Rochelle Or Stagi

[GalwayGal]

Hi guys

 

I have just bought myself a Rochelle, but while I was in the shop making my purchase, I noticed a Stagi it was lovely

The Rochelle is quite big, while the Stagi was small and lovely.

The Rochelle is black and quite plain!

But, I want to know which is better?

 

Thanks

[Daniel Hersh]

I personally like the Rochelle better. Though it's a bit big, the buttons are laid out the same way that they'd be on a smaller, higher-end concertina. And the action is better-built than on a Stagi. (However, there are some people who prefer the Stagi sound.) I've heard that both lines can have quality control problems, but it's my impression that they're more common on a Stagi. And of course the Rochelle is much less expensive.

 

Some of the Stagis are very pretty, while the Rochelle is indeed a bit plain-looking. The Rochelle was designed for its functionality as a starting player's instrument by someone who knows concertinas very, very well (Wim Wakker). I think that appearance was a secondary factor

 

I started on a Bastari (Stagi's predecessor) myself, long before the Rochelle was available, and it did the job for me. But I'd recommend the Rochelle for a beginning player today.

 

Daneil

 

Hi guys

 

I have just bought myself a Rochelle, but while I was in the shop making my purchase, I noticed a Stagi it was lovely

The Rochelle is quite big, while the Stagi was small and lovely.

The Rochelle is black and quite plain!

But, I want to know which is better?

 

Thanks

Edited March 26, 2008 by Daniel Hersh

[Mikefule]

The consensus reply to this question is always Rochelle.

 

It is a plain, unadorned but workmanlike box and good value. I think that the Stagi gives more bling rather than better music.

[wntrmute]

Another thing is if you go to the Button Box web page, they list all of the things they do to make a Stagi work more reliably. I think they just check the Rochelles, but don't have to make changes.

[RustyBits]

When I first started playing 10 years ago I bought a Stagi. It was not great. The buttons got stuck and I had to wrestle with the bellows to get them to move. The size of the buttons was way different than the next instrument I purchased and it took me a while to transition.

 

I had a Herrington for 9 years an recently sold it and bought a Rochelle to tide me over until my next mid-range box arrives. It is WAY better than the Stagi! What it lacks in exterior glamour it makes up for with usability.

[Richard Morse]

Another thing is if you go to the Button Box web page, they list all of the things they do to make a Stagi work more reliably. I think they just check the Rochelles, but don't have to make changes.

We (the Button Box) do check over every Rochelle we sell and only *rarely* have to make any adjustments. They are impressively well-designed and well-constructed for their price (and quite beyond!).

 

-- Rich --

[CaryK]

Another thing is if you go to the Button Box web page, they list all of the things they do to make a Stagi work more reliably. I think they just check the Rochelles, but don't have to make changes.

We (the Button Box) do check over every Rochelle we sell and only *rarely* have to make any adjustments. They are impressively well-designed and well-constructed for their price (and quite beyond!).

 

-- Rich --

 

I have owned and played both. The Stagi was purchased from The Button Box and performed admirably for me for a couple of years, inspite of its limitations. I purchased a Rochelle and had real problems with its playability (very stiff bellows that did not loosen in the several months of constant playing I gave them) and some problems with the mechanism, for which Wim Wakker quickly sent me replacement parts and instructions on how to fix my instrument. His service was great. I ended up selling the Rochelle though and keeping the Stagi, mainly because of its playability and secondly because of its attention to aesthetic details. Later, sold the Stagi to be able to upgrade to a used Herrington. On a waiting list for my next upgrade at this time for which I am patiently saving.

 

I may be a loner on this one, but I prefered the Stagi quite a bit over the Rochelle. But, the Stagi does cost more and doesn't give you the generous trade-in policy that comes with the Rochelle.

[Dana Johnson]

The only thing I haven't ever been able to figure out is why since Wim designed many good hybrid 30 button concertinas of the more or less standard around 6" size, and that since all the other hybrids manage to fit the requisite number of reeds pretty easily into the small 6" box, why Wim designed the thing so big??? The large bellows makes it harder to play even if everything else is fine. Perhaps the Chinese weren't into any big re tooling. You do get a lot more for your money than with a Stagi, but It isn't the construction that makes it cheap ( unlike the Stagi) but being made in China. Perhaps Wim didn't want to undercut his other hybrids with an instrument that was nearly as good for a much lower price.

Dana

[m3838]

The only thing I haven't ever been able to figure out is why since Wim designed many good hybrid 30 button concertinas of the more or less standard around 6" size, and that since all the other hybrids manage to fit the requisite number of reeds pretty easily into the small 6" box, why Wim designed the thing so big??? The large bellows makes it harder to play even if everything else is fine. Perhaps the Chinese weren't into any big re tooling. You do get a lot more for your money than with a Stagi, but It isn't the construction that makes it cheap ( unlike the Stagi) but being made in China. Perhaps Wim didn't want to undercut his other hybrids with an instrument that was nearly as good for a much lower price.

