Jump to content

Is A Chemitzer An Anglo ?


Recommended Posts

I am going to show my ignorance here as I am a bit taken back by a recent review of Anglo International.

In amongst an excellent review is a section of " I would have liked the collection to have included certain players " I can except this as it is what I expected some would say when I started this project and in passing for the current English and Duet projects.What suprised me was that the writer wished that I had included Chemitzer playing.

I know in some postings with regards to this instrument that it is called a concertina and I just Googled the instrument and concertina came up,but is it an Anglo? I would have thought it was a Bandonion, but I would be interested in your thoughts and comments.

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am going to show my ignorance here as I am a bit taken back by a recent review of Anglo International.

Is this review somewhere that we can see it?

 

In amongst an excellent review is a section of " I would have liked the collection to have included certain players " ... What suprised me was that the writer wished that I had included Chemitzer playing.

Here's my opinion:

The Chemnitzer and bandonion are related to the anglo, but they are not "anglos".

... 1) One reason I make this distinction is that somewhere in the distant past (personally distant, not geologically or even historically distant) the B and C diverged from the A and went their own way(s), in terms of all three of note layout, construction, and playing style. In fact, I don't think the players of B and C think of their instruments as A, nor vice versa, though I'll be interested to hear what Theodore Kloba has to say on the subject. (And I think the B and C are more similar to each other than even to 20-button German anglos, but I think their players generally consider them to be different instruments, not simply variants of a single instrument.)

... 2) I think the B and C are related to the A in about the way the lute and guitar are related to the mandolin. Include all of the latter in a compilation of "plucked stringed instruments", if you like, but not in a compilation of "mandolins". I think including a mandola or even a banjo-mandolin in the latter collection might be a bit like including some of the more boundary-stretching "anglos", but still wouldn't require including guitars or banjos in a "mandolin" compilation.

... 3) There is no law -- from either government or God -- that requires that human-defined categories share any pattern or relationship at all, much less any particular person's idea of what's a "reasonable" pattern or relationship. Categories can be completely arbitrary, so having a category like "anglo" that's somewhat arbitrary is no violation. And the fact is (as I understand it) that the well-established category of A does not include either B or C. In fact, in my own experience it didn't even include any concertinas of German-style construction at least until the 1980's. They were separately classified as "German". But in common usage the categorization changed (speculation as to why should be given a separate Topic), so Alan didn't have to title his compilation "Anglo-, German-, and squashbox-International". :D But it didn't change to include bandonion or Chemnitzer. Nor melodeon, for that matter. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I encountered some at Halsway Manor some years ago(20 something years! really!! How did that happen?) I was able to find a subset of the numerous buttons that corresponded to the 20 button anglo layout. The owners were quite surprised when I could play them. But then again a melodian also contains a subset of buttons that are familiar to an Anglo player so where do you draw the line?

 

Robin Madge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I encountered some at Halsway Manor some years ago(20 something years! really!! How did that happen?) I was able to find a subset of the numerous buttons that corresponded to the 20 button anglo layout. The owners were quite surprised when I could play them. But then again a melodian also contains a subset of buttons that are familiar to an Anglo player so where do you draw the line?

 

Robin Madge

And the piano and harpsichord share the same keyboard layout but they are not the same instrument either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What suprised me was that the writer wished that I had included Chemitzer playing.

Sounds like you could sell at least one copy of Chemitzer International!

 

I don't recall hearing this system played, although I've heard Bandonion both in England, and Austria. I remember the late Pat Robson talking about both systems, but only recall hearing him play Bandonion.

 

Regards,

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as an evolutionary issue. The common ancestor of the Anglo, Bandoneon, Chemnitzer (and the Karlsfelder for that matter) was Uhlig's four-sided German concertina. I believe that the two-row version of Uhlig's concertina had an identical layout to what we would call a two-row Anglo today. (Hopefully Stephen or possibly Ted Kloba can weigh in to confirm or correct that.) But they evolved along divergent paths--the Anglo has six sides, and the Chemnitzer no longer has two rows tuned a fifth apart, though it has two rows whose core sections are much like Anglo rows that are tuned a whole tone apart.

 

So perhaps Anglo is to Chemnitzer and Bandoneon as human is to chimpanzee and bonobo....

