Diy Janko Bandoneon

[MusicScienceGuy]

http://musicscienceguy.vox.com/library/pos...er-playing.html

Perhaps I'm stupid, but I didn't understand the idea.

What's wrong with just reading the score?

For an experienced player, "just reading the score" is pretty straightforward. The technique is for those new to music.

Also, when playing chords on a W/H layout it's sometimes hard to see from the score whether the interval is say a third, or a minor third, and what inversion is meant.

With the three "root line" notes highlighted, it's much more obvious: if the notes both are in the yellow band or both in the white, they are a major third, if they cross the bands, they are minor. (play a I, ii, iii, IV, V etc progression)

Does this clarify?

Ken.

[m3838]

http://musicscienceguy.vox.com/library/pos...er-playing.html

Perhaps I'm stupid, but I didn't understand the idea.

What's wrong with just reading the score?

For an experienced player, "just reading the score" is pretty straightforward. The technique is for those new to music.

Also, when playing chords on a W/H layout it's sometimes hard to see from the score whether the interval is say a third, or a minor third, and what inversion is meant.

With the three "root line" notes highlighted, it's much more obvious: if the notes both are in the yellow band or both in the white, they are a major third, if they cross the bands, they are minor. (play a I, ii, iii, IV, V etc progression)

Does this clarify?

Ken.

 

It kind of does, but I still am wondering, what kind of scores do you mean?

If you look at fake book, the chord symbols indicate major and minor and the chord itself, but leave inversion to you. So simple looking fake books are not really for the beginners.

If you have a score with all chords spelled out, it looks hideous, but actually helps the beginner, as all notes are there. Just finger them and you'll know major from minor in instant. And inversions all spelled out.

What do you mean by "when playing chords on a W/H layout it's sometimes hard to see from the score whether the interval is say a third, or a minor third, and what inversion is meant..."? Isn't it there regardless of the keyboard?

[Boney]

It was proven years ago that the Dvorak keyboard is better for touch typing

Hm, not so fast:

 

The Fable of the Keys [exerpts below]:

 

A 1956 General Services Administration study by Earle Strong, which was influential in its time, provides the most compelling evidence against the Dvorak keyboard. [...] ...the Dvorak typists progressed less quickly with further Dvorak training than did Qwerty typists training on Qwerty keyboards.

 

The most recent studies of the relative merits of keyboards are found in the ergonomics literature. These studies provide evidence that the advantages of the Dvorak is either small or nonexistent. [...] In two studies based on analysis of hand-and-finger motions R. F. Nickells Jr. finds that Dvorak is 6.2 percent faster than Qwerty, and R. Kinkhead finds only a 2.3 percent advantage for Dvorak.

 

Moreover, the studies suggest that there may be no advantage with the Dvorak keyboard for ordinary typing by skilled typists. It appears that the principles by which Dvorak ''rationalized" the keyboard may not have fully captured the actions of experienced typists largely because typing appears to be a fairly complex activity.

 

...the claims for the superiority of the Dvorak keyboard are suspect. The most dramatic claims are traceable to Dvorak himself, and the best-documented experiments, as well as recent ergonomic studies, suggest little or no advantage for the Dvorak keyboard.

[jjj]

So far I haven't seen anyone mention this simple fact: If you take the Stradella row of bass buttons and shift every other button up a row, you get the first two rows (and first octave) of the Wicki/Hayden layout! So a W/H pair of rows is just a staggered Stradella row. That means you can move around the bass buttons in a somewhat more compact manner. As for hitting the chords up above the bass rows, I agree with Rich that it's easy, it can be made to sound very much like an accordion LH (Stradella), but you have quite a variety of options in how you voice the chords, unlike an accordion.

Nice, that you mentioned all these fact and can't wait to get my hands onto the W/H layout. As mentioned, I'm not much good at music theory, but my sense of pragmatic observation & reasoning seems to push me. I'm glad having gained the certainty that W/H is by far the easiest to learn & play layout of them all. That I consider a big step for mankind... sorry I got carried away. I should stick to just "me-kind"

I personally believe the Hayden layout is the best thing to happen to concertinas since the bellows. But I'm not so sure how well the W/H layout would transfer to a "prone" keyboard to be played with both hands.

I really cannot see why not? Maybe the button have to be piano key seized (=20 mm in diameter) to allow for full technical potential ?

BTW, I think we came to a consensus that the Janko keyboard is too long and shallow for practical use in a concertina, despite its good features as a prone keyboard. --Mike K.

As mentioned, I already adapted my Synth to Janko, I don't mind to start all over with W/H! That's life! I was too sure that Janko is the one I'm after and hope that this is it!! I should have done some more homework; better late than never.

[m3838]

]I personally believe the Hayden layout is the best thing to happen to concertinas since the bellows

But it comes with the price.

Of C e g c it is easy to only play C e g.

Octaves are doable, but only that, doable. C or B systems presents very naturally flowing Cegc type harmony.

[Boney]

]I personally believe the Hayden layout is the best thing to happen to concertinas since the bellows

But it comes with the price.

Of C e g c it is easy to only play C e g.

Octaves are doable, but only that, doable. C or B systems presents very naturally flowing Cegc type harmony.

Have you experimented with a Hayden concertina? It is a bit tricky with the right hand, but with the left, it's actually very easy to add the C an octave above the root to a C chord (if that's what you mean). The finger that plays the 5th (the G) extends slightly to play the C a 4th above it at the same time.

 

All this speculation and theory can be useful to a point, but you really have to try these things out on a real instrument, and spend some time, to find out what works and what doesn't. Of course there are tradeoffs, but even in my early development, they aren't all what I thought they would be.

[m3838]

]I personally believe the Hayden layout is the best thing to happen to concertinas since the bellows

But it comes with the price.

Of C e g c it is easy to only play C e g.

Octaves are doable, but only that, doable. C or B systems presents very naturally flowing Cegc type harmony.

Have you experimented with a Hayden concertina? It is a bit tricky with the right hand, but with the left, it's actually very easy to add the C an octave above the root to a C chord (if that's what you mean). The finger that plays the 5th (the G) extends slightly to play the C a 4th above it at the same time.

 

All this speculation and theory can be useful to a point, but you really have to try these things out on a real instrument, and spend some time, to find out what works and what doesn't. Of course there are tradeoffs, but even in my early development, they aren't all what I thought they would be.

 

I mean this simple and common exercise:

 

C E G c E G c e G c e g c e g c' and back.

 

I don't mean Hayden is bad (is it "H-ah-y-deh-n" or "H-eh-y-deh-n"?), but doubting the concept of "the easiest keyboard there is". I think it's self misleading premise.

Another interesting idea about how bad is piano: 7ths chord. On a piano a 7th-s note is, obviously, 1 key before the 8th, right? It must be very difficult compared to dimentional keyboard, where 7th may be on another row, throwing your internal view of a keyboard off. Chromatic keyboard is less intuitive because of this. It can be quite annoying.

I have another idol recently: Glenn Gould. Looks totally insane, with his constant humming, that doesn't stop even in a recording studio. But boy! Man knew the words to those compositions of Bach, they had words!!!

I'd like to see bandoneon or any concertina player taking the instrument this high.

Out of free reeds only Russian B system players got close.

How you guys say? "The eating of a pudding is in the prove"?

[ragtimer]

I personally believe the Hayden layout is the best thing to happen to concertinas since the bellows. But I'm not so sure how well the W/H layout would transfer to a "prone" keyboard to be played with both hands.

 

I really cannot see why not? Maybe the buttons have to be piano key sized (=20 mm in diameter) to allow for full technical potential ?

 

I just meant what I said, that "I'm not sure" how well the W/H would work as a prone keyboard.

Meaning I haven't had the chance to try one (would love to be a guinea pig for this) nor have we heard from anyone personally who's tried it, yet. Maybe some "Jammer" testimonials?

 

You are absolutely right in stating that the best button size is yet to be determined. My guess is the buttons should be quite a bit bigger and wider spaced than on a concertina.

 

A real question is whether the thumbs should be used. If so, then the buttons MUST be close to piano-key size and spacing. And then there's Brian's (Inventor's) idea for a separate "foot bass" row of thumb buttons -- which would allow for a much smaller finger button field, more like a cocnertina's.

 

A lot of experimentation, meaning a lot of prototypes tossed in the trash bin, will be needed.

If you are volunteering to start, more power to you, and our thanks!

BTW, I think we came to a consensus that the Janko keyboard is too long and shallow for practical use in a concertina, despite its good features as a prone keyboard. --Mike K.

As mentioned, I already adapted my Synth to Janko, I don't mind to start all over with W/H! That's life! I was too sure that Janko is the one I'm after and hope that this is it!! I should have done some more homework; better late than never.

Yes, the Janko is easily implemented as a mechanical overlay over a stock keyboard. Not sure you can build a Hayden keyboard so easily. I'd suggest buying a cheap Casio keyboard at Radio Shack for $150 and hacking it to pieces to make a test bed, since you don't want to mess up your good synth.

Best wishes, Mike K.

[MusicScienceGuy]

The m-audio series has inexpensive controllers (no sound- must be connected to a computer) - the smallest, 49-key one is only $129.

It is usb-powered, and can be converted, using the technique jjj has posted (please provide a link jjj) to a janko-type easily.

 

if you use 2 of them, facing each other, you can create a 6-row janko unit.

 

with a bit more work and by reassigning the keys, you can convert the unit to a 4-row flat W/H or B-system or C-system.

 

see my posting in How to Build a Jammer which is also how to build a Janko.

Ken.

[Richard Morse]

I mean this simple and common exercise:

 

C E G c ... E G c e ... G c e g ... c e g c' and back.

Do you mean those as "chunk" chords? If so, that's very easy to do on W/H (and have legato sound as well). If you mean C, EGc etc. (as in bass, chord) then it's a bit more difficult and there's a slight gap of sound when one move's fingers. I have the benefit of being able to play all this on a my Hayden concertina which may give me a bit of an edge over the conceptuals here.

 

OTOH - exercises like that rarely happen in real music so I think that's a poor example to base anything on. I suggest we try emulate what we seem to be aiming for: how one would play stride style on a piano? If so the pattern would be something like this:

 

C, EGc ... G-, EGc ... C, EGc ... G-, EGc ...

 

Which is drop-dead easy on W/H and only slightly harder on B or C system. Definitely more difficult on piano as that would either take two hands or one hand jumping considerably. A plus for W/H is that you can also do C, Gce and C, ceg without moving hand position - and that those inversions are considerably more difficult on B or C system (and only marginally more difficult that the C, EGc on piano as you have to shift position or use two hands initially anyway).

 

But - *how* is that played? On piano one typically uses the sustain pedal to bridge the non-sound gap when the hand shifts. No sustain on concertina or accordion which is why we like to keep our fingers in place! But on your synth you'll have a sustain pedal, right? So only fingering is an issue, not the sound gap caused by finger jumps.

 

I also note that stride is most often played C-C, EGc ... G--G-, EGc ... C-C, EGc ... G-G-, EGc ... in paired-octave bass. I find that difficult to do on my Hayden concertina (but leaving out the top c of the cord makes it *very* easy) but VERY easy to do on prone W/H. Why? Because I'm able to use my thumb (I use my TI for C-C and IMR for EGc) and can play legato for it! No pedal needed. Try that on B or C system. Much more difficult.

 

I invite those to try paper-play all this. I've printed out a paper layout with keys with piano-spacing which seems to work very well.

is it "H-ah-y-deh-n" or "H-eh-y-deh-n"?

)Hay-den. As in a room where hay is kept.

Another interesting idea about how bad is piano: 7ths chord. On a piano a 7th-s note is, obviously, 1 key before the 8th, right? It must be very difficult compared to dimentional keyboard, where 7th may be on another row, throwing your internal view of a keyboard off. I don't know what you mean by a "dimensional keyboard" but on a W/H the 7th is on the same row as the 8th and is in fact the next note to the left of it. Can't get any closer than that! In reality on a piano keyboard that 7th note is TWO keys before the 8th, not one... AND it's on "another row".

 

-- Rich --

[jjj]

Last year I asked Japanese Chromatone when their Janko style Synth will be available and 10 month later they invited me to buy it. I had a great excuse: "Sorry I waited too long; in the meantime I built my own Janko adapter" (!) and sent them my project PDF... instead.

In various forums/fora I was pushing the idea of Janko in the hope to generate more interest in advanced MIDI applications, for I believe the time has come to enable hobby musicians to benefit from the latest technological advances. Musical instruments of yesteryear were in line with technological advances in that epoch (like K. Marx's introduction of his communist manifesto), when computer technology was still underdeveloped. They were developed to the highest technological level of their time. Mid 80th its development came to a halt, because Windows85 were born.

 

Also. in the past, electronic instrumental sounds were viewed as unsuitable for true musical expression and values. Yet, great organists, such as my idol the late "Klaus Wunderlich", have proven the opposite to be true. Now, with the advent of MIDI wind and breath controllers we are getting again a step closer to the real thing. The way things go, computer technology is going to have the last word/ laugh, because traditional musical instruments are stay put, whereas the latter keeps on evolving. Just listen to the latest Wersi organs. It's a far cry from what we heard only a few years, ago - and that's only the beginning of PC technology, as we all know.

Chromatone is doomed, for they made the same mistake I did: they failed to do their homework and settled for the second best, because W/H, not Janko, is the unsung hero and winner! Thus, any new instrument, based on the W/H layout can only flourish.

I'm afraid, it might take a while to convince hobby musicians and Profis to embrace the W/H as the one and only truly progressive keyboard layout and I don't need the abilities of clairvoyants to predict with certainty that the W/H layout will be the keyboard layout of the future!

 

It's advantages are manifold (yes, promising folded money, too!) So far "Jim, the Thummer" is the only developer (apart from Ken and last, not least my humble efforts) keen on cashing in on this very insight and he's going to make it, because his concept is based on sound reasoning, progressive thinking and philosophy. He has all rights and reasons to claim that his idea of a new-age MIDI instrument (based on the W/H layout) is the easiest to learn & play instrument in the world! In a way, I feel sorry for the humble concertina... because now will increasingly play the second fiddle; i.e. never be able to catch up with the potential realm of MIDI and progressive PC technology, for even the poorest hobby musicians will eventually cross the floor to the affordable Jammer.

Edited March 14, 2008 by jjj

[ragtimer]

Chromatone is doomed, for they made the same mistake I did: they failed to do their homework and settled for the second best, because W/H, not Janko, is the unsung hero and winner! Thus, any new instrument, based on the W/H layout can only flourish.

I'm afraid, it might take a while to convince hobby musicians and Profis to embrace the W/H as the one and only truly progressive keyboard layout and I don't need the abilities of clairvoyants to predict with certainty that the W/H layout will be the keyboard layout of the future!

But keep in mind that some keyboard players have heard of the Janko keyboard, whereas few outside the concertina world know about the W/Hayden system. I suspect that Chromatone will probably be able to capitalize on the Janko mystique and sell a few units.

It's advantages are manifold (yes, promising folded money, too!) So far "Jim, the Thummer" is the only developer (apart from Ken and last, not least my humble efforts) keen on cashing in on this very insight and he's going to make it, because his concept is based on sound reasoning, progressive thinking and philosophy.

The Thummer consists of two separate W/H keyboards, one for each hand, like a Hayden Duet concertina.

Whereas the Jammer is a single wide and shallow W/H keyboard for both hands -- a more conventional prone keyboard, from a pianist's or organist's way of thinking.

 

It will be interesting to see which of these two approaches to a prone W/H keyboard catch on -- or at least to see how their unique pros and cons pan out when trying to play real music.

 

BTW, a "shallow and wide" keyboard (4 rows at most), a la Jammer, is needed if you want to stack up several manuals as in an organ console, or the way rock musicians stack several keyboards on their custom racks.

He has all rights and reasons to claim that his idea of a new-age MIDI instrument (based on the W/H layout) is the easiest to learn & play instrument in the world! In a way, I feel sorry for the humble concertina... because now will increasingly play the second fiddle; i.e. never be able to catch up with the potential realm of MIDI and progressive PC technology, for even the poorest hobby musicians will eventually cross the floor to the affordable Jammer.

Really? I'd guess that of all the acoustic instruments (pianos, cellos, trombones, etc.), the concertina will be one of the LAST to pass into oblivion, simply because it's so compact and expressive and alive in your hands -- and no batteries required. And no reeds to change, constant re-tuning, nor need to swab the spit out of it after a session!

--Mike K.

Edited March 15, 2008 by ragtimer

[jjj]

Chromatone: Good observation! It's true that many Musos are unaware of of the W/H advantages. They regard at the concertina with contempt. I was one of them for 66 years (!) Thx to you good people I finally woke up and start kissing concertinas!

Jammer is a single wide and shallow W/H keyboard for both hands...

Ergonomically I prefer the Thummer's layout, for it can be adjust to ^ position, the natural position of our hands and can even play it like a concertina. I think the layout can also be remapped (try that with concertina!) for the one's not liking the the left box's W/H mirror layout.

The concertina will be one of the LAST to pass into oblivion...

Yes, I like to agree with you, but progress is inevitable and in the past progress replaced things we previously thought "irreplaceable". The same happened to Omega watches, radio & TV appliances, Window95 and everything else.

Admittedly, at the moment the ball is still in concertina's court, because the "new-age instruments" still sound pretty underdeveloped. Yet, don't forget PC technology is progressing at an alarming rate, whereas the good concertinas development is exhausted and its quality regressive ...at an alarming rate.

Edited March 16, 2008 by jjj

[jjj]

The next hurdle will be to get rid of this outdated, traditional notation and create a specially formulated notation for the W/H layout, enabling hobby musicians to learn new melodies with their proper fingering (shall Profi musicians continue to torture each other with outdated traditional notation). I prefer a WYSIWYG Klavarskribo-style notation.

Traditional notation has only 5 lines and that's why notes are inserted into wrong lines and than corrected via #or b. That's insane!

Klavarskribo notation actually shows you the notes in the keyboard! You don't even care in which scale the melody is written! You only notice that the traditional keyboard forces you to struggle through the irregular jungle of more or less narrow, higher lying black keys...

Why not getting rid of the lot and adapting to the most progressive keyboard layout and notation?

 

Now, after discovering the advantages of the W/H layout, I truly view the awkward, traditional piano keyboard and notation with contempt.

I just cannot believe that professional musicians prefer awkward keyboard layouts and notation to far more logically correct ones!

>>> Why have it easy... when it is possible to enjoy its pedantic, circumstantial format?

On these kinds of insane considerations the Janko layout and Klavarskribo notation were dismissed by music teachers (!) and that's how the demise

of the traditional 'zebra' keyboard and notation was procrastinated... still today and continues to be heralded as the "world's proven and unrivaled standard in piano keyboard and notion layout." Most people wouldn't dare to argue and so, just conform to claims of musicians and music-teachers.

Do we live in an idiotic world?! Rolling Eyes

[JimLucas]

Sorry, folks, for the length of this post. Skip it, if you like.

 

The next hurdle will be to get rid of this outdated, traditional notation...

Outdated? Not at all!

 

...and create a specially formulated notation for the W/H layout,...

I don't really see an advantage to a notation that is specific to a single instrument, especially when it's an instrument that I neither play nor likely ever will. E.g., guitar tab is great for guitars, but virtually useless for mandolin and banjo players, and a pain at both ends of my spine if I try to read it while playing concetina, whistle, or anything but guitar.

 

...enabling hobby musicians to learn new melodies with their proper fingering...

Ah, and who will declare what fingerings are "proper"? Mr. Napoleon 'jjj' Bonaparte? I like the fingerings on my English, anglo, and various duets, and I will gladly join "The Resistance" to defend them.

 

...shall Profi musicians continue to torture each other with outdated traditional notation...

I have yet to hear a professional musician claim that traditional notation is an annoyance, much less "torture". If you find it hurtful, I suspect that the pain is coming from within you, not from the external notation.

 

Traditional notation has only 5 lines and that's why notes are inserted into wrong lines and than corrected via #or b. That's insane!

If anything is "insane" here, I think it's your description. Traditional notation has an unlimited number of lines (and spaces), but tries not to use more than are necessary at any given time. Though often only five continuous lines are used, others are added as needed, either continuous lines (e.g., a bass clef added to the treble clef) or short-segment "ledger lines" (for middle C, notes above the treble clef, etc.). And notes are placed exactly as the notation intends them to be. Sharps and flats are not "corrections", but amendments.

 

Klavarskribo notation actually shows you the notes in the keyboard!

Not in my English, anglo, or non-Hayden duet concertina keyboards. And if it did for one, it wouldn't do for the others... nor for the oboe, banjo, cello, uilleann pipes, or Pan pipes. Hmm. Some pan pipes are built in two rows, alternating notes of a diatonic scale between front and back rows, with "accidentals" produced by altering the embochure on those pipes. Since you seem to be advocating an instrument-specific version of Klavarscribo to match each instrument's note layout, how do you propose to indicate notes which can be played, but don't have their own positions in the layout? Or what about non-tempered tunings, in which (e.g.) Eb and D# are not identical?

 

You don't even care in which scale the melody is written! You only notice that the traditional keyboard forces you to struggle through the irregular jungle of more or less narrow, higher lying black keys...

Not me, it doesn't. I don't play "klavar" (piano) keyboards, but various others, and standard notation suits me just fine. It's simple for simple music, and only slightly more complex for rather more complex music.

 

Why not getting rid of the lot and adapting to the most progressive keyboard layout and notation?

Sounds good. I'll consider it. But I've already concluded that neither Klavarscribo nor your proposed Wikification ("Wikiscribo"? can't be "klavar", because "klavar" means "piano") comes even close to fitting that description.

 

Now, after discovering the advantages of the W/H layout, I truly view the awkward, traditional piano keyboard and notation with contempt.

Ah, contempt. You seem to be proud of it, so I hope you don't mind that I view your contempt with contempt.

 

By the way, you keep mentioning "the traditional piano keyboard and notation" together, as if they are somehow inseparable. They're not. In fact, the notation is completely independent of the keyboard (one of the things I like about it) and I believe in its fundamental aspects considerably predates the keyboard. (On the other hand, I can see how the piano keyboard could have been derived from the notation.)

 

I just cannot believe that professional musicians prefer awkward keyboard layouts...

But they seem to like their "keyboards" (whether piano, mandolin, steel drum, concertina, or whatever). Perhaps because they don't find them to be awkward?

 

...notation to far more logically correct ones!

Logic is a method of argument by which conclusions can reliably be drawn from assumptions. The truth -- or "correctness" -- of the conclusions depends on the truth of the assumptions. I find myself disputing the "truth" of various assumptions implied by your argument, and so I find your classification of "correct" to be without foundation, and thus il-logical.

 

Why have it easy... when it is possible to enjoy its pedantic, circumstantial format?

Oh, but I (and a great many of the "we" who regularly use standard notation) feel that we do have it easy, by using standard notation. We certainly aren't masochistically abusing ourselves for the purpose of denying the world at large the benefits of something better, as you seem to be implying.

 

And standard notation is far from "circumstantial". It is a useful (extremely useful, at least for me) representation of the structure of music, in its most common forms. (Well, Western forms, at least, but I don't see anything in Klavarscribo or your suggestions which would handle scales with more than 12 chromatic steps per octave, either.) It is based on a musical structure of scales with 7 sequential intervals, not all equal, composing each octave, and with a means of constructing other intervals by indicating alterations to individual notes. And that's how most of the music I listen to, sing, and play is constructed. It is not built around theoretical geometrical arrays of entirely equal intervals. Nursery songs aren't, nor are the works of Bach, Mozart, Joplin, Brubeck, or any other musicians or composers that I'm personally aware of. I don't think of or feel my music in terms of the 12-step chromatic scale (though I'm aware of it), and why should I want a notation that clashes with the way I think and feel?

 

Another advantage of standard notation is its representation of duration. Instead of matching duration directly to distance on a page, as my quick internet search suggests is the case with Klavarscribo, standard notation uses different symbols to represent different durations, so that long durations can be represented in little space, while very short durations can be easily distinguished and understood without a magnifying glass.

 

On these kinds of insane considerations the Janko layout and Klavarskribo notation were dismissed by music teachers (!)...

Not at all. Those are not their reasons, but your misrepresentations. Perhaps your rationalizations for the fact that the world's majority doesn't seem to worship the same "god" that you do?

 

...

Do we live in an idiotic world?! Rolling Eyes

Lots of things in this world that don't make sense to me, though "idiotic" isn't a word I would use (in part, because it's more disparaging than precise). But I suspect that musical notation is hardly the only point on which you and I would disagree about what was "sense" and what was not.

 

Well, I've generally been keeping quiet in this thread, because the main thrust has been about something that I personally have little interest in, the arguments have seemed repetitive and futile, and there's been precious little practical experience to support rather expansive theoretical claims. (To quote I don't know who, "In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice... but not in practice." ) But jjj, I feel that your extensive and vitriolic misrepresentation of and outright lies about a powerful and elegant tool that I use regularly and to great benefit required a rebuttal.

 

If anyone feels that my response has been harsh, I will simply say that I don't believe it's anywhere near as harsh as jjj's attack on "standard notation". And I have attacked only his argument, not either his choice of keyboard nor his choice of notation, except to say that from what little I've been able to learn about "...scribo" notation, its claimed superiority is not evident to me... and I've tried to show why.

 

Meanwhile, if jjj (or Rich, or anyone else) produces a working instrument, I would be pleased to try it out, but I'm not interested in arguing its merits without a means of testing the reality.

 

And in the end, what I've presented is my viewpoint, with which others may -- and at least jjj pretty clearly does -- disagree. I've said my say, and will now attempt to refrain from further posting in this thread.

