Tune of the Month, an Old-time American Tune

[Jody Kruskal]

This posting brings me up to date on my Tune of the Month blog.

 

 

Here are the button numbers:

 

Left and right hand where button #1 is the low end of its side:

 

1a 2a 3a 4a 5a

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10

 

P=push D=draw

I'm still a little confused by the tabulature....is this just on the right hand side or does it go over both?

 

Hi LTD,

 

I'll try to be more clear. The buttons are identified by this scheme for 30 button Anglos.

 

Left Hand

Accidental row --- 1a__2a__3a__4a__5a

Middle row-------- 1___2___3___4___5

Near row---------- 6___7___8___9___10

 

Right Hand

Accidental row --- 1a__2a__3a__4a__5a

Middle row-------- 1___2___3___4___5

Near row---------- 6___7___8___9___10

 

If you open up either of the tab score pdf files you will see there are three staves per system. The top one is melody with chords. The bottom two are the details of my arrangement with the right and left hands in the two staves and clearly marked at the top left corner of the page. In addition, the bottom staff has two layers with the stems either up or down. The stem up notes are all played by the left index finger.

 

Ask me more questions if you like. I would be glad to help.

[Dan Worrall]

Firstly, I must point out that I am very much an "ear" player and I struggle with both notation and tab.

 

I like the idea of the top melody line with the two rows of tab below, that makes it easier to see the tune.

 

I find the button numbering system you and Dan have used a bit confusing. You have numbered the buttons from the low notes to the high notes, so that button 1 on the left hand is played with the pinky but button 1 on the right hand is played by the index finger. Speaking for myself, I find it easier to understand if each side were to be numbered down from the top (as you hold the instrument). That way there is a correlation between both hands - button 1 would always be at the top, and button 5 at the bottom. To me, that's clearer to understand and easier to remember.

 

When I occasionally use tab (I don't transcribe whole tunes but sometimes want to make a note of a tricky piece of fingering) I use this system, with ' to indicate which row the button is on. I find this more intuitive.

 

5''' 4''' 3''' 2''' 1''' | 1''' 2''' 3''' 4''' 5'''

5" 4" 3" 2" 1" | 1" 2" 3" 4" 5"

5' 4' 3' 2' 1' | 1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

 

[this isn't formatting properly the | represents the break between left and right sides]

 

It doesn't help that I play a 40-key, which makes it harder to relate the numbering of your and Dan's system to my keyboard.

I agree this is the numbering system I have always used and is on the old tutors.

Al

 

Sorry to bring this up a few days late. Are you guys sure about this? I have a collection of about 40 old tutors going all the way back to Hoeselbarth and Minasi....and nobody numbers like that. Without any exception that I can see, numbers get larger from left to right on each keyboard in everybodys usage. Most also number the C row (Lor R hand) 1-5 and the G row 5-10, but there is some variance there, as keyboard systems evolved. There is a reason for increasing the numbers from left to right....that means that notes get higher as numbers get larger. To do it the way you suggest may be convenient if you are thinking mainly of your hands as a mirror image....but if you are thinking of the keyboard instead, the standard, tried and true system seems to make more musical sense.

 

Mind you, I don't care a fig what number system you are using....more power to you; I'm just responding to the comment that your system 'is in the old tutors.' I haven't seen that. Yet! I think Jody's tab system is reasonably standard, though of ocurse not uniquely so, as there are minor variations (Levy numbers C 11-15 and G 16-20, for example).

 

I continue to like tab, and applaud Jody for putting some out. Not because it is easy to read, or a good way to sightread anglo music...it isn't...but because it shows someone else what fingering choices one is making. Not too big a deal with Irish playing (unless we are working out cross-fingering or ornaments), but always interesting for the chorded players. Choices, choices.

 

Best regards,

Dan

[hjcjones]

We'll, I've only ever seen one tutor, which I bought with my first concertina and threw out 40 years ago as it was utterly useless, so I can't comment.

