Number Of Bellow Folds ?

[Alan Day]

About two years ago I had new 7 fold bellows made for my CG and GD boxes (A rare present from the Taxman). Originally I had six fold bellows on each.

Many of you know I play English style and Duet style on the Anglo.The extra fold on my GD has made all the difference and some tunes that were restricted to the CG owing to air problems I can now play easily on both boxes.This leads me to the question of ultimate bellow fold numbers,For Irish music playing it would seem that a small number of folds is sufficient ,but English style requires a greater number.For me a CG Anglo ultimate would be six or seven for GD definitely seven, or for some perhaps eight.It has been traditional for instruments to have six fold bellows, but I am wondering if this should not be re examined.

I certainly would not want a huge number of folds enough to polish my shoes when I play and the larger the number the more difficult they are to control,particularly if any of you have played a miniature.So with this all in mind what number of bellow folds do you think is correct ?

Al

[Greg Jowaisas]

Alan,

I think the depth of the bellows folds is also a factor.

The generous valley and peak of a Jeffries 6 fold can supply a lot more air than the typical Lachenal bellows even if the Lachenal had 8 folds.

 

Brian Peters just visited our area. I can see how his 7 fold instrument might help with his chords and accompaniment. His instrument is a Peerless by Crabb and has robust bellows like a Jeffries.

 

I had an eight fold Wheatstone from the 1950s that undoubtably came via South Africa. The bellows were not floppy. I always felt that the Irish music I try to play worked best if I stayed within half the possible bellows extension.

 

Greg

[David Barnert]

While we're on the subject, how do you count the folds? If there are six peaks between the ends, then there are seven valleys. How many folds is this?

 

And is "bellows" singular or plural? You don't know how many times I had to rewrite the above pararaph to avoid using "has" or "have" as the verb in a sentence in which "bellows" was the subject, which would have a 50% chance of being wrong.

[Alan Day]

While we're on the subject, how do you count the folds? If there are six peaks between the ends, then there are seven valleys. How many folds is this?

 

And is "bellows" singular or plural? You don't know how many times I had to rewrite the above pararaph to avoid using "has" or "have" as the verb in a sentence in which "bellows" was the subject, which would have a 50% chance of being wrong.

Dave, I would count the number of peaks making this a six fold bellows the valleys or troughs being part of that construction.

Al

[malcolm clapp]

And is "bellows" singular or plural? You don't know how many times I had to rewrite the above pararaph to avoid using "has" or "have" as the verb in a sentence in which "bellows" was the subject, which would have a 50% chance of being wrong.

 

 

There is only one bellows per concertina. Must be singular, surely????

 

The French word for bellows is "le soufflet", definitely singular (and masculine!!!)

 

I have seen advertised on eBay concertinas with two or three bellows, where presumably the seller is counting the number of sets of folds between the wooden frames that are found on (particularly) German concertinas, melodeons, bandoneons, chemnitzers and the like. However, I don't feel this is correct terminology, but I can see the logic in this (I think?)

 

MC

[stuart estell]

My Normans (Normen?) differ - the C/G has a 6-fold bellows, whereas the G/D has a 7-fold. The G/D is much easier for thick chording as a result, and not noticeably more difficult to control.

[Dave Prebble]

Alan,

I think the depth of the bellows folds is also a factor.

The generous valley and peak of a Jeffries 6 fold can supply a lot more air than the typical Lachenal bellows even if the Lachenal had 8 folds.

 

Brian Peters just visited our area. I can see how his 7 fold instrument might help with his chords and accompaniment. His instrument is a Peerless by Crabb and has robust bellows like a Jeffries.

 

I had an eight fold Wheatstone from the 1950s that undoubtably came via South Africa. The bellows were not floppy. I always felt that the Irish music I try to play worked best if I stayed within half the possible bellows extension.

 

Greg

 

 

Hi Greg,

 

Depth of bellows most certainly is an important factor. I remember Geoff Crabb saying something like 1/8" deeper folds will give you the same extra air as would an extra fold.

Having nothing better to do one afternoon, I did all the calculations and this proves to be just about 'spot on'.

