First Hybrid--what About Mayfair? Bastari? Norman's Saxon? Marcus

[asdormire]

And then I would point out that "accordion reeds" is a characteristic of German-style construction, but not of English-style. A hybrid which is 15/16 of one species and only 1/16 of another is still a hybrid; we don't have special names for the degrees of relative mixing.

 

As a stock breeder, at that point you are pretty much considered to be back to one of the original breed types. It is called "breeding up."

 

Alan

[JimLucas]

I'm pretty sure that I've seen Mayfairs with flat-on mounted reeds too.

I was going to say that, so this is a "me, too" post.

In fact, of the few Mayfairs I've seen, none had "blocks", only flat-on reeds.

[JimLucas]

And then I would point out that "accordion reeds" is a characteristic of German-style construction, but not of English-style. A hybrid which is 15/16 of one species and only 1/16 of another is still a hybrid; we don't have special names for the degrees of relative mixing.

As a stock breeder, at that point you are pretty much considered to be back to one of the original breed types. It is called "breeding up."

At a stock show, that might be allowed. I'm not so sure about a pedigreed dog or cat show.

[wes williams]

I'm pretty sure that I've seen Mayfairs with flat-on mounted reeds too.

I was going to say that, so this is a "me, too" post.

In fact, of the few Mayfairs I've seen, none had "blocks", only flat-on reeds.

Its possible that Behlen could have done this too, but we'd need to find one to confirm it. Looking at the photos in Ken's article, it could be possible for this to describe either method. In his letter from Dec 1972, he says about the 30K English :

These have 30 Basic Chromatic keys, 60- swedish steel reeds A-440 Pitch or A-880-, Mounted on suede leather direct to reed blocks.

[asdormire]

And then I would point out that "accordion reeds" is a characteristic of German-style construction, but not of English-style. A hybrid which is 15/16 of one species and only 1/16 of another is still a hybrid; we don't have special names for the degrees of relative mixing.

As a stock breeder, at that point you are pretty much considered to be back to one of the original breed types. It is called "breeding up."

At a stock show, that might be allowed. I'm not so sure about a pedigreed dog or cat show.

 

 

Probaly not there either. It is just a breeding strategy.

 

From a genetic standpoint though, at that point you have pretty much lost the advantages that hybridization gives you. Since this is a concertina board, I am not going to go farther into it. I will say though, though with access to German, English and Hybrid Concertinas at the house, all of wich I have looked at inside and out, I would say that the basics are the same. The advantage of the hybrids come about by using the german reeds to keep the price down in an other wise english machine, which has the advantage of response and playability. I would say this is closer to say using a hamp bore on a York sow to get the meatiness of the father while keeping the mother's advantage in litter size and milking abillity.

 

Alan

[JimLucas]

... I will say though, though with access to German, English and Hybrid Concertinas at the house, all of wich I have looked at inside and out, I would say that the basics are the same. The advantage of the hybrids come about by using the german reeds to keep the price down in an other wise english machine, which has the advantage of response and playability. I would say this is closer to say using a hamp bore on a York sow to get the meatiness of the father while keeping the mother's advantage in litter size and milking abillity.

Actually, the analogy with simply breeding animals is spurious. The hybrid concertinas don't have a random half-and-half mixture of elements from two "parents", but a carefully selected and (in the examples so far) quite unbalanced mixture of traits of the two (or more) original "strains", probably even with some new details (maybe needed to make the selected pieces work together, maybe just attempted "improvements"). More like genetic engineering... or what genetic engineering hopes to become.

[asdormire]

... I will say though, though with access to German, English and Hybrid Concertinas at the house, all of wich I have looked at inside and out, I would say that the basics are the same. The advantage of the hybrids come about by using the german reeds to keep the price down in an other wise english machine, which has the advantage of response and playability. I would say this is closer to say using a hamp bore on a York sow to get the meatiness of the father while keeping the mother's advantage in litter size and milking abillity.

Actually, the analogy with simply breeding animals is spurious. The hybrid concertinas don't have a random half-and-half mixture of elements from two "parents", but a carefully selected and (in the examples so far) quite unbalanced mixture of traits of the two (or more) original "strains", probably even with some new details (maybe needed to make the selected pieces work together, maybe just attempted "improvements"). More like genetic engineering... or what genetic engineering hopes to become.