 

I'm originally a guitarist. Guitar tab has a line for each string, and a number for each fret on that string - you don't number each position on the fretboard individually. When I was looking for a way to remind me of concertina fingerings, I approached it the same way, numbering the buttons in each row. To me it seemed logical to number both sides from the top down as this relates (approximately) to the fingers used for each button.

 

There is a reason for increasing the numbers from left to right....that means that notes get higher as numbers get larger.

 

But they don't. On the numbering systems used by Jody, and by you in the Kimber book, buttons 6 and 7 are lower than button 5.

 

the standard, tried and true system seems to make more musical sense.

 

When I worked out my method, I wasn't aware that there was a "standard" system (this was before the internet and the wealth of information now available to us).

 

I'm not sure about it making musical sense, or even whether that matters with tab. What does matter is that it is quick and easy to relate the tab to the keyboard. I find it easier to think in terms of 1-5 on each row rather than numbering each individual button and trying to remember which is which.

 

For me, it is more difficult because I play a 40-key with extra buttons at the top of each row, so I actually start numbering from 0. Adapting the "standard" to accommodate this would be difficult and make it even less clear to read.

 

Choices, choices.

The range of possible choices is of course what makes the anglo so fascinating.

[Jody Kruskal]

We'll, I've only ever seen one tutor, which I bought with my first concertina and threw out 40 years ago as it was utterly useless, so I can't comment.

 

I'm originally a guitarist. Guitar tab has a line for each string, and a number for each fret on that string - you don't number each position on the fretboard individually. When I was looking for a way to remind me of concertina fingerings, I approached it the same way, numbering the buttons in each row. To me it seemed logical to number both sides from the top down as this relates (approximately) to the fingers used for each button.

 

There is a reason for increasing the numbers from left to right....that means that notes get higher as numbers get larger.

 

But they don't. On the numbering systems used by Jody, and by you in the Kimber book, buttons 6 and 7 are lower than button 5.

 

the standard, tried and true system seems to make more musical sense.

 

When I worked out my method, I wasn't aware that there was a "standard" system (this was before the internet and the wealth of information now available to us).

 

I'm not sure about it making musical sense, or even whether that matters with tab. What does matter is that it is quick and easy to relate the tab to the keyboard. I find it easier to think in terms of 1-5 on each row rather than numbering each individual button and trying to remember which is which.

 

For me, it is more difficult because I play a 40-key with extra buttons at the top of each row, so I actually start numbering from 0. Adapting the "standard" to accommodate this would be difficult and make it even less clear to read.

 

Choices, choices.

The range of possible choices is of course what makes the anglo so fascinating.

 

Hi Howard, all good points. These button identification systems are abstract as is all music notation and tab and there is no obvious "right" way to do it. It's a convention that gets established in the reader's brain and only becomes quick and easy by repeated use. As you point out, ease of identification is the goal. The very fact of historical use of the system Dan and I are using increases it's value as a convention though. I would adopt a better scheme if a universal one were offered.

 

One problem that our way avoids is that with the system you propose, you would then need an additional symbol to tell you which row your 1-5 button was in. What do you call them? N, M, F for near, middle and far? That's better than the key symbols of C, G, A (accidental) because of all the differing keys that anglos are in.

 

Then there is the problem of the buttons beyond the standard 30. I play 38 and 40 button instruments too. For myself, I use graphic pictures to jot down unusual buttons that I might use. My hand drawn graphics look like this. Here is a left hand A push chord.

 

I only put in the information I need for the situation, that is only buttons that are not obvious to me. The little lines are markers if the button is not at the end of a row. This works for me with the few times I need a reminder but I fear that in a proper tab-score this would be just too cluttered. My Fly Around score is for most players and most play 30 button instruments. If they don't then I would expect them to know which buttons are extra and which are contained in the standard (sort of!?!?!?) 30.

