Classic question - Old vs New

[Gusten]

Hi,

 

I'm shopping for an upgrade to my Rochelle. I've come across some really tempting offers, both vintage Jones, Lachenal type instruments, and new "hybrid" types (or whatever you call them). I can't make up my mind though, as I have two wishes that I don't think I'll be able to meet within my budget. I'll try and explain them below...

 

The main reason I'm looking for an upgrade to the Rochelle is that it's started to limit my learning progress. Here, I feel that one of the new brands (Morse, Tedrow, Edgley, Sherwood (I wonder how playability on this one compares to the other similiar ones), etc.) is the choice for me. I'm more likely to get more "playability" out of these ones, than a vintage instrument in the same price range. I realize that I'll be looking at the lower end of the vintage instruments, if I'm looking for a used hybrid (or a new Sherwood).

 

I really love, though, the sound of the old vintage ones, the steel reeds. I'm worried that I'll be glaring jealously at all other players I come across who use vintage instruments and produce that lovely sound. I'm fairly certain that I will not be able to find a vintage instrument within my price range that sounds "right", and still offers the same action, belows and reed response of the newer hybrids.

 

I'm not really hoping to find the answer here, I just had to express my indecisiveness. I'm thinking that, as I'm still a young novice, should opt for the instrument that benefits my own progress the most, and then upgrade to something that sounds "right" to me when I can play the sh*t out of it. Or, am I thinking that I should opt for something that sounds right to me, which is still an upgrade to the Rochelle, and gradually upgrade in terms of playability to more and more expensive instruments that all sound "right" but gradually offer more playability?

 

Any of you guys ever found yourselves at this same cross-row? What path did you go, and did you ever regret it? (I recall reading a similiar thred a while back, but couldn't locate it...)

[Bill N]

Any of you guys ever found yourselves at this same cross-row? What path did you go, and did you ever regret it? (I recall reading a similiar thred a while back, but couldn't locate it...)

 

Yes, very recently. I got my Rochelle last May, and was happy enough with it to keep practicing, and to become committed to sticking with the concertina. I also had a German concertina (20 button Scholer) to compare it with, and it was miles better than that.

 

I ordered a Morse hybrid ( primarily to have a louder instrument in GD to play for a Morris side) which I've had for a couple of months now. I was astonished by how much easier it is to play than the Rochelle. The action is easier and smoother, and the bellows are very supple. (I now refer to the Rochelle as my "resistance trainer".) As to the sound: Originally I thought the Rochelle sounded fine, but compared to the Morse it now seems to sound muffled. Also, the Morse is very evenly balanced from the bottom to the top of the scale. All the reeds respond consistantly, and the treble doesn't get lost in the bass. I haven't heard a lot of vintage concertinas, but I would say that it compares well to the few I have heard, and is not very "accordion-like" to my ears.

 

So no, I don't regret it.

 

Edited to fix some typos-early morning post!

Edited January 7, 2009 by Bill N

[Gusten]

Thanks Bill, for sharing your story! I'm glad it worked out for you! You bring up some issues that I really have experienced with the Rochelle too. Just one reply, and I'm already leaning towards one of the newer models. (I've heard great things about them all, so I sort of generalize them all as just good hybrids. Only exception would be the sherwood, which I can't find much information about.)

[tombilly]

I had same issue last year - got a 'standard' 30 key Lachenal, rosewood from Chris Algar for around £1500. Sure, the bellows is not as airtight as a new model, the bone buttons without bushings 'rattle' a bit and there have been a couple of small maintenance issues but it's good to play. It's also interesting to pause when playing and consider how many other hands it's been through in it's c. 90 years. Horses for courses, I think...

[Gusten]

Tombilly, you're glad you made that choice, going with a vintage model? The flaws are made up for with the sound, playability, and as you point out - history? Having such an old instrument appeals me too, but I'm trying not get let that affect me when looking for an upgrade here. Ain't always easy, when looking at hundred years old concertinas that have history written in every little cosmetic "flaw" it might have.