 

 

Agreed, my example was meant as an analogy. Making concertinas is engineeering and craftsmanship.

 

Alan

[JimLucas]

I think it's asking a bit much to expect us all to agree on what "hybrid" means in this context given that there isn't a foolproof workable definition of "concertina" that we can all agree on either.

That's a part of what I've been trying to say.

 

I remember when I first heard (or read) the word "hybrid" to describe the new breed of concertinas and being unhappy with the term, although I don't remember why.

Maybe because it was too vague?

 

In any case, one important (to my way of seeing it) characteristic of the instruments we call hybrids that I don't see mentioned here is price intermediate between the cheapies and the real deals.

Earlier in this thread, I wrote:

...These "hybrids" we talk about are also commonly referred to as "accordion-reeded" or as "mid-range" (in price, and possibly in quality)....

It might be said that if we call it a concertina and it costs between $1200 and $3000 new then it's a hybrid, no matter how it's made.

No, no, no!. It's not a "hybrid", it's a "macaroon"! I'm sure that the fact that the word "macaroon" represents particular dollar amounts is obvious to a newcomer here -- or even an old timer, -- while the arbitrary convention that a noun meaning "mixture" designates a particular price range is not obvious.

 

OK, sarcasm aside, I think that a term used to denote a particular class should be somehow descriptive of that class, and certainly not a word that denotes a completely different characteristic, even if the two happen to be loosely correlated at the present moment.

 

David, if it's price range you want to denote, then "mid-range" is a perfectly good term, and one that has been in common use here on C.net in the past. I still use it. "Mid-priced" might be even clearer.

[Theodore Kloba]

I wonder why we need to have a definition of "hybrid" beyond the biological one... Why not just state the facts about a particular instrument and ditch the artificial category? It seems to work for the folks who only know "Chemnitzer" concertinas. How many buttons? How many reeds? How voiced? Long-plate, pin, or waxed in? Reedblocks glued to the valveboard? What shape are the reedblocks? Are they glued together from small pieces of stock, or machined from solid blocks? Wooden action? Wooden with metal extensions? Metal? What type of pivots? etc., etc.

Harold was the first builder over here in the States though, unless someone corrects that statement too!

Depends on what you call a "concertina". I would think that Hengel, Patek, Glass, Kadlubowski, Uhlir, Wolfe, etc. would hotly contest that statement!

FWIW, Rudy Patek was a promoter & performer. His brand was made by Otto Schlicht, who made Pearl Queen and others as well. The others are all builders.

Interesting that the two big histories of American Chemnitzers give almost no mention of the little anglo-german models...they go from Uhlig's beginnings quickly to the multi-row makers. We need to reach out to them in order to put together a full story of the early years of the anglo...something I have begun to do, offline.

What are those two "big histories" you speak of?

In addition to the points already made, one could for example also mention the fact that the laid-flat design was used on many of the old German concertinas (though with long-plate ganged reeds).

It also persisted on American instruments with long plate reeds that included piccolo reeds and had enough physical space to fit them in the box.

...And it will be used on at least one new American concertina with reeds paired on small plates.

And the word "hybrid" can be of course be used more generically too

I think it should only be used genetically.

As a stock breeder...

That's more like it!

[Richard Morse]

I wonder why we need to have a definition of "hybrid" beyond the biological one... Why not just state the facts about a particular instrument and ditch the artificial category?

I think the thing we're trying to do (or considering attempting to do) is to put a label on the type of instruments many of us are currently making so that they can be referred to as a class or type by a single word (or couple?) rather than a long description that can easily be adulterated and/or misconstrued.

It seems to work for the folks who only know "Chemnitzer" concertinas. How many buttons? How many reeds? How voiced? Long-plate, pin, or waxed in? Reedblocks glued to the valveboard? What shape are the reedblocks? Are they glued together from small pieces of stock, or machined from solid blocks? Wooden action? Wooden with metal extensions? Metal? What type of pivots? etc., etc.