 

I play Anglo and am learning Chemnitzer, and I think that other Anglo players might find Chemnitzer to be of interest too. I think that "Chemnitzer International" (or perhaps "Chemnitzer/Karlsfelder/Einheitsbandoneon International") would be a great idea if somone wanted to do it, though I'm not sure how big the market for it would be. But whether a Chemnitzer "is" an Anglo is perhaps not quite the right question.

 

Daniel

 

I am going to show my ignorance here as I am a bit taken back by a recent review of Anglo International.

In amongst an excellent review is a section of " I would have liked the collection to have included certain players " I can except this as it is what I expected some would say when I started this project and in passing for the current English and Duet projects.What suprised me was that the writer wished that I had included Chemitzer playing.

I know in some postings with regards to this instrument that it is called a concertina and I just Googled the instrument and concertina came up,but is it an Anglo? I would have thought it was a Bandonion, but I would be interested in your thoughts and comments.

Al

Edited by Daniel Hersh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no law -- from either government or God -- that requires that human-defined categories share any pattern or relationship at all, much less any particular person's idea of what's a "reasonable" pattern or relationship.

Congratulations, Alan, on your not violating any laws of God or government, at least when viewed from Denmark! I'll bet that's a relief. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am already getting names put foreward for Melodion International !!!

I have never announced it,suggested it or planned it.How do these things happen.

I have months of work on English and Duet so another one Daniel on Chemitzers etc

I will leave to somebody else.Certainly it would not be a bad idea for someone to put a CD of this music together if one does not exist.

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alan,

I think it is pretty safe to say that the general concertina community views the Chemnitzer and Bandonion as distinct instruments. Obviously there is some amount of overlap, but that is true of all the instruments in the concertina family... its what makes them concertinas. BTW, I believe it is probably also true that most players of Chemnitzer's don't view them as being Anglos.. indeed the references I have seen seem to suggest that at least in the American midwest they just call them concertinas, suggesting that those players are somewhat divorced from the broader context of the concertina playing community. A concept that is probably supported by the relative lack of players who play them on this forum (there are few, but only a few if I remember correctly).

 

--

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that "Chemnitzer International" (or perhaps "Chemnitzer/Karlsferlder/Einheitsbandoneon Intenational") would be a great idea if somone wanted to do it, though I'm not sure how big the market for it would be.

I suspect that the market could be at least as big as for "Anglo International", but I'm not sure how much overlap there would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as an evolutionary issue. The common ancestor of the Anglo, Bandoneon, Chemnitzer (and the Karlsfelder for that matter) was Uhlig's four-sided German concertina. I believe that the two-row version of Uhlig's concertina had an identical layout to what we would call a two-row Anglo today. (Hopefully Stephen or possibly Ted Kloba can weigh in to confirm or correct that.) But they evolved along divergent paths--the Anglo has six sides, and the Chemnitzer no longer has two rows tuned a fifth apart, though it has two rows whose core sections are much like Anglo rows that are tuned a whole tone apart.
The Anglo also benefitted from English construction practices, hence it's true name, the Anglo-German concertina, called "Anglo" for short. The Bandoneon and Chemnitzer are descended from the German (Uhlig) concertina, but can only be considered cousins to the Anglo-German (which also descends from the German).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that the market could be at least as big as for "Anglo International", but I'm not sure how much overlap there would be.

And for that reason would probably be best put together by someone in or around Chicago.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as an evolutionary issue. The common ancestor of the Anglo, Bandoneon, Chemnitzer (and the Karlsfelder for that matter) was Uhlig's four-sided German concertina. I believe that the two-row version of Uhlig's concertina had an identical layout to what we would call a two-row Anglo today. (Hopefully Stephen or possibly Ted Kloba can weigh in to confirm or correct that.) But they evolved along divergent paths--the Anglo has six sides, and the Chemnitzer no longer has two rows tuned a fifth apart, though it has two rows whose core sections are much like Anglo rows that are tuned a whole tone apart.

 

So perhaps Anglo is to Chemnitzer and Bandoneon as human is to chimpanzee and bonobo....

 

I play Anglo and am learning Chemnitzer, and I think that other Anglo players might find Chemnitzer to be of interest too. I think that "Chemnitzer International" (or perhaps "Chemnitzer/Karlsfelder/Einheitsbandoneon International") would be a great idea if somone wanted to do it, though I'm not sure how big the market for it would be. But whether a Chemnitzer "is" an Anglo is perhaps not quite the right question.