It is not the additional air trapped by the deeper folds themselves that makes the main difference, but the extra length (thus swept volume) of the main hexagonal core at the bellows centre, which is significantly extended by the deeper folds.

ie Deep fold bellows open quite a bit further.

 

I always used to maintain that 6 folds were sufficient for me, and that is certainly the case for chordal dance music where there is a lot of emphasis on snappy rhythm generated in large part by bellows reversals.

These days I find myself mellowing somewhat, experimenting far more with phrasing and playing more airs and melodies where I will play long passages on either push or pull. I am thus resolved to make set of seven folds for my main squeeze, a G/D Jeffries..... one fine day....when I have nothing else to do

 

Once you get used to them, and provided that the bellows are made well, there should be no less control over 7 fold, as opposed to 6 fold, bellows.

 

Regards

 

Dave

[Alan Day]

I agree Dave,there was no problem at all with the extra fold.The difference was certainly in the GD however.The reed size of the lower instrument using more air than the CG.

Al

[Paul Read]

For me the ideal is 7 folds. My main instrument is a G/D Jeffries with John Connor bellows. He does beautiful work but I wish there were 7 folds.

 

I suspect the South African Wheatstones had 8+ folds to accommodate the Boer style of playing which is somewhat chorded (more than one note sounding at any time as opposed to tune plus chords as I understand it). Does anybody have a more informed opinion on this?

[Alan Day]

For me the ideal is 7 folds. My main instrument is a G/D Jeffries with John Connor bellows. He does beautiful work but I wish there were 7 folds.

 

I suspect the South African Wheatstones had 8+ folds to accommodate the Boer style of playing which is somewhat chorded (more than one note sounding at any time as opposed to tune plus chords as I understand it). Does anybody have a more informed opinion on this?

My Jeffries too has John Connor bellows so that makes our concertinas identical.The extra one fold does make the difference.With heavily chorded tunes you have to go the opposite direction on occassions, but it is much more comfortable with seven on the DG.

Zak van de Vyver playing Boer style does regularly run out of air and drags it in within the rythm of the tune,whereas young Regardt de Bruin seems happy playing his concertina with equal ease in whatever direction he chooses to go.

Al

[zak]

For me the ideal is 7 folds. My main instrument is a G/D Jeffries with John Connor bellows. He does beautiful work but I wish there were 7 folds.

 

I suspect the South African Wheatstones had 8+ folds to accommodate the Boer style of playing which is somewhat chorded (more than one note sounding at any time as opposed to tune plus chords as I understand it). Does anybody have a more informed opinion on this?

My Jeffries too has John Connor bellows so that makes our concertinas identical.The extra one fold does make the difference.With heavily chorded tunes you have to go the opposite direction on occassions, but it is much more comfortable with seven on the DG.

Zak van de Vyver playing Boer style does regularly run out of air and drags it in within the rythm of the tune,whereas young Regardt de Bruin seems happy playing his concertina with equal ease in whatever direction he chooses to go.

Al

 

Morning, My wheatstone has six section bellows whereas Reygardt de Bruin plays a SA made wheatstone copy with eight section bellows.

Zak.

Oops, DP. Sorry

Edited May 7, 2007 by zak

[JimLucas]

While we're on the subject, how do you count the folds? If there are six peaks between the ends, then there are seven valleys. How many folds is this?

Good question. Though on reflection I think it should make more sense to count the number of valleys in the bellows as the number of "folds", I think it's standard to use the count of the ridges, instead. I would stick with the ridges, since that's what most people understand.

 

And is "bellows" singular or plural?

It's definitely singular.

But it's also a proper plural form. I.e., it's proper to say, "my concertinas' bellows". Another, multi-word plural form is "sets of bellows", as in, "He made five sets of bellows." Then again, the single, two-handled bellows of a blacksmith is often referred to as a "pair of bellows".

 

Maybe whether "bellows" is singular or plural depends on whether the instrument it's part of is classified as a "concertina" or an "accordion"?

[m3838]

In Russian the Bellows is "Mehhhh", which is translated as "The skin", or "Fur" for obvious reason.

Or often "Meha-a-ah", or "The skins" or "Furs" for less obvious reason.