What they are doing is describing a type of instrument rather than naming it's class. How would a Jeffries be described to them? It would be a lot harder to go through a listing of how it's made (which a lot of people probably wouldn't understand anyway) than saying that it's a British-style anglo concertina... which are very differently constructed from Chemitzers.

 

-- Rich --

[wntrmute]

The only guts of a concertina I've seen in person was my el-cheapo, and I saw a picture of the guts of a Céilí and somewhere else some of the 'classic' Jeffries or Wheatstones and such. The biggest difference between the cheap one and the Morse seemed to be that the reeds on the cheap one were standing up all in a row, while the Céilí had a seperate compartment for each pair of reeds to lie in -- the compartment for each reed pair seems to be standard for the traditional expensive type from what I've seen on the web so far. The picture of a Rochelle's innards was more like my cheap one, only the row of reeds was broken up and at an angle. I have no idea what a Stagi does, do they have the cells or compartments for each pair of reeds? Would that be a consistent distinction between the 'trainer,' 'hybrid,' and 'traditional' classes? How the reed pan is broken up, how the reeds are mounted, and what kind of reeds they are?

 

I do have the sense of stepping into an eternal flame war here, though. Again, I am just asking; I freely admit I don't know much about these instruments at all.

 

ETA: When Mr Wakker announced his 'Clover' line, he specifically described it as a 'hybrid' and then went on to say that it would be much like his Phoenix, only with accordian reeds. Here is the thread.

Edited September 6, 2007 by wntrmute

[Randall Cayford]

I think that the three of us are all trying to do the same thing: capture the traits that make us (though again perhaps not Jim) recognize these concertinas as being of the same type, and of a different type than some other accordion-reeded concertinas such as the German-built, the standard Bastari, the Rochelle, or the "cheap Chinese".

I guess I understood that "hybrid" excluded Bastaris and cheap Chinese instruments, but I never really thought about how it applied to the Rochelle.

 

Is the Rochelle not a hybrid? It's newer than the term so perhaps it's a new subclass, a "low-end hybrid"?

[Daniel Hersh]

The only guts of a concertina I've seen in person was my el-cheapo, and I saw a picture of the guts of a Céilí and somewhere else some of the 'classic' Jeffries or Wheatstones and such. The biggest difference between the cheap one and the Morse seemed to be that the reeds on the cheap one were standing up all in a row, while the Céilí had a seperate compartment for each pair of reeds to lie in -- the compartment for each reed pair seems to be standard for the traditional expensive type from what I've seen on the web so far. The picture of a Rochelle's innards was more like my cheap one, only the row of reeds was broken up and at an angle. I have no idea what a Stagi does, do they have the cells or compartments for each pair of reeds? Would that be a consistent distinction between the 'trainer,' 'hybrid,' and 'traditional' classes? How the reed pan is broken up, how the reeds are mounted, and what kind of reeds they are?Here is the thread.

This is the "reed block" vs. "laid-flat reed" issue that Jim and I were arguing about earlier in this thread. I said that laid-flat reeds were one characteristic of the type of concertina that we're discussing (called by some a "hybrid" and by others a "mid-range" or "intermediate" concertina). Jim did not agree.

 

 

I think that the three of us are all trying to do the same thing: capture the traits that make us (though again perhaps not Jim) recognize these concertinas as being of the same type, and of a different type than some other accordion-reeded concertinas such as the German-built, the standard Bastari, the Rochelle, or the "cheap Chinese".

I guess I understood that "hybrid" excluded Bastaris and cheap Chinese instruments, but I never really thought about how it applied to the Rochelle.

 

Is the Rochelle not a hybrid? It's newer than the term so perhaps it's a new subclass, a "low-end hybrid"?

Partly the same issue again. Though the Rochelle has a British-style action, it has reed blocks rather than laid-flat reeds. I would add that instruments in the category that we have been discussing have external designs closely reminiscent of traditional British concertinas, while the Rochelle does not, and also that instruments in that category tend to be built with very high-quality accordion reeds and it's my (unconfirmed) impression that the Rochelle uses a less expensive type of accordion reed.

[wntrmute]

I think what I was trying to say was that even if I took my El-Cheapo and broke apart the reed blocks and laid them flat, it still wouldn't be a hybrid because the board wouldn't be built up with those rectangular or spoke-like chambers -- it would still just be a flat bit of plywood. Are there any hybrids (commonly accepted as such -- circular argument in a way, I know) or high-end concertinas that don't have a chambered reed pan?

