Wikipedia Edit War

[wntrmute]

In another thread I brought this up, and my feeling was that there was a consensus on the following wording (the 'original wording' in the poll), which was adapted from someone else's contribution (hat tip to Mikefule):

Due to the use of non-traditional reeds, 'hybrid' instruments may have some differences in tone and response -- though this can also be true of traditionally built instruments as well. While some players have a strong preference for traditional reeds, others actually prefer the sound or performance of accordion reeds. There are players who own several concertinas so that they can take advantage of the range of tonal qualities available between the different varieties.

 

There was some question as to whether there should be a discussion about the 'hybrid' (that this term is disputed is mentioned earlier in the text) or mid-range concertinas, specifically with regards to something as arcane as the reeds. I think the fact that there is a dispute does make it important to mention. This dispute has again found its way into the text in a way that I personally feel includes strong personal bias against 'accordion reeded' instruments ('the new wording' in the poll). I have bolded and numbered the sections that I feel do not reflect a neutral point of view or verifiable facts:

 

Due to the use of accordion reeds, 'hybrid' instruments have a distinctive accordion-like tone[1]. Their response, an important measurement of concertina quality and performance, is in the high medium range[2]. The sound of hybrid instruments is acclaimed by some, though there is still a strong general preference for the traditional sound[3]. The measure may be in the instruments selected for recording. As yet no great concertina player has recorded on a hybrid[4].

 

1. Even my el-cheapo doesn't sound like an accordion to me -- but I'm hardly an expert and I'm just one guy. I don't think anyone buys a hybrid expecting, wanting or desiring an accordion-like sound, considering the fact that a chromatic accordion can be 1/3 or 1/2 the price of a somewhat chromatic 'hybrid' anglo. Also, there is not nor was there ever just one 'authentic' concertina sound. Brass reeds vs. steel, radial pan vs. parallel, and metal vs. wooden ends make for different sounds even when 'traditional' reeds are used (and is there another term for the 'traditional' reeds? As I've pointed out before the German concertinas 'traditionally' used a completely different kind of reed from the English made. Mr. Wakker had a jaw-cracking German word for it, even).

 

2. Every review I have read have compared the 'hybrid' concertinas quite favorably with the most expensive vintage or new instruments in terms of action and response. What exactly is 'high medium' supposed to mean? Is this a true statement in terms of general consensus?

 

3. To what extend is this true? And as noted before, and in the other thread, which 'traditional sound' is so greatly prefered: Jeffries, Jones, Lachenal, or Wheatstone? Or the sound of the early German made anglos? To extend this to the Chemnitzer or Bandoneón, I am not aware of any that are manufactured with accordion reeds in a hybrid style (though I seem to recall someone on these boards is home-building one), and the only choice I know of within those instruments is between a Stagi or a traditional long-plate reed style instrument. However, Stagi isn't considered a 'hybrid' manufacturer from everything I've read. Is this incorrect?

 

4. Considering the hugely vast number of internationally reknowned concertinists who are chased by anxious papparazi every waking moment this is a very telling point. Oh, wait.... Also, is this even true? I've heard Noel Hill (as close to a Eddie Van Halen as exists in the world of concertinas so far as I know) uses Tedrows in his classes. Mr. Edgley has a video of someone winning a competition using one of his concertinas on his website. Mr. Morse has a testimonial from a Nashville studio musician, who specifically praises the instrument's sound in a recording studio.

 

The bottom line is that I personally don't think the new edit is appropriate or balanced, and that the earlier version is better in those regards. However, that article is not my personal domain. I feel that this forum is the best place to hammer out a concensus with regards to the various kind of concertinas that are out there, and hopefully raise the general awareness for the insturment in all its forms (though I suspect the Chemnitzer and Bandoneón communities are woefully under-represented here). Is the old or new edit preferable? Should the whole matter be dropped? Is there a third (or fourth, or fifth) option that someone (more qualified than me) would propose?

 

Now I need to go to the post office to pick up an antique concertina I bought off Ebay -- here's hoping I didn't get ripped off. I'll post some pictures of the thing with some information if there's any interest, it looked interesting from a concertina history point of view.

Edited December 10, 2007 by wntrmute

[Stephen Chambers]

[Guest Peter Laban]

I've heard Noel Hill (as close to a Eddie Van Halen as exists in the world of concertinas so far as I know) uses Tedrows in his classes.

 

My son goes to Noel Hill's classes in Ennis, in fact he was there this morning and I can assure you that what you've heard is absolutely not the case.

[Molly Roberts]

From time to time during his classes Noel Hill will give each of our concertinas a work-out, generally as a result of a question posed by a student. So in that sense, yes, he's played all of our instruments - including my Tedrow. But when Noel is teaching or playing for us he plays his own instruments.

 

Molly

[Daniel Hersh]

My own personal opinion (and I agree with Stephen that is very much a can of worms)...

 

I agree with some of your rival's edits, but would "tone" them down a bit. My suggested modified version:

 

Due to the use of accordion reeds, 'hybrid' instruments have a distinctive tone[1]. Their response, an important measurement of concertina quality and performance, is good[2]. The sound of hybrid instruments is acclaimed by some, though there is still a general preference for the traditional sound[3]. The measure may be in the instruments selected for recording. As yet no great concertina player has recorded on a hybrid[4].

And a question: are you signing your Wikipedia work or doing it anonymously? If you're anonymous, you might consider starting to take credit.

 

In another thread I brought this up, and my feeling was that there was a consensus on the following wording, which was adapted from someone else's contribution (hat tip to Mikefule):

Due to the use of non-traditional reeds, 'hybrid' instruments may have some differences in tone and response -- though this can also be true of traditionally built instruments as well. While some players have a strong preference for traditional reeds, others actually prefer the sound or performance of accordion reeds. There are players who own several concertinas so that they can take advantage of the range of tonal qualities available between the different varieties.

 

There was some question as to whether there should be a discussion about the 'hybrid' (that this term is disputed is mentioned earlier in the text) or mid-range concertinas, specifically with regards to something as arcane as the reeds. I think the fact that there is a dispute does make it important to mention. This dispute has again found its way into the text in a way that I personally feel includes strong personal bias against 'accordion reeded' instruments. I have bolded and numbered the sections that I feel do not reflect a neutral point of view or verifiable facts:

 

Due to the use of accordion reeds, 'hybrid' instruments have a distinctive accordion-like tone[1]. Their response, an important measurement of concertina quality and performance, is in the high medium range[2]. The sound of hybrid instruments is acclaimed by some, though there is still a strong general preference for the traditional sound[3]. The measure may be in the instruments selected for recording. As yet no great concertina player has recorded on a hybrid[4].

 

1. Even my el-cheapo doesn't sound like an accordion to me -- but I'm hardly an expert and I'm just one guy. I don't think anyone buys a hybrid expecting, wanting or desiring an accordion-like sound, considering the fact that a chromatic accordion can be 1/3 or 1/2 the price of a somewhat chromatic 'hybrid' anglo. Also, there is not nor was there ever just one 'authentic' concertina sound. Brass reeds vs. steel, radial pan vs. parallel, and metal vs. wooden ends make for different sounds even when 'traditional' reeds are used (and is there another term for the 'traditional' reeds? As I've pointed out before the German concertinas 'traditionally' used a completely different kind of reed from the English made. Mr. Wakker had a jaw-cracking German word for it, even).

 

2. Every review I have read have compared the 'hybrid' concertinas quite favorably with the most expensive vintage or new instruments in terms of action and response. What exactly is 'high medium' supposed to mean? Is this a true statement in terms of general consensus?

 

3. To what extend is this true? And as noted before, and in the other thread, which 'traditional sound' is so greatly prefered: Jeffries, Jones, Lachenal, or Wheatstone? Or the sound of the early German made anglos? To extend this to the Chemnitzer or Bandoneón, I am not aware of any that are manufactured with accordion reeds in a hybrid style (though I seem to recall someone on these boards is home-building one), and the only choice I know of within those instruments is between a Stagi or a traditional long-plate reed style instrument. However, Stagi isn't considered a 'hybrid' manufacturer from everything I've read. Is this incorrect?

 

4. Considering the hugely vast number of internationally reknowned concertinists who are chased by anxious papparazi every waking moment this is a very telling point. Oh, wait.... Also, is this even true? I've heard Noel Hill (as close to a Eddie Van Halen as exists in the world of concertinas so far as I know) uses Tedrows in his classes. Mr. Edgley has a video of someone winning a competition using one of his concertinas on his website. Mr. Morse has a testimonial from a Nashville studio musician, who specifically praises the instrument's sound in a recording studio.

 

The bottom line is that I personally don't think the new edit is appropriate or balanced, and that the earlier version is better in those regards. However, that article is not my personal domain. I feel that this forum is the best place to hammer out a concensus with regards to the various kind of concertinas that are out there, and hopefully raise the general awareness for the insturment in all its forms (though I suspect the Chemnitzer and Bandoneón communities are woefully under-represented here). Is the old or new edit preferable? Should the whole matter be dropped? Is there a third (or fourth, or fifth) option that someone (more qualified than me) would propose?

 

Now I need to go to the post office to pick up an antique concertina I bought off Ebay -- here's hoping I didn't get ripped off. I'll post some pictures of the thing with some information if there's any interest, it looked interesting from a concertina history point of view.

Edited December 8, 2007 by Daniel Hersh

[JimLucas]

The bottom line is that I personally don't think the new edit is appropriate or balanced, and that the earlier version is better in those regards.

I agree. Very strongly.

 

Is the old or new edit preferable?

The "old", i.e., yours. Not just preferable, but pretty damn good!

 

Should the whole matter be dropped?

Definitely not. In my opinion, the four segments you've highlighted in the new version are:

1. "...'hybrid' instruments have a distinctive accordion-like tone."
   Simply false.
   
2. "Their response, an important measurement of concertina quality and performance, is in the high medium range."
   Perhaps true of some, but definitely not true of all.
   
3. "...there is still a strong general preference for the traditional sound."
   Unsupported, and unsupportable. Anecdotally, it seems that some people at least believe that they prefer "the traditional sound", but as far as I know, no one has ever reported a blind test in which even these people could express their preferences among the sounds of a variety of both "traditional" and "hybrid" instruments without any clue except the sound itself as to the identities of the instruments. Furthermore, there are some (many, I suspect and hope) who refuse to play the TV elimination game of rejecting all other choices to "prefer" only one.
   
4. "The measure may be in the instruments selected for recording. As yet no great concertina player has recorded on a hybrid."
   This one's a real maggot pie. Too many assumptions are required to accept even arguing it. Does YouTube or Frank Edgley's web site count as "recorded"? What criteria are used to deem someone "great"? Why should that be "the measure", and what exactly is it supposed to be a measure of? Etc.
   

Is there a third (or fourth, or fifth) option that someone (more qualified than me) would propose?

I'm not "more qualified" than you, at least with regard to Wikipedia. Is it possible to get that particular poster restricted by Wikipedia for having edited to insert a disparaging bias?

[JimLucas]

(Responding to this post.)

I agree with some of your rival's edits, but would "tone" them down a bit. My suggested modified version:

Due to the use of accordion reeds, 'hybrid' instruments have a distinctive tone[1]. Their response, an important measurement of concertina quality and performance, is good[2]. The sound of hybrid instruments is acclaimed by some, though there is still a general preference for the traditional sound[3]. The measure may be in the instruments selected for recording. As yet no great concertina player has recorded on a hybrid[4].

Hi Daniel. Since I disagree with you, I think I should say how and why.

1. The "hybrid" instruments do not have "a" distinctive tone. Their "distinctive" tones differ from maker to maker and even from instrument to instrument from the same maker, most notably those who do custom work. And I think wntrmute's mention that this is also true of "traditional" concertinas is also significant and should not be left out.
   
2. "Good", but not "excellent"? Again, I think wntrmute's original version is both more accurate and less likely to trigger an inadvertant bias in the reader.
   
3. No, there is not a "general" preference for "the traditional sound". Not even among the actively posting members of Concertina.net, as many past threads have amply documented. And I shouldn't have to say that there is also no single "traditional sound". Each of my vintage concertinas has its own distinctive sound, each quite different from the others.
   
4. I'll repeat one point from my previous post: "The measure" of what? Of listeners' preference? Is that the same as players' preference? Oh, wait a minute! Is the preference of all players identical to the preference of "great" concertina players? The truth is simply that -- as wntrmute said -- preferences differ, and I don't believe the data exist upon which to base any more precise claim.
   

Note that it is my understanding (opinion?) that the Wikipedia article should function as an introduction to concertinas, and not attempt to act as a "buyer's guide".

 

I'm still strongly in favor of a return to the "original" text. But...

Anybody want to start a poll?

Edited December 8, 2007 by JimLucas

[Daniel Hersh]

Jim--

 

I like the idea of a poll, (and perhaps a sound test with an oscilloscope too .

 

A couple of things re the tone issue:

 

You are of course correct that there are big differences in tone within the traditional category. (I haven't had much opportunity to compare different makes/models of hybrid side by side, so I don't personally know whether the same is true for them.) But to my ear, based on the instruments and recordings that I have had the opportunity to hear, there's a bigger difference in sound between the categories than within them. I believe that I can hear a common "concertina-reed sound" in a Lachenal, Dipper, Wheatstone, Jeffries etc. that I don't hear from the hybrids that I have heard. Others may of course have a different perception.

 

And it's my impression that of the players who are familiar with the sound of both hybrid and traditional concertinas, a significant majority like the traditional sound better. But I admit that's based on no real data at all, so a poll could help.

 

Re response. I don't think that "good" would be perceived as negative by the reader. But all the hybrids I have played actually had excellent response, so I'll concede the point. I was looking for compromise language, unnecessarily.

 

And I also agree at this point that the statement about "the measure" is problematic and should be deleted. I would still be ok with the following sentence about great players, though.

 

Daniel

 

(Responding to this post.)

I agree with some of your rival's edits, but would "tone" them down a bit. My suggested modified version:

Due to the use of accordion reeds, 'hybrid' instruments have a distinctive tone[1]. Their response, an important measurement of concertina quality and performance, is good[2]. The sound of hybrid instruments is acclaimed by some, though there is still a general preference for the traditional sound[3]. The measure may be in the instruments selected for recording. As yet no great concertina player has recorded on a hybrid[4].

Hi Daniel. Since I disagree with you, I think I should say how and why.

1. The "hybrid" instruments do not have "a" distinctive tone. Their "distinctive" tones differ from maker to maker and even from instrument to instrument from the same maker, most notably those who do custom work. And I think wntrmute's mention that this is also true of "traditional" concertinas is also significant and should not be left out.
   
2. "Good", but not "excellent"? Again, I think wntrmute's original version is both more accurate and less likely to trigger an inadvertant bias in the reader.
   
3. No, there is not a "general" preference for "the traditional sound". Not even among the actively posting members of Concertina.net, as many past threads have amply documented. And I shouldn't have to say that there is also no single "traditional sound". Each of my vintage concertinas has its own distinctive sound, each quite different from the others.
   
4. I'll repeat one point from my previous post: "The measure" of what? Of listeners' preference? Is that the same as players' preference? Oh, wait a minute! Is the preference of all players identical to the preference of "great" concertina players? The truth is simply that -- as wntrmute said -- preferences differ, and I don't believe the data exist upon which to base any more precise statement.
   

Note that it is my understanding (opinion?) that the Wikipedia article should function as an introduction to concertinas, and not attempt to act as a "buyer's guide".

 

I'm still strongly in favor of a return to the "original" text. But...

Anybody want to start a poll?

[JimLucas]

I like the idea of a poll,...

Feel free to start one. I have to get back to other things.

 

... (and perhaps a sound test with an oscilloscope too .

Which would tell us what? That we could start arguing about what aspects of the oscilloscope traces are relevant to what we hear? In fact, we don't even all hear the same things when listening to the same things. But comparative sound files could be interesting, if we could each listen to a number of different instruments being played. Of course, to be properly rigorous, it should be the same tunes/arrangements played by the same person(s) on all the instruments of each type (anglo, English,...).

 

A couple of things re the tone issue:

 

You are of course correct that there are big differences in tone within the traditional category. (I haven't had much opportunity to compare different makes/models of hybrid side by side, so I don't personally know whether the same is true for them.) But to my ear, based on the instruments and recordings that I have had the opportunity to hear, there's a bigger difference in sound between the categories than within them. I believe that I can hear a common "concertina-reed sound" in a Lachenal, Dipper, Wheatstone, Jeffries etc. that I don't hear from the hybrids that I have heard.

And an equivalent "hybrid sound" common to the various hybrids? You think a wooden-ended Jones sounds more like a metal-ended Jeffries than like a wooden-ended Ceili, or that a metal-ended Norman sounds more like the Ceili than like a metal-ended Lachenal?

 

And it's my impression that of the players who are familiar with the sound of both hybrid and traditional concertinas, a significant majority like the traditional sound better. But I admit that's based on no real data at all, so a poll could help.

I'd put a few caveats on that one.

• First, I've heard that opinion expressed by folks who have never heard a hybrid. They've formed their "own" opinions by aping the judgments of others.
  
• It's well known that many people will form and even revise their opinions to match those of others they perceive to be popular or powerful. In fact, that aspect of human behavior is what justifies the advertising profession.
  
• I believe that many (I have no real idea of the percentage) of today's experienced concertina players not only started with a vintage instrument, but did so before hybrids became widely available. And so they've gotten used to them. Familiarity can have an strong influence on preference.
  
• I suspect that most often such comparisons are not between hybrids (or even a particular hybrid) and all traditional/vintage concertinas, but that the comparison is made against only the very best of the vintage or modern "traditional" instruments. I know that if I were forced to have only one instrument and the choice was between a Morse Ceili or Albion and a top flight Jeffries anglo or Æola English, the Morse would most likely lose. But between the Morse and a low end -- maybe even a mid-range -- Lachenal, there's a good chance that I would choose the Morse, even for the English, where the Morse has nearly an octave less range at the top.
  

And I also agree at this point that the statement about "the measure" is problematic and should be deleted. I would still be ok with the following sentence about great players, though.

Not me. That would be telling the reader what's "popular". Even if true, why should that be important? It's not about concertinas, but about forming opinions, and seemingly tries to establish a concertina "caste system".

[wntrmute]

Any credit for the wording of the original should go to Mikefule -- though I'll happily accept any criticism.

Well, happily may be the wrong word.

And I have, just recently, signed up for a Wikipedia account so I can be blamed ...errrr... credited by name. It's the same as my name here. A lot of other people have helped on it, too, both here and on the Wikipedia site.

 

By the way, are those low-fat cholesterol-free worms that I've uncanned here?

[david_boveri]

From time to time during his classes Noel Hill will give each of our concertinas a work-out, generally as a result of a question posed by a student. So in that sense, yes, he's played all of our instruments - including my Tedrow. But when Noel is teaching or playing for us he plays his own instruments.

 

Molly

 

here in the states he teaches with a wheatstone, so i would agree he probably not teach with a tedrow. beyond that, you'd have to ask him his preferences. i have seen him play mostly wheatstones, and a couple jeffries.

 

i very much like noel hill as a person and a musician, but i do not think his taste in concertinas has anything to do with a wikipedia article.

[Bob Tedrow]

I believe can set the record straight here. Over the last 60 days I have built and delivered three concertinas for Noel.

 

 

What he does with them, I cannot say.

 

 

 

Bob Tedrow

 

 

From time to time during his classes Noel Hill will give each of our concertinas a work-out, generally as a result of a question posed by a student. So in that sense, yes, he's played all of our instruments - including my Tedrow. But when Noel is teaching or playing for us he plays his own instruments.

 

Molly

 

here in the states he teaches with a wheatstone, so i would agree he probably not teach with a tedrow. beyond that, you'd have to ask him his preferences. i have seen him play mostly wheatstones, and a couple jeffries.

 

i very much like noel hill as a person and a musician, but i do not think his taste in concertinas has anything to do with a wikipedia article.

[Chris Timson]

Me too.

 

Chris

[Mikefule]

Wikipedia is a public resource, not a private battleground.

 

Most people probably regard Wikipedia as a good starting point for research, rather than a definitive source of information. I like to find articles that are neutral in tone and give a fair overview. If I find an article on any given subject is loaded with personal opinion rather than fact, I tend to ignore it. You can usually tell when an entry strays into "in-crowd controversy" if you read it carefully.

 

If you want an "edit war" to end, leave it for a bit. Your opponent will only check it so many times before assuming you've given up and moved on.

 

Clearly, whatever the reeds that are fitted, a concertina does not sound like an accordeon; an accordeon normally has far more reeds sounding at once, and block chords "built in". However, the tone of an individual note may have a quality similar to the quality of a single note on an accordeon. This is far less important to the casual reader of Wikipedia than things like history, shape, layout and so on.

[Stephen Chambers]

...it is my understanding (opinion?) that the Wikipedia article should function as an introduction to concertinas, and not attempt to act as a "buyer's guide".[/indent]

That's an aspect that I feel very uncomfortable with in the new article. Why declare so openly to the simply curious how much our increasingly valuable instruments are worth? So far this has only been realised by the scammers on eBay, but why broadcast it to the thieves and muggers of the world?

 

Here in Ireland I know several people who have had their old grey Paolo Soprani accordions stolen from under their very noses, almost "to order" - and those are only worth half the price of a good Jeffries!

 

By the way, are those low-fat cholesterol-free worms that I've uncanned here?

Sorry, full-fat and salted - not healthy at all!

 

It's a topic just about guaranteed to elicit strong views and start a heated argument. Been there, not going that way again...

Edited December 10, 2007 by Stephen Chambers

[Daniel Hersh]

I like the idea of a poll,...

Feel free to start one. I have to get back to other things.

I'll think about it. I too have other things to do than post here.

 

A couple of things re the tone issue:

You are of course correct that there are big differences in tone within the traditional category. (I haven't had much opportunity to compare different makes/models of hybrid side by side, so I don't personally know whether the same is true for them.) But to my ear, based on the instruments and recordings that I have had the opportunity to hear, there's a bigger difference in sound between the categories than within them. I believe that I can hear a common "concertina-reed sound" in a Lachenal, Dipper, Wheatstone, Jeffries etc. that I don't hear from the hybrids that I have heard.

And an equivalent "hybrid sound" common to the various hybrids? You think a wooden-ended Jones sounds more like a metal-ended Jeffries than like a wooden-ended Ceili, or that a metal-ended Norman sounds more like the Ceili than like a metal-ended Lachenal?

As I just said, I haven't had the opportunity to compare different hybrids side-by-side, so I can't comment on metal-ended Norman vs. wooden-ended Ceili. And the last time I heard a Jones was more than 10 years ago. But based on instruments that I have been able to compare, I would say that to my ear a wooden-ended Lachenal sounds closer to a metal-ended Jeffries than either does to a Ceili or an Edgley.

 

And it's my impression that of the players who are familiar with the sound of both hybrid and traditional concertinas, a significant majority like the traditional sound better. But I admit that's based on no real data at all, so a poll could help.

I'd put a few caveats on that one.

• I believe that many (I have no real idea of the percentage) of today's experienced concertina players not only started with a vintage instrument, but did so before hybrids became widely available. And so they've gotten used to them. Familiarity can have an strong influence on preference.

I suspect that you are correct that this is the case for many of the experienced players who prefer the traditional sound. But all I stated was that there was a preference, not what the preference was based on. There may be newer players who initially heard only hybrids and therefore prefer the hybrid sound. Would you dismiss their opinions so quickly?
 

I suspect that most often such comparisons are not between hybrids (or even a particular hybrid) and all traditional/vintage concertinas, but that the comparison is made against only the very best of the vintage or modern "traditional" instruments. I know that if I were forced to have only one instrument and the choice was between a Morse Ceili or Albion and a top flight Jeffries anglo or Æola English, the Morse would most likely lose. But between the Morse and a low end -- maybe even a mid-range -- Lachenal, there's a good chance that I would choose the Morse, even for the English, where the Morse has nearly an octave less range at the top.

I was speaking only about the sound of the instrument, not its overall quality. If I were deciding on one instrument to "have" I might make the same choices as you.

[JimLucas]

[*]I believe that many (I have no real idea of the percentage) of today's experienced concertina players not only started with a vintage instrument, but did so before hybrids became widely available. And so they've gotten used to them. Familiarity can have an strong influence on preference.

I suspect that you are correct that this is the case for many of the experienced players who prefer the traditional sound. But all I stated was that there was a preference, not what the preference was based on. There may be newer players who initially heard only hybrids and therefore prefer the hybrid sound. Would you dismiss their opinions so quickly?

Absolutely!! ... Because what I'm trying to dismiss is the presentation of personal preferences as relevant to the understanding of concertinas. The persons with the preferences, even if they could be identified and classified, are not concertinas. Put those comments into an essay about the social dynamics of music appreciation, perhaps, but not under "concertina".

 

[*]I suspect that most often such comparisons are not between hybrids (or even a particular hybrid) and all traditional/vintage concertinas, but that the comparison is made against only the very best of the vintage or modern "traditional" instruments. I know that if I were forced to have only one instrument and the choice was between a Morse Ceili or Albion and a top flight Jeffries anglo or Æola English, the Morse would most likely lose. But between the Morse and a low end -- maybe even a mid-range -- Lachenal, there's a good chance that I would choose the Morse, even for the English, where the Morse has nearly an octave less range at the top.

I was speaking only about the sound of the instrument, not its overall quality. If I were deciding on one instrument to "have" I might make the same choices as you.

Nor was I talking about "overall" quality. But assuming other variables to be "equal", I might still prefer the sound of a Ceili to that of many Lachenals -- which don't all sound alike, not by a long shot, -- even to the extent of outweighing another factor (I mentioned the range).

[Mikefule]

I really think that the purpose of a Wikipedia entry is being missed by some of the contributors to this thread.

 

Imagine yourself knowing nothing about violins at all, and looking the subject up in Wikipedia to find "all this stuff" about the difference between gut strings and steel strings. Imagine looking up "footwear" and being drawn into a lengthy debate about the merits of different ways of tying the laces. Imagine looking up mini skirts.

 

The Morris Dancing entry in Wikipedia is often aggressively edited to introduce the partisan debate about the stale subject of whether or not women are "allowed" to dance the Morris. The Unicycling entry is often edited to include obscure details about crank flips and grinding.

 

All the interested but ignorant reader of the Morris Dancing entry needs to know about the "debate" is "In the late twentieth centrury, there was some controversy over whether Morris should be an all male activity, or should be confined to single sex teams, or whether mixed sex teams were equally valid. For the main part, this is no longer considered to be controversial and there is room within the Morris for teams of all kinds."

 

All the interested but ignorant reader of the Unicycling entry needs to know is, "Many skilled riders enjoy doing a wide variety of stunts and tricks on their unicycles. Some of these stunts are quite spectacular and even dangerous. There is much crossover influence between unicycling and sports such as BMX freestyle, bicycle trials, and skateboarding freestyle. There are informal and formal competitions, at local, national and international level, and some top riders enjoy considerable commercial success." (They don't need to know exactly what the tricks are or how they are done.)

 

All the interested but ignorant reader of the concertina article needs to know is, "Mainly for reasons of cost, many modern concertinas utilise reeds of the type that are designed for more common instruments such as accordeons. Because of differences in the metal used, and the way they are made, the tone and response are different from that of purpose made concertina reeds. There are many players who have a strong preference for the tone and response of one type of reed or the other."

Edited December 9, 2007 by Mikefule