 

Your own personal system seems to work for you as mine works for me, but I'm trying to use a system that works for the majority of Anglo players and reduces the information overload as much as possible.

[Dan Worrall]

We'll, I've only ever seen one tutor, which I bought with my first concertina and threw out 40 years ago as it was utterly useless, so I can't comment.

 

I'm originally a guitarist. Guitar tab has a line for each string, and a number for each fret on that string - you don't number each position on the fretboard individually. When I was looking for a way to remind me of concertina fingerings, I approached it the same way, numbering the buttons in each row. To me it seemed logical to number both sides from the top down as this relates (approximately) to the fingers used for each button.

 

There is a reason for increasing the numbers from left to right....that means that notes get higher as numbers get larger.

 

But they don't. On the numbering systems used by Jody, and by you in the Kimber book, buttons 6 and 7 are lower than button 5.

 

the standard, tried and true system seems to make more musical sense.

 

When I worked out my method, I wasn't aware that there was a "standard" system (this was before the internet and the wealth of information now available to us).

 

I'm not sure about it making musical sense, or even whether that matters with tab. What does matter is that it is quick and easy to relate the tab to the keyboard. I find it easier to think in terms of 1-5 on each row rather than numbering each individual button and trying to remember which is which.

 

For me, it is more difficult because I play a 40-key with extra buttons at the top of each row, so I actually start numbering from 0. Adapting the "standard" to accommodate this would be difficult and make it even less clear to read.

 

Choices, choices.

The range of possible choices is of course what makes the anglo so fascinating.

 

Hi Howard,

 

Logical? Logic is it? My goodness, you've got the wrong instrument!! Try the tin whistle. or maybe the bones!

 

Back to seriousity, my comment about the numbers getting higher refers to notes within each row, on each individual side, only. This makes the most sense of course if you think of the anglo as two harmonicas stacked on top of each other...which was the original idea. The top row doesn't work that way, of course....so don't bring up logic there!

 

I understand your process of self-teaching and making your tab system up yourself. I started playing in Texas in the early 1970s and there was no one, nowhere to give a clue. That is one reason I like tab now, and appreciate all those old 19th century tutors....you can read them and then recreate someone's method, more or less. Once you know what you like, of course, you no longer need anything....unless you wish to show someone else who is living somewhere even more remote than England or Texas.

 

Cheers,

Dan

[hjcjones]

Logical? Logic is it? My goodness, you've got the wrong instrument!! Try the tin whistle. or maybe the bones!

Of course it's logical. I'm constantly having to explain this to EC players. Of course, the logic is totally off the wall, but it's in there somewhere - one day I'll find it .

 

I don't play tin whistle, will the recorder do? But I do play the bones.

 

Back to seriousity, my comment about the numbers getting higher refers to notes within each row, on each individual side, only. This makes the most sense of course if you think of the anglo as two harmonicas stacked on top of each other...which was the original idea. The top row doesn't work that way, of course....so don't bring up logic there!

 

I thought we tried to encourage novice players not to think of it as two separate rows, but as a whole instrument.

 

Tab is not about representing sounds, it represents positions. With guitar tab, the same fret numbers may represent different notes depending on how the guitar is tuned. Obviously, we don't have that with concertina, but I don't think it's necessary for the tab to reflect the pitch of the note, it just has to show which button to use. The easier it is to relate the tab to the button, the more effective it is.

 

It appears to me that the standard tab button numbering was worked out on paper rather than from playing. My system feels more intuitive, at least it does to me. With the standard system I struggle to remember which number relates to which button - 1-5 is easy, but above that I have to stop to think, and it doesn't help that the numbers are different on each hand.

 

In an earlier reply you referred to thinking of the hands as a mirror image, and I suppose that is what I do. Unlike the guitar or melodeon, where the hands are each doing something quite different, a concertinerist's (is that a word?) hands are both doing similar things.

 

My system is also easy to extend to include extra buttons, although it is still based around the standard 30 keys. Of course, if you are publishing tab for other players then you have to assume a standard instrument.

 

I used to use violin bow marks to indicate push or pull, but not being a fiddler I could never remember which is which. I've now borrowed the usage from melodeon tab, which uses the French P (pousser - push) and T (tirer - pull). Push and Draw is I suppose more Anglo-Saxon, but by being consistent with melodeon tab it avoids yet another change of mental gears for me.

 

I don't always write out the left hand tab - if I am using my usual chord shape I'll just write the name.

 

I've certainly no wish to undermine the superb work you've done with the Kimber transcriptions, or Jody's latest efforts, both of which I applaud - I like Jody's addition of a separate melody line. Since there is a "standard" tab system of sorts, and one with a long history, it clearly makes sense to use that. Had I been aware of an existing system I wouldn't have made up my own. My comments were simply to explain why I have difficulties with it.

 

Of course, I'm secretly hoping you'll see the light, pulp the remaining copies of Kimber and re-publish it using my system, that would be a great help to me

[david fabre]

Hi Jody,

I started to work the tune on my G/D. I found the score extremely useful to study your style.

I have a few remarks and questions.

 

1/ It could be interesting to indicate where you operate the air button (if you do so)

 

2/ in second part, bars 2 and 6 are on a G chords, but first is on draw, second on push.

Is there a particular reason for this ?

 

3/ in bar 6 of part 2, if played on push, the button for the high b sould be 5, not 9.

 

4/ I chosed to play it on on the G/D but I am used to C/G fingerings so I have to transpose.

Since you certainy use a score editor I'm wondering if you could transpose automatically

(or send a midi file or other score format so that I could do it myself).

If it's just me I can perfectly transpose by hand

(actually I have already done so, and this is indeed a good exercice)

but there may be other persons interested by this.

[Ptarmigan]

Hi Jody,

 

I just wanted to say thanks for posting those MP3s of this tune on C/G & G/D instruments.

 

I've just had my old Ab/Eb Lachenal dropped down to G/D & it's great to be able to hear the difference.

 

I really love that low growl you are able to get on the G/D.

 

Without that C/Gs can sometimes, to my ears, sound just a wee bit too squeeky/trebly, if you know what I mean.

 

Cheers

Dick

[Jody Kruskal]

I’ve updated my page for Fly Around My Pretty Little Miss (also called Western Country, btw). A few buttons were mislabled in both the G/D and C/G versions. Those mistakes were caught by the observant David Fabre and Jim Van Donsel. Thanks guys.

 

Also, I have added a pdf page of explanation, a guide to the tablature. I hope someone finds it helpful.

[Jody Kruskal]

Hi Jody,

 

I just wanted to say thanks for posting those MP3s of this tune on C/G & G/D instruments.

 

I've just had my old Ab/Eb Lachenal dropped down to G/D & it's great to be able to hear the difference.

 

I really love that low growl you are able to get on the G/D.

 

Without that C/Gs can sometimes, to my ears, sound just a wee bit too squeeky/trebly, if you know what I mean.

 

Cheers

Dick

 

Hi Dick,

 

I do know what you mean and I rarely play my C/G. Still, in a noisy room or outside they really cut the mustard.

[Jody Kruskal]

Hi Jody,

I started to work the tune on my G/D. I found the score extremely useful to study your style.

I have a few remarks and questions.

 

1/ It could be interesting to indicate where you operate the air button (if you do so)

 

2/ in second part, bars 2 and 6 are on a G chords, but first is on draw, second on push.

Is there a particular reason for this ?

 

3/ in bar 6 of part 2, if played on push, the button for the high b sould be 5, not 9.

 

4/ I chosed to play it on on the G/D but I am used to C/G fingerings so I have to transpose.

Since you certainy use a score editor I'm wondering if you could transpose automatically

(or send a midi file or other score format so that I could do it myself).

If it's just me I can perfectly transpose by hand

(actually I have already done so, and this is indeed a good exercice)

but there may be other persons interested by this.

 

Hi David,

 

I'm glad you like the tune. I'll try to answer your list.

 

3) Thanks for the correction. Right you are, that button is a 5 not a 9.

 

4) Midi files of both C/G and G/D arrangements are on the Tune of the Month page. Just download ‘em and play them on any midi player you like. There's a free one at Finale Notepad.

 

1) Good idea... yet it feels like the score is so complicated already that I decided to leave the air button bit out. I wonder if that information might be so different on different boxes that it’s really more confusing than helpful. Also, I use the air button rather unconsciously and probably more often than I need to. My finger sits on it all the time.

 

Still, here are the likely spots for a little breath in the G/D version. In general, there is more pushing than drawing in this arrangement so I tend to give the bellows air on the draw in measures 2 and 6 of the A section as well as 2 and 4 of the B section.

 

2) To answer your question, variety is the spice of life. In the G/D version, the first instance of the B section G chord in bar 2 is on the draw because that sounds a very different voicing of the G chord than the push in bar 6. The phrasing of the melody lends itself to the thin voicing first and the richer voicing second. Though the draw voicing is thin, still I use it to avoid too much pushing which would make you run out of air. To be more specific, the draw voicing is thin because all you have is a high G and B to work with, whereas the push voicing of a G chord on the G/D is full and rich and following the previous thin G phrase in bar 2 has an emphatic and triumphant sound... oh joy!

 

Part of what gives that second time such a lift is the extra right hand harmony note, a D (somewhat easier to play on the push) that carries over from measure 5 into measure 6. That high D harmony note doubles the root in measure 5 but harmonically works as the fifth in measure 6 and making that shift in function from root to fifth in the same note is exciting. Some people call this voice leading, I think.

 

Note that the high D I’m talking about in measures 5 and 6 is held out longer than the melody notes. This is key to my sound and how I achieve it.

 

I should say, since you are so interested in the details of my arrangement, that the most important detail is the way I’ve got some finger holding down a button while the others are moving. Sometimes that finger plays two notes, both push and draw, and sometimes it plays a note that is longer in duration than the melody notes or rhythmic um-pa notes. Every measure in this tune has a place where I’m doing that. In the example above, those long high Ds are played by the right hand. All the other instances of long held notes against the moving harmony and melody lines have the held notes in the left hand. I think that having relative duration for each note you play is part of what makes the harmonic style of Anglo playing come alive and sound less mechanical and more musical.

 

Here is the equation that puts it all together:

 

Articulation = Dynamic + Duration.

[david fabre]

Hi Jody and thanks for the explanations.

 

About the midi file : Thanks for indicating this. I transposed it for C/G fingerings (with band-in-a-box).

I can send the pdf file to anyone interested.

Interestingly, the midi file is a bit different from the tab you provided, and features richer

voicings at several places. This gives some options for variations.

 

About the differences in the second part : right that the difference of voicing works well and adds

diversity. However, on my (bad) stagi three bars on the push is too much

(hence my other question about air button), so i prefer to play both bars 2 and 6

on the pull. I can manage with the hold high D in that direction (I have a wheatstone layout,

and suspect that Jeffries will make it a bit more awkward). The bass G is still missing

on my 30 buttons but i'm sure you have it on your instruments.

 

About the use of hold notes : I agree that it leads to a much more musical style than

the classical "oum-pah". Surely this is a characteristic feature of your style ; in your

"naked concertina" I could hear this technique at many places. The tab file helped

me to understand this. I'll try to incorporate this to my own playing.

 

I'm sure writing such tabs is a lot of work and can understand you won't do that for

all tunes in your next book. If ever you repeat this I'll be much interested, and I'm sure

many other members will.

 

David

[Jody Kruskal]

Thanks David,

 

I'm glad you find the tab/score helpful. It's very gratifying to see you making use of it.

 

The bass G is still missing on my 30 buttons but i'm sure you have it on your instruments.

Yes, I have a low pull G on my left thumb button 38 key G/D anglo. Also a corresponding button on all my instruments in their various keys. It pushes C. It's a very handy button, but I did not include the use of it in my arrangement because I thought that few would have such a thing. That's the 31st button on some boxes and can often be a drone, though none of mine are set up that way.

 

About the midi file :

Interestingly, the midi file is a bit different from the tab you provided, and features richer

voicings at several places. This gives some options for variations.

Oops, those richer voicings may be the result of my mistake in not deleting the redundant top melody/chords stave before saving the file as standard midi. The midi that was on my site doubled the melody which would take two people to actually do. I have just replaced those midi files on my site if you would like to download the "real" thing.

 

If you keep finding mistakes in my work, I'll keep correcting them... and very grateful I am too.

[hjcjones]

I really love that low growl you are able to get on the G/D.

 

Without that C/Gs can sometimes, to my ears, sound just a wee bit too squeeky/trebly, if you know what I mean.

 

Cheers

Dick

 

A G/D sounds great, but I rather like the brightness of tone you get with a C/G. It does get a bit extreme when you hit the really high notes and start attracting stray dogs and passing bats, which is why in a session I generally prefer to play in G low down on the G/D rather than high up on the C/G. However sometimes you just want the sound to cut through, and the C/G really does that.

[Jody Kruskal]

I really love that low growl you are able to get on the G/D.

 

Without that C/Gs can sometimes, to my ears, sound just a wee bit too squeeky/trebly, if you know what I mean.

 

Cheers

Dick

 

A G/D sounds great, but I rather like the brightness of tone you get with a C/G. It does get a bit extreme when you hit the really high notes and start attracting stray dogs and passing bats, which is why in a session I generally prefer to play in G low down on the G/D rather than high up on the C/G. However sometimes you just want the sound to cut through, and the C/G really does that.

 

Cutting power aside, I almost never play my C/G, though I often bring it out, just in case... and in the case is where it usually stays. Tunes in Dm and C are great on it but we don't play those too often. The G/D is the best box for my style of harmonic play, not so much because of the timbre but because it works the best in the keys of the tunes I play with my friends here in NYC. Here is the list of keys we play in, from most common to least: D, A, G, Em, Am, Bm, E, Dm, C, Gm, F, Bb.

 

Of the tunes I play, most of them are awkward on the C/G. That is to say I can't play all the stuff I want, melody, chords, bass lines, internal lines and high harmony. Usually I can make something of the tune but it's limited. Often, some compromise is required like shifting octaves in the middle of a phrase or section.

 

Shifting octaves is a really great cheat in a jam. It's amazing how much I can get away with in even a small session, and the ear (my ear anyway) hardly notices or objects. Still G/D is the way to make all the cool stuff (aside from melody only) possible. All of this is my opinion, BTW. It's my experience and your experience my well be different.

 

I did attend a session far from home where I didn't know anyone. They decided to play in C for a few hours. It was really great to pull out my C/G and join in. I would have been stumbling around if I had tried to do that on my G/D what with unfamiliar folks and tunes and all.

[david fabre]

I agree that your style is best suited to G/D; However I'd love to hear what you can do on the C/G.

Have you considered recording one or two tunes on it for your next CD ?

 

 

David

[Jody Kruskal]

I agree that your style is best suited to G/D; However I'd love to hear what you can do on the C/G.

Have you considered recording one or two tunes on it for your next CD ?

 

 

David

 

Good idea David. In the meantime, check out my tune of the month site. C/G can be heard on:

 

 

8/08 Crank it Up, Jefferies 38

 

11/07 Mean Streets, Morse 31

[Jody Kruskal]

At the NECW event yet more corrections came to light in the pickup measure of the C/G score. All fixed now if anyone wants to get a fresh corrected copy at http://jodykruskal.com/tune_of_the_month/fly_around.html.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Jody Kruskal