[JimLucas]

I wonder why we need to have a definition of "hybrid" beyond the biological one... Why not just state the facts about a particular instrument and ditch the artificial category?

I think the thing we're trying to do (or considering attempting to do) is to put a label on the type of instruments many of us are currently making so that they can be referred to as a class or type by a single word (or couple?) rather than a long description that can easily be adulterated and/or misconstrued.

But as I see it, you're trying to do so by adulterating and misconstruing what is already a much used and well understood single word. My complaint is not that you want such a label, but that "hybrid" is an inappropriate choice for the restricted definition you and Daniel seem to be espousing.

 

In fact, let me propose a potential label: "new breed". New Breed concertinas. How does it sound?

[Daniel Hersh]

I think what I was trying to say was that even if I took my El-Cheapo and broke apart the reed blocks and laid them flat, it still wouldn't be a hybrid because the board wouldn't be built up with those rectangular or spoke-like chambers -- it would still just be a flat bit of plywood. Are there any hybrids (commonly accepted as such -- circular argument in a way, I know) or high-end concertinas that don't have a chambered reed pan?

I'm not sure that what I'm about to say is 100% accurate, so I hope that someone more knowledgable such as Rich Morse will chime in. I believe that "hybrids" with accordion reeds don't typically have the same kind of reed slots (or "chambers") that you find on traditional British-style concertinas with concertina-type reeds. See the pic below of the inside of a Morse from the Button Box web site for an illustration of a hybrid reed pan. But you need to have some kind of way of controlling the airflow so air only flows past the reeds associated with the depressed button, so each reed pair is placed above a little box through which the air flows, controlled by the pads of the action. (Is this what you meant by a "chamber"?) Your reed blocks are also divided into sections, for the same reason.

 

[Daniel Hersh]

I wonder why we need to have a definition of "hybrid" beyond the biological one... Why not just state the facts about a particular instrument and ditch the artificial category?

I think the thing we're trying to do (or considering attempting to do) is to put a label on the type of instruments many of us are currently making so that they can be referred to as a class or type by a single word (or couple?) rather than a long description that can easily be adulterated and/or misconstrued.

But as I see it, you're trying to do so by adulterating and misconstruing what is already a much used and well understood single word. My complaint is not that you want such a label, but that "hybrid" is an inappropriate choice for the restricted definition you and Daniel seem to be espousing.

 

In fact, let me propose a potential label: "new breed". New Breed concertinas. How does it sound?

Well, I started this thread building on Dan's post, where he said "hybrid". I had a good idea from the context of what kind of concertina he meant, and I would imagine that you did too, though you may have winced at it. Usage of the word "hybrid" for this specific concertina type was not invented by me -- I'm just using the word as others have used it, and it's fairly clear in context though in different contexts it has a broader meaning as well.

 

I wouldn't mind using a different term if others understood what I was talking about. (A big "if", though.) But "new breed" in particular (or "new" anything) could get confusing when something newer comes along. The Jackie/Rochelle design, for example, is a newer approach than the Norman/Herrington/Morse/etc. one.

 

Thinking about the Jackie/Rochelle design makes me see the point of Ted's suggestion, since we have no name at all for that combination of design features and I would expect that other new combinations will come along too. But in the end I agree with Rich that there's enough discussion of the Norman/Morse/etc. type that we need to call it something. I think that the term "hybrid" for it may be in common enough usage by now that it's going to stick around, despite the potential confusion--after all, we manage to live with the fact that the most common concertina types, though radically different in key and note layout, have the near-identical-sounding names of Anglo and English.

Edited September 6, 2007 by Daniel Hersh

[JimLucas]

Since Jim asked, I'll say I had meant the term 'hybrid' to mean an anglo built by taking a handful or two of individually framed Italian reeds and affixing them to a nice (non-wooden) action to make them sound as truly (anglo- or English-) concertina-like as possible.

It would be more conclusive and accurate to say that you had meant the term "hybrid" to mean....

Rich, I think Dan is quite articulate and I believe that he meant what he said, not what you wish he had said.