[michael stutesman]

Hi,

 

 

The main reason I'm looking for an upgrade to the Rochelle is that it's started to limit my learning progress.

 

 

Not to spoil your fun but, in my case at least, this was mostly a fiction I told myself to justify a new concertina. If you put that Rochelle in the hands of a really good player you will see what I mean.

[Mikefule]

I started with a Rochelle. It is a perfectly serviceable instrument, but it is slightly harder to play, and generally less rewarding, than a better box. That is only to be expected as it is designed as a basic beginner's box.

 

I upgraded to a Marcus, which is one of the cheapest of the good quality modern boxes. The pleasure of owning, handling and playing the better box is worth every penny.

 

I regularly get the chance to have a go on other boxes including a very nice Dipper, and again the step up in quality, feel and pleasure is noticeable.

 

As a rule, money "saved" on a musical instrument is expenditure deferred.

 

Buy the best you can afford. And try before you buy. It's an instrument, not a tool, and it needs to feel right and sound right for you.

[Jim Besser]

Any of you guys ever found yourselves at this same cross-row? What path did you go, and did you ever regret it? (I recall reading a similiar thred a while back, but couldn't locate it...)

 

I have and like both traditional instruments and mid-range hybrids. From my perspective, these are some key parameters in making your decision.

 

The good hybrids are every bit as playable as really good vintage instruments, much more playable than lesser ones - bad Lachenals, for example.

 

Older instruments may be more finicky, requiring more adjustment and sometimes repair. That's been true with mine, despite a very good Dipper rebuild

 

But...I vastly prefer the sound of traditional instruments. I'm willing to put up with additional finickiness to get the sound I crave.

 

I've had no personal experience with newish traditional instruments like Dippers, Suttners, etc.

 

If you crave the traditional sound, a hybrid may leave you dissatisfied no matter how well it plays. If your budget means you can afford only a good hybrid or a low-end vintage instrument, you might do a lot better with the former, which will play a lot better and be more reliable.

 

Just one person's personal preferences, not gospel.

[David Levine]

There is a reason why the best vintage Jeffries, Wheatstones, and Crabbs, cost so much more than middling Lachenals and Jones. And why the very best contemporary concertinas - Carroll, Dipper, Suttner, et. al. - cost so much more than the best hybrid concertinas. The more expensive concertinas sound better. Maybe not twice as nice, but better.

 

Your development as a player will certainly be limited by an instrument that requires more effort to play well. It will certainly impede your learning ability to have an instrument that you don't delight in. The better the instrument the closer you are to the music. You'll play better with a better instrument. With the best instruments there is a delight in the quality of the sound, which allows fuller expression in both phrasing and dynamics. A really good player will of course sound better on a Rochelle than a beginner. But a really good player would sound even better on a really good instrument.

 

Jody Kruskal is a top Anglo player. When I met him last summer he was traveling with a Dipper G/D and -- I think -- a Morse C/G. The C/G was very light and tight, and he made it sound great. I'd prefer to play a newer Morse, Tedrow, or Edgely than an old Lachenal. But that's just me. There's some great music on Frank Edgley's site: http://www.concertinas.ca - all played on a new concertina with accordion reeds. I'd sacrifice a little sound quality to get better response, much better action - riveted reeds rather than sloppy hooked levers - and tight bellows and pads to minimize leaks.

 

If you're serious about the music, even as a beginner (or especially as a beginner) then you should get the very best instrument you possible can. It will be worth it. Finally- almost every financial investment that people have made in the past few years has dipped in net worth... but the best musical instruments have kept their value.

[Gusten]

Thank you all for sharing your experiences! And you bring a good point Michael, my Rochelle would sound like nothing I can produce in the hands of a really skilled player. That's why I'm not in a real rush to buy something (though I do eager to upgrade). I do, however, want to learn what preasure and attack to use one a good instrument, instead of on one that is hard to play. That's the reason I'm looking for a hybrid. And then Jim comes along and repeats what echoes in my head, that producing the "perfect sound" might be worth some trade offs.

 

Since I live in Sweden, there are not much instruments around to try out. I do occasionally meet people who play anglo, I'll have to really bug them about trying out their instruments. The only retailer I've found here only dealt with the very low-end Stagis, so I have to do most of my research on internet, and all your thougths are very helpful.

[Ken_Coles]

I own both vintage (mid-level) and new instruments (a hybrid and a trad-reeded one). I always seem to play the new ones. They are more responsive, even, the engineering has improved in 100 years over what Lachenal/Jones could do, and I can even get warranty repairs on them. Sure, the tone is a bit different, but for me it is a minor matter, and listeners have been known to choose the hybrid as the sound they prefer! Again, trying them yourself is the answer here, as we are all different.

 

Ken

[Mikefule]

I had my monthly lesson tonight. My teacher had retuned my Marcus box and made a few adjustments. It was a joy to pick up and play - a feeling I never had with the Rochelle, even on the day I bought it. There was nothing wrong with the Rochelle, but it was functional rather than a delight to own.

 

Then I had my monthly quick go on my teacher's Dipper. A whole different game again. It's a thing of beauty just to hold and feel the smoothness of the action, never mind to play.

 

But the important difference: after I got the Marcus, I never again had any urge to pick up the Rochelle, not even once; but even after playing the Dipper, it is still a joy to play the Marcus.

 

A nice instrument is worth so much more than money. If you want to play concertina, buy the best you can afford. There will always be a better one you can't afford.

 

But if you can't afford to upgrade now, all that hard work you're putting in on the cheaper box will give you a great platform for when you can.

[Leo]

Hi Gusten

 

There is an older thread with some sound samples of various concertinas that might be worth a look for an audio comparison: http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=7283

 

Most of them should still work.

 

Thanks

Leo

[Gusten]

Thanks Leo, that's brilliant!

 

And thank you all for sharing your thoughts and experiences, it's really helpful.

[Robert Booth]

Hi, Gusten

 

Your comment about relearning pressure and attack struck a chord with me, as not long ago I graduated from a old beater second or third hand Bastari to a brand new hybrid and found that an awful lot of the physical stuff that I'd taught myself had to be radically reworked; the new box was so much more sensitive and LOUDER that I was forced to take a lot of steps back in my learning and adjust to the new instrument.

 

This was, ultimately a good thing 'cause it forced me to face and deal with a lot of bad habits that I got away with using the less responsive concertina.

 

Most seem to agree that one should get the best you can afford. That should help things get moving in the direction that you want.

 

Have fun with it.

Rob

[Dieppe]

Personally, I get a kick out of having an old Wheatstone. I love the mellow sound the brass reeds have, and it's just a nice instrument all around. (Though the D is a little off and bothers me.. but that's a minor thing.) And being able to say "Yes, this is really an instrument from 1898..." is nice.

 

I'm one of those folks in favor of old instruments being played, like they were intended, rather then propped up in a museum somewhere.

[David Levine]

I'm one of those folks in favor of old instruments...

 

Yes, and I love old cars.

 

In the house I often play my old Jeffries Bb/F. It's sweeter and has an undeniable charm.

But a newer box just works better.

[Hereward]

I'm one of those folks in favor of old instruments...

 

Yes, and I love old cars.

 

In the house I often play my old Jeffries Bb/F. It's sweeter and has an undeniable charm.

But a newer box just works better.

 

I bought the best instrument I could get within the price range I thought was OK for me to have an instrument to learn on. When I move on it will be to another older instrument because a new one would be well out of the price range I would be willing to invest. Thus I think that each player will have to make his own mind up about this and weigh up the different options, most of which have been covered here.

 

Ian