[jjj]

Sorry, I'm not good at participating in vitriolic, polemic arguments... love peace & enjoy good music. (I'll be beaten by your experience in the former.) Just a few constructive thoughts for you, instead. Please consider this:

 

1) "If I were to begin my career anew it would be on this keyboard." - Arthur Rubinstein (in regard to Janko layout)

 

2) "This invention will have replaced the present piano keyboard in fifty years' time!" - Franz Liszt (in regard to Janko layout)

 

3) Get some thorough information about Klavarskribo notation. It's an alternative keyboard notation taught at the music conservatory in Holland.

 

4) It's no secret that professional musicians aren't interested 'in relearning'; not even the most progressive keyboard layout and or notation !!!

 

5) "Your reality"seems to contradict Rubinstein's & Liszt's (amazing!); thus I assume you are a greater musician than they were.

Please allow me to worship you as my idol? What's your name, again... I can't find it on Google

 

--------------------------------------

Since music means really a lot to me, the discovery of the W/H layout is probably one of my life's greatest joys.

At first I thought the Janko layout is the easiest to learn & play. So, I built a Janko adapter onto my Synth ... only to discover that the C-system is even better. Yet at the end I got the bright thought of having a more thorough look at what else is there's around... That's how I gradually got onto W/H! For some "stupid" reason I totally discounted the concertina as a serious musical instrument with a great layout potential. (Not to mention that such sheer ignorance is unknown to Master JimLucas.) Admittedly, it took me quite a while to overcome this ignorance. In hindsight I'm sooo glad having been able to overcome it. That much so, that I now live this joy day and night! It left some great psychological, even philosophical effect on me. It's given me a new lease of life; something new and great to look forward to.

It's, because it has taken me a lifetime (or minus childhood, 50 years!) to get there. In fact I should feel ashamed of heralding it, but if it can help a young person to avoiding the same mistake then my shame is the least to worry about. After all, Rubinstein & Liszt weren't ashamed of it, either...

Edited March 17, 2008 by jjj

[JimLucas]

Sorry, I hate vitriolic, polemic arguments...

Me, too.

Please consider this:

 

1) "If I were to begin my career anew it would be on this keyboard." - Arthur Rubinstein (in regard to Janko layout)

 

2) "This invention will have replaced the present piano keyboard in fifty years' time!" - Franz Liszt (in regard to Janko layout)

Consider it, why? Except maybe to note that Lizt died in 1886, and his prediction has not yet come true?

 

My complaint was with what you said about traditional music notation, not at all about keyboards.

 

3) Get some thorough information about Klavarskribo notation. It's an alternative keyboard notation taught at the music conservatory in Holland.

I've already googled and found some information, but not enough to convince me that I should interrupt my other activities to undertake such a research project. It excites you. It doesn't excite me.

 

4) It's no secret that professional musicians aren't interested 'in relearning'; not even the most progressive keyboard layout and or notation !!!

Hardly limited to either professionals or musicians, but so what?

Some "better" things are not readily adopted. But failure to be adopted is not proof that something is better.

 

5) "Your reality"seems to contradict Rubinstein's & Liszt's (amazing!); thus I assume you are a greater musician than they were.

...

Sorry, I hate vitriolic, polemic arguments...

Yeah, right!

And I'll repeat that their comments which you quoted have nothing to do with the subject I addressed in my post, which was traditional music notation. I'll let others draw their own conclusions from your attempt to conflate the two.

 

Please allow me to worship you as my idol?

My permission is not required.

 

What's your name, again... I can't find it on Google

Either you didn't try, or you're lying.

My quick google of my name reported "about 48,700" results for "Jim Lucas". A few of the first hundred were even about me, and not some other "Jim Lucas".

Enough said. More than enough.

[jjj]

Criky... you are a musical fighter!

Did music do that to you?

Are you into ROCK music or worse?

I bet you would even argue with me that we here got wonderful weather.

 

Sorry, I still can't work out "which Jim Lucas" you are. This makes it hard to worship you...

(Q: How to worship a warship?)

In Australia we have a game, called: "Hit the Lucas!"

In Germany the name 'Lucas' is a rare as 'Adolf'

In Chile, ordinary people call money "Lucas"

In the Bible... forget it!

So give me a hint. Amen (or 'Hi man'!)

 

(Sorry for not allowing myself to upset myself.)

Edited March 17, 2008 by jjj