Dana

I don't quite understand you. There are plenty of very fast and punchy accordions around and the difference in size between Rochelle and, say, Morse, is not that great. Both are small instruments.

Besides, I looked inside the Jackie and realized that the size is barely accomodating it's 30 reedplates.

I think you can blame the larger size of Jackie/Rochelle on the redundant make-believe 6-sided body, having to wrap around 4 sided reed banks.

[ragtimer]

I don't quite understand you. There are plenty of very fast and punchy accordions around and the difference in size between Rochelle and, say, Morse, is not that great. Both are small instruments.

But it's true that, as the cross-sectional area of the ends increases, so does the force you need to squeeze with to generate the same amount of pressure/vacuum on the reeds. So a big instrument can seem hard to squeeze to get any volume out of it, or even to get fast atttack on the notes.

 

OTOH, a bigger box means you can go longer between bellows reversals (EC) due to the increased volume.

Besides, I looked inside the Jackie and realized that the size is barely accomodating it's 30 reedplates.

I think you can blame the larger size of Jackie/Rochelle on the redundant make-believe 6-sided body, having to wrap around 4 sided reed banks.

Right -- that's pretty clear from the photos that have surfaced.

Just suppose Wim had made the Rochelle with 4 sides (square)! Good enough for Bob Tedrow ...

 

When you get over that thought, imagine the Jackie/Jack in square!!! A square EC -- nooooh!!!

--Mike K.

[ragtimer]

The only thing I haven't ever been able to figure out is why since Wim designed many good hybrid 30 button concertinas of the more or less standard around 6" size, and that since all the other hybrids manage to fit the requisite number of reeds pretty easily into the small 6" box, why Wim designed the thing so big???

I agree with m3838 -- the 6 sides have to wrap around the reed banks.

 

What I want to know is when Wim is going to make a Rochelle-class entry level Hayden Duet. It would revitalize the usage of the Hayden system, and help him sell more of his new high-end Haydens. --Mike K.

Edited March 27, 2008 by ragtimer

[GalwayGal]

Ok thanks very much guys

Ive decided to stick with the Rochelle!

thanks all for your advice!

Edited March 27, 2008 by GalwayGal

[Dana Johnson]

I don't quite understand you. There are plenty of very fast and punchy accordions around and the difference in size between Rochelle and, say, Morse, is not that great. Both are small instruments.

Besides, I looked inside the Jackie and realized that the size is barely accomodating it's 30 reedplates.

I think you can blame the larger size of Jackie/Rochelle on the redundant make-believe 6-sided body, having to wrap around 4 sided reed banks.

I haven't gotten a look inside a Rochelle or a Jackie yet, but it sounds as though they are constructed with typical accordion style reed banks, in which case it is easy to see why the extra size. My point was that all the other concertina makers who use accordion reeds have been able to fit them into a substantially smaller package without undue strain by dumping the accordion style reed banks and switching to a surface mounted layout with the reed plates fixed atop chambers. Wim has done this as well as far as I know. It isn't particularly harder to make this type reed pan / action board than it is to make the reed banks to mount on a separate action ( pad ) board, just a different style that gives better volume and response for a concertina ( also works pretty well in the Castagnari Accordion models with the flat mounted reeds ). I won't presume that Wim didn't have good reasons for choosing this type of design over others he'd already done, I would just like to know what they were.

[Daniel Hersh]

The Rochelle uses accordion-style reed blocks, but so far as I know a Stagi does too, and in a smaller space. So the Rochelle could have been smaller without changing that aspect of the design. However...

 

Here's what Wim says on his site about the thinking behind the Rochelle design: "Our Rochelle has been developed especially for beginning players on the anglo concertina. Although the instruments are perfectly capable of meeting the requirements of intermediate players, we understand that many players might want to upgrade to a vintage or new instrument later on. With this in mind, we made all the important features, such as key board lay out, spacing of the keys, key diameter, key travel (the height of the keys), number of bellows folds, etc. identical to traditional anglo concertinas, to assure a smooth transition to a higher class concertina later on. The Rochelle has a traditional riveted action, normally only found in expensive hand made instruments. The action is designed by us and makes the instrument 'feel' much like a high priced vintage instrument."

 

So I think that's the answer. Wim seems to have made the changes that he felt he needed to make to his Chinese manufacturer's prior design to cover what he felt were the "important features". The size of the instrument and the presence of reed blocks didn't make the list. My guess would be that he wanted to keep the price as low as he could, so he avoided changes that he felt were not essential. I would also guess that his new Clover model, which will be nicer and more expensive than the Rochelle, will be a smaller instrument with flat-mounted reeds.