 

Daniel

 

I agree with your description of the evolutionary path, Daniel. As far as the original two row layout, you can see it in the first German tutor that was written to accompany it, here:

http://www.concertina.com/worrall/hoeselbarth-tutor/

And see the form in which it arrived in England, here:

http://www.concertina.com/merris/minasi-german-tutor-1846/.

It is the same is on the modern anglo.

 

Uhlig's proto-anglo (the 'German' concertina) is of course still made in Germany and is still played by a very small minority there. It was just one part of an explosion of types of keyboards in nineteenth century Germany; Maria Dunkel's studies (in German) document that in great detail. Because this was the simplest and cheapest design, it was exported worldwide in great quantities. As far as I know, it really only took 'permanent' hold in Britain (and its colonies)...where of course a third row and better design were added...and Ireland. The two row German and Anglo German instruments, as well as the three row anglo, poked around the US for a few decades around the civil war (some Minstrel shows used them, for example), but then were pretty much replaced by other free reed instruments by the latter part of the 1800's (as you know, current playing in the US developed in part from twentieth century Irish and English immigrants, as well as 'folk revival' players like most of us are). Meanwhile in Germany, interest moved rapidly from the two row to the various German improvements on its keyboards...first just adding more rows in more keys, then getting more radical in redesign, resulting in instruments that, as you say, only have small bits of their keyboards that still bear witness to Uhlig's first prototype (as in the Bandonion and Chemnitzer).

 

A bit of a side note: There is an interesting and revealing history of the use of the Chemnitzer concertina in the US by James Leary (reference below), which also includes a CD of early recordings (1920's). It appears that the Chemnitzer most likely arrived with, or at least was first popularized by, Otto Georgi in Chicago in the 1880s. He emigrated from Chemnitz, where he had been affiliated with Friedrich Lange, himself a son-in-law of Uhlig. Georgi hired Silberhorn, who later set up shop for himself, and the two began promoting and selling Chemnitzer keyboard instruments and printing arrangements for them in great quantities. They sold Chemnitzers made by Lange in Chemnitz, until American builders began to produce them. By the time of the two world wars, which cut off supply and contact, the Chemnitzer music culture in the Midwest was well established and survived.

 

Cheers,

Dan

 

Leary's "The German Concertina in the Midwest" can be found in "Land Without Nightingales: Music in the Making of German America", 2002, University of Wisconsin press. The old recordings are well worth a listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to show my ignorance here as I am a bit taken back by a recent review of Anglo International.

In amongst an excellent review is a section of " I would have liked the collection to have included certain players "

That is easy for some reviewer to write. He does not need to consider the the finite amount of room available on 3 disks, and managing that with deadlines.

 

What surprised me was that the writer wished that I had included Chemnitzer playing.

 

From the other postings, it seems that the writer is either a member of a small minority who considers Chemnitzers to be Anglos, or he did not quite get the point of the compilation. I wonder which tracks the review writer would suggest removing to make room for tracks of Chemnitzer playing.

 

I have nothing against Chemnitzer playing (and am still considering buying one), but I believe that this Anglo compilation is not incomplete for not including any Chemnitzer playing (3 negatives in that sentence).

 

Where can we read a copy of the review?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it's about time I speak up...

 

...but is it an Anglo?

No... because of the three words in the phrase "Anglo-German Concertina", the only one that doesn't apply to Chemnitzer is "Anglo".

 

I have a number of Chemitzer concertinas which I play as if they were anglos, although that is not the way that for instance the Silberhorn tutor instructs you to play

I have two of Bandonions that I play as though they were Chemnitzers, although that's not how the Tangueros would. I'm trying to pick up a bit more Anglo elements in my playing of both LSGCs*, but ultimately the repertoire dictates the playing style and I don't have a lot in my repertoire (desired or actual) that really fits with the Anglo style.

 

3) There is no law -- from either government or God -- that requires that human-defined categories share any pattern or relationship at all, much less any particular person's idea of what's a "reasonable" pattern or relationship.

There is also no concise English term for Chemnitzers and Bandonions collectively (I use LSGC), or Chemnitzers, Bandonions and Anglos collectively, although there are reasonable patterns of relationship existing.

 

Sounds like you could sell at least one copy of Chemitzer International!

The instrument could use something like that. I don't know what would belong on it though...

 

I think that "Chemnitzer International" (or perhaps "Chemnitzer/Karlsfelder/Einheitsbandoneon International") would be a great idea if somone wanted to do it, though I'm not sure how big the market for it would be.
Call it LSGC International.

 

I will leave to somebody else.Certainly it would not be a bad idea for someone to put a CD of this music together if one does not exist.

I think there are decent compilations out there within the various styles, but they tend to keep to themselves.

 

BTW, I believe it is probably also true that most players of Chemnitzer's don't view them as being Anglos.. indeed the references I have seen seem to suggest that at least in the American midwest they just call them concertinas, suggesting that those players are somewhat divorced from the broader context of the concertina playing community.
I think the term "Chemnitzer" is something that was applied by scholars to differentiate types long after the Central & Eastern European immigrant communities embraced them in the US.

 

And for that reason would probably be best put together by someone in or around Chicago.

They're dying fast here. Better hurry up.

 

*LSGC: Large Square German Concertina

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also no concise English term for Chemnitzers and Bandonions collectively (I use LSGC), or Chemnitzers, Bandonions and Anglos collectively, although there are reasonable patterns of relationship existing.

 

BTW, I believe it is probably also true that most players of Chemnitzer's don't view them as being Anglos.. indeed the references I have seen seem to suggest that at least in the American midwest they just call them concertinas, suggesting that those players are somewhat divorced from the broader context of the concertina playing community.

I think the term "Chemnitzer" is something that was applied by scholars to differentiate types long after the Central & Eastern European immigrant communities embraced them in the US.

 

*LSGC: Large Square German Concertina

 

Bill,

It is just a variance in perspectives, of course, but the Concertina players in the Midwest (home of the "World Concertina Congress") think it is the rest of us that are divorced from the broader context of the concertina-playing community! Check out this paragraph from Leary's 'The German Concertina in the Midwest':

"Apart from the kindred bandonion's place in Argentine tango music, the concertina has been confined chiefly to the musical traditions of Germans, Poles, and Czechs in the Old World and the New. The concertina, consequently, retains its German association in America because its lineage is relatively linited and easily traced. In addition, musicans who play the instrument often assert its origin as a defense against the general publics repeated assumptions that: 1. all "squuezeboxes" are accordions, 2. "accordion" and "concertina" are the same instrument, or 3. ot the extent that concertinas exist, they are small hexagonal instruments popularized by English sailors. "No!" the concertina players assert: we play the concertina, not the accordion, and the kind of concertina we play is not the English concertina but the German (or, even more specifically, the Chemnitzer) concertina."

 

With regard to Theodore's assertion that "Chemnitzer" is a relatively new term, after some head scratching I'd have to agree. Of all the makers in both Germany and the US going back into the nineteenth cenury, from the names given in Leary, they all called/call themselves concertina companies, for example, and the sheet music arrangers (like Silberhorn) acted similarly. Leary consistently uses the term "German" concertina for the Chemnitzer concertina (only using the Chemnitzer term once, in the above paragraph), but that is not the context in which most of us anglo players would use that term (to us, a German concertina is a two row a la Uhlig's 1830's prototype).

 

Terms confusion extends as far back as the instruments themselves. According to Maria Dunkel,

"H(ector) Berlioz distinguishes in 1844 between ``le Concertina Anglais'' and ``le Concertina Allemand'' but dedicates a detailed description only to the first since the keyboard of the German instruments depended upon the caprice of the builder. The confusion persisted also in Germany but was finished at the end of the 1850's when the term Bandonion was introduced in the region of Krefeld, Mainz and Cologne while in Bavaria the term Concertina was used instead. The instruments from Saxony and Thüringen were continued to be called chromatic harmonikas while sold to English and French spoken countries as concertinas and to the Rhineland as bandoneons (but with a distinct layout of the keyboard)."

 

For what it is worth (not much), I'd lump the anglo, anglo-german, German, Chemnitzer, and bandoneon instruments as 'bisonoric concertinas', and the English, Hayden, and Crane duets as 'unisonoric concertinas'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it is worth (not much), I'd lump the anglo, anglo-german, German, Chemnitzer, and bandoneon instruments as 'bisonoric concertinas', and the English, Hayden, and Crane duets as 'unisonoric concertinas'.

I think that most of us here agree on the unisonoric-bisonoric distinction. But such terms as "anglo" and "German" -- as I think this thread shows -- are at least as much cultural as technical, and each of those covers a subset (or different subsets, depending on who's using the term) of "bisonoric".

Link to comment
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

×
×
  • Create New...