Therefore i think proper word is "The Bellow" and plural "Bellows". But since the words come attached with traditional way of useage, we should be saying "Set of bellows", since the "Bellows" most surely reflect many folds of a single object.

[JimLucas]

In Russian the Bellows is "Mehhhh", which is translated as "The skin", or "Fur" for obvious reason.

Or often "Meha-a-ah", or "The skins" or "Furs" for less obvious reason.

Therefore i think proper word is "The Bellow" and plural "Bellows". But since the words come attached with traditional way of useage, we should be saying "Set of bellows", since the "Bellows" most surely reflect many folds of a single object.

"Therefore"???

 

How can there be a "therefore"? English language and usage are neither defined by nor dependent upon the Russian language. The "rules" of English grammar (and of all natural languages) are descriptive, not prescriptive, and anomalouos "exceptions" abound. "Bellows" -- like "scissors" and "species" -- is a noun of which the singular ends in "s" and is the same as the plural.

[m3838]

English language and usage are neither defined by nor dependent upon the Russian language.

 

Are you kidding?

However, Scissors consist of two pieces, and species can't describe single animal.

Can you say "This scissors is sharp and does a good job"? It's always "This pair of scissors", no? Don't know about species, always thought there is singlular "Specie", hm.

Strange to hear "One Bellows" though. Kind of awkward.

And I come from Russian side of the English, which stands for "Opinionated", therefore my definitions are way deeper than the Oxford Dictionary.

Who is that Oxford, anyways?

[david_boveri]

Alan,

I think the depth of the bellows folds is also a factor.

The generous valley and peak of a Jeffries 6 fold can supply a lot more air than the typical Lachenal bellows even if the Lachenal had 8 folds.

 

Brian Peters just visited our area. I can see how his 7 fold instrument might help with his chords and accompaniment. His instrument is a Peerless by Crabb and has robust bellows like a Jeffries.

 

I had an eight fold Wheatstone from the 1950s that undoubtably came via South Africa. The bellows were not floppy. I always felt that the Irish music I try to play worked best if I stayed within half the possible bellows extension.

 

Greg

 

brian's bellows were made by colin dipper. so everybody, wait ten years and get some dipper bellows!

[Alan Day]

To "Bellow" in English is to let out a load roar or shout as load as you can,or the bellow of a bull or cow.

Fire bellows or Blacksmiths bellows have as far as I know always had the s on the end.

Al

[JimLucas]

English language and usage are neither defined by nor dependent upon the Russian language.

Are you kidding?

Not about that. Are you?

 

However, Scissors consist of two pieces, and species can't describe single animal.

True, but irrelevant. A "couple" or "pair" consists of two individuals or individual items, but each of those words is grammatically a singular noun, and each has a plural ("couples", "pairs"). And neither "flock" nor "herd" can describe a single animal, but why should they? It's not their purpose. We say "the flock is", not "the flock are", because we're talking about the flock as a unit, not about its constituent parts separately. Or do you think I should say "Misha are" rather than "Misha is", because Misha is (are?) composed of many parts: arms, legs, liver, etc.?

 

Can you say "This scissors is sharp and does a good job"?

Yes.

 

It's always "This pair of scissors", no?

Often, yes. But no, not always.

 

And each individual member of the pair is called a "blade", not a "scissor".

 

Don't know about species, always thought there is singlular "Specie", hm.

There is, but it means "coined money", not classification of animals. And I don't think I've ever seen it used in a plural form.

 

Strange to hear "One Bellows" though. Kind of awkward.

It may seem that way to you, but not to me. What about it do you find awkward? I wonder whether you also think the word "gross" is awkward. (It also ends in "s" and is the same in both singular and plural.)

 

And I come from Russian side of the English, which stands for "Opinionated", therefore my definitions are way deeper than the Oxford Dictionary.

"Deeper"? How so? Harder to fathom?

 

Who is that Oxford, anyways?

Oxford University and a large staff thereof, I believe.

 

But getting back to "bellows": Some people will say, "My concertina's bellows is black," while others will say, "My concertina's bellows are black," and there are enough of each that I don't believe either is considered wrong. But "my concertina's bellow" is definitely wrong. (However, someone with a couple of very loud concertinas might correctly say, "My concertinas bellow." )