 

Perhaps Wim himself will join this discussion at some point and let us know for sure.

 

I don't quite understand you. There are plenty of very fast and punchy accordions around and the difference in size between Rochelle and, say, Morse, is not that great. Both are small instruments.

Besides, I looked inside the Jackie and realized that the size is barely accomodating it's 30 reedplates.

I think you can blame the larger size of Jackie/Rochelle on the redundant make-believe 6-sided body, having to wrap around 4 sided reed banks.

I haven't gotten a look inside a Rochelle or a Jackie yet, but it sounds as though they are constructed with typical accordion style reed banks, in which case it is easy to see why the extra size. My point was that all the other concertina makers who use accordion reeds have been able to fit them into a substantially smaller package without undue strain by dumping the accordion style reed banks and switching to a surface mounted layout with the reed plates fixed atop chambers. Wim has done this as well as far as I know. It isn't particularly harder to make this type reed pan / action board than it is to make the reed banks to mount on a separate action ( pad ) board, just a different style that gives better volume and response for a concertina ( also works pretty well in the Castagnari Accordion models with the flat mounted reeds ). I won't presume that Wim didn't have good reasons for choosing this type of design over others he'd already done, I would just like to know what they were.

Edited March 27, 2008 by Daniel Hersh

[m3838]

Wim did explain why he used accordion slyle reed banks.

One of the main reason was to make it possible to produce Baritone and Trebble only by switching the banks, not by re-designing the whole reed-pan. I'd say, if he provided the banks with the screw-in system, not gluing them, it'd be awesome. Then one could buy only reed banks and switch them. Two in one!.

But I'd wait till next generation of Wim's concertinas will come up. Jackie is really a beginner's instrument.

I'd like to see better bellows and more buttons. The appearance doesn't bother me at all and spacing of buttons is so much better than in many higher end instruments, it got me doubting the very premise of "hihger end". So hopefully Clover follows with, mm, Whatever -the-mainstream-association-with-classical -music.

Boy, if only he could prodice English system double reeder, octave tuned, square, I'd pay premium.

[ragtimer]

Wim did explain why he used accordion style reed banks.

One of the main reason was to make it possible to produce Baritone and Treble only by switching the banks, not by re-designing the whole reed-pan. I'd say, if he provided the banks with the screw-in system, not gluing them, it'd be awesome. Then one could buy only reed banks and switch them. Two in one!.

That would indeed be a cool system. My Bastari 67-key Hayden has screw-in reed banks (plus screw-down individual reed plates), and is very impressive looking inside and easy to work on.

 

One can imagine an Anglo with separate reed bank sets of C/G and G/D, and different ranges of ECs, as Wim already does (but still no G/D Rochelle).

The appearance doesn't bother me at all and spacing of buttons is so much better than in many higher end instruments, it got me doubting the very premise of "higher end".

I too have had experiences that make me wonder if the high-end instruments really have the most ergonomic size and layout and spacing of buttons (e.g., entry-level Stagi Hayden Duet has the more playable layout).

Boy, if only he could produce English system double reeder, octave tuned, square, I'd pay premium.

Wow, an English Bandoneon! People would certainly take notice of that I'd wager that Wim would still use radial action, so it would only "look like" a Bandoneon.

 

Personally, I'd rather have "wet" unison tuning than octaves, but I need to experience a really good octave-reeded instrument first. --Mike K.

[m3838]

Personally, I'd rather have "wet" unison tuning than octaves, but I need to experience a really good octave-reeded instrument first.

 

What you really need is three reed LMM with the coupler.

LM is not necessarily bandoneon, My Overture LMMM has a switch to make it LM, MMM, LMM, MM, L, and M. Of all I like the L, LM and master switch. MMM sounds strange, MM is too squeaky in C/F, M is too thin and quiet, but sweet.

What do you mean by "radial action"? The banks going in Karre? But what an action has to do with it been a Bandoneon? I think the true sound of typical well built bandoneon combines many features, not least reeds mounted on single Zinc plates. But alluminium reedplates are not bad either. Just a bit different, not as "ringly". Old Bandoneons are also a bit "nasal". Perhaps good for Tango, but Polkas and Waltzes may sound less up-beat. I mainly am concerned that my Albion sounds too thin for many of the pieces I originally intended it. Like Cello suites. One thing is Cello, and entirely another is my Albion.

Lots of Russian folk music is written for the key of C in upper octave - too high for single reed. OK, if you have roaring bass accompaniment, but not for EC. Easy fix, play it octave lower - doesn't work, as pieces often travel down to the very lowest G and below, then soar up to the high C and above, so an octave tuned double reeder will be very useful.

[Boney]

So hopefully Clover follows with, mm, Whatever -the-mainstream-association-with-classical -music.

How about this: