lowest G in the instrument, G2 is the next lowest note, G3 is the G above G2 etc. Similarly, Ab1 is the lowest Ab, the next Ab above is Ab2 etc etc.  The other numbers for each position are reed frame size references.

 

I have a Louis Lachenal #13735 on the bench at the moment and it's nomenclature is exactly the same as in your photographs.

Edited May 17 by d.elliott

[Thy28293]

Hello, Thanks for the interest.

I understand the use of these suffixes : lower G is called G1 (RHS) , the next above is G2  (LHS)... A1 (LHS)  A2 (RHS)  ...and so on... As you say  : the same idea with the  corresponding b s and # s.

 

That said : on the LHS labels I found out, you can read  A1 / Ab1,... F2/F #2.... G4/ G #4 and so on... ; all right.

 

The point is : I still don't understand why the sharp form of G2  is there called (printed) "G # 3 " and not "G # 2", as I would logically expect (while there is a key playing the "G # 2",  you however can't read its name anywhere on the label).

 

My Lachenal RHS label :

G3 , (playing one octave above the LHS G2, as we know),  and its matching sharp, called "G # 3"  (as expected here)

 

 

Why do these Lachenal labels feature one  "G # 3 " on the left hand side and another one on the other side (whereas these two different "G # 3"  don't play the same note) ?

 

Was it a common use at that ancient time  ?

 

Let's have a look at this Wheatstone and Co label :

"48 key, 5-fold bellows, rosewood ends (?), Wheatstone label with the serial number 2091, brass reeds"

 

 LHS label features "G2..".. and the matching sharp is here called "G # 2" : ok !

 

 

 

 

 

Source :

 

A "misprint " that would have persisted for decades - by "Louis Lachenal" and "Lachenal and Co" as well?? ? 🫤🤔

 

There is, for sure, a logical reason....that I'm missing for now.

 

(By the way : a better place for this thread should rather be in the "concertina history" discussion than here in the "....construction and repair")

 

 

[Thy28293]

No idea about these left hand sides,

with "G2 + G#3" in the Lachenal  /

versus expected "G2 + G#2" in the Wheatstone ?

thy

[Paul_Hardy]

Based on absolutely no research, I suggest that you are probably right and that it was a misprint/mis-design, that persisted for years, as everybody read what they expected to be there rather than the pedantic detail. As one is working round the machine, adjacent reeds are pretty well adjacent pitch, so there is not much chance for real confusion. Nobody reads the 2s or 3s.

[alex_holden]

12 hours ago, Paul_Hardy said:

Based on absolutely no research, I suggest that you are probably right and that it was a misprint/mis-design, that persisted for years, as everybody read what they expected to be there rather than the pedantic detail. As one is working round the machine, adjacent reeds are pretty well adjacent pitch, so there is not much chance for real confusion. Nobody reads the 2s or 3s.

 

I think it's likely the tuners knew about the misprint but their bosses didn't think it was a big enough problem to justify the expense of having an engraver correct the printing plate.

[Thy28293]

This can be the point : the cost of changing the plates, even when the firm changed from "Louis  Lachenal" to "Lachenal and Co." .

Likely : technically possible to change the central "firm name " part without having to change the  outside "nomenclature " part ; while impossible / not so easy to change only one detail on the latter (a look at these printing plates could help... but vanished/scrapped with the Lachenal machinery in the early 1930's ?).

 

As you say : tuners and repairers don't really need to read the labels to find their way, through the reed pan.

 

(last question : did somebody find this kind of "misprint" on other models than 48 K ?)

 

Thanks !

[Thy28293]

Should this "topic / discussion" be sent to the, I think more appropriate, "concertina history" ?

When some of the moderators staff read this...