why the standards are low in concertinas

[Leo]

There is no logical reason to suppose that a top quality Concertina in the hands of a sufficiently talented musician is not every bit as legitimate and deserving of respect as any other musical instrument. However there is little doubt that the Concertina continues to be perceived, by those who have not yet fallen for it's undoubted charms, to be a musical instrument unworthy of being taken seriously. If we wish to transform this perceived image, we have to raise our sights, strive a little harder and reduce the quantity of embarrassing videos and recordings which do the instrument's image no favours. On the other hand does it really matter so long as we are all enjoying ourselves and not causing offence in the process ?

 

Raising our sights, striving a little harder and reducing the quantity of embarassing videos posted (and I have to admit, this is a crime I'm guilty of..) sounds good - it would indeed help to improve the image of the instrument, which would mean more players, which could only be good. Raising the bar would also mean that more players would be encouraged to practice to a greater level of proficiency, and, personally, I think that would mean enjoying themselves more as well. The more proficient I am playing an instrument, the more enjoyable I find it.

 

Of course, I didn't mean any of this to imply that there's anything wrong a model of musicianship different to my own - quite as you say, as long as it's enjoyable, the details aren't too important!

Hi Tzirtzi and Rod

 

From the information that I receive, you seem to be in the minority by a great margin. The opinion is running close to 90% in favor of finding concertina related videos (via PM, and emails). Two years ago, in Jan 07, there were virtually no videos at all and I started finding them and talking about them. (See the monster thread that started it all, you can' miss it.) During that time surprisingly now they pop up more frequently in the most unlikely countries with no continent untouched.

 

So on the one hand we've gotten more players which could only be good, (Who said that?) and quite a few who have said "Happy me, I bought a concertina". The ones with the smiley next to the title are members of this board that I recognize. Since I'm not a good judge, by which criterion would you like to grade embarassing and not show again. Keep in mind that among the beginners, given enough time, some just might be the next Noel Hill, Edel Fox, or whichever celebrity you favor now.`FWIW, neither are on my favorite list, but that's just me and another story.

 

Among competitions that create "the best" remember that they are playing to the judges and noone else. One judge may prefer ornamentation above all else, and the next year another judge may say speed above all else and other judges may want only classical. It's an elusive criterion that in my mind doesn't mean anything for the music itself and creates an unrealistic expectation of standards that can't be kept from year to year. Sorry I don't buy into it.

 

As for the Suzuki Method, I wouldn't exactly call it a goldmine of societal wisdom useful for an adult. Might be ok for a 5 year old child, but they should outgrow it quickly since pure wrote learning alone is the least desirable method available along with all the other undesirable characteristics mentioned with the technique if you read about it. Personally I like the "Harold Hill Think Method" myself, since I would equate them about the same. Mark Speaketh with much wisdom about traps and teachers. (above in post 12) "The desire in full or in part did something with it..or not".

 

Striving a little harder is an individual internal thing that is impossible to impose on someone else no matter how hard it's tried. So post more videos as you reach a new level, I'll enjoy it. Maybe next year you'll be the one looked up to.

 

Thanks

Leo

 

PS. Just so you know I do have some discretion in my selections. Here's two examples I passed on:

Chad's Concertina Rock Out

 

Lonely kid plays the Concertina...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4-BfSkLFA&fmt=18

Edited May 29, 2009 by Leo

[Leo]

before anyone says anything: i have never written them up as a list before, so it is not be properly exclusive or concise. there are of course other things i am working or have on the backburner to work on in the future which i did not include. rhythm is one of them. musicality is another. i think that rhythm and musicality are both more important than anything else on that list, and that one would do better to work on just these two things rather than anything else on my list.

 

however, the point is not on what i think is most important, or what i am necessarily working on right now, but a brief snippet of the sort of systematic methodology which i do not think even exists in the concertina world today. this is why i think there are not the sort of players m3838 and i agree both are evident on other instruments. i believe that it is not the inherent qualities of the concertina as he does, but rather that the lack of competition and virtuosic players has prevented any sort of systematic school of thought from ever developing.

 

as a final disclaimer, i would like to note that my attempt to make a more systematic methodology is so that i can better refine my own technique, and not because i am any sort of master. i am trying to make a sort of roadmap for myself to follow, which exists for all the more popular instruments, if not through treatises but through master classes and passed on knowledge. however, i do stand behind my 14 points each individually (though NOT as a definitive list), as i have spent a lot of time developing each idea, time which i know i should have been developing my sense of rhythm, which is SEVERELY lacking.

Hi Dave

 

Nice list. Sounds like a plan to me. Some of it, maybe a little more than half sounds like the P/A teacher I had as a child. I still have the lumps on my head from her inspiration. I too would also emphasize the player makes the music, not the instrument.

 

Thanks

Leo

[JimLucas]

Are you having fun playing the 'tina?

 

Because that's all that matters.

 

/not trying to be a troll, just stating my opinion.

Ah, but that's one of the problems in a discussion such as this. "Virtuosity" is itself a matter of opinion, and in the opinion of those who make such a big deal of the word and the judging of what qualifies for its application, "having fun" is not all that matters, nor even (in my observation) something that bears at all on "virtuosity".

 

So what if "standards" are not the same as other instruments?

Indeed! There's a fellow named Zamfir, widely touted (at least in Europe) as a "virtuoso" on the pan pipes. But in what I've heard of his playing, I think he's little more than a pop star, and in expressiveness and technical ability I don't think he comes close to Larry Adler (on the harmonica, in case you don't know), Pablo Casals (cello), or the anonymous (because I never asked his name) cymbalom player in a Rumanian folk band that I heard 40 years ago. That latter fellow, interestingly enough, was simply a support musician for another pan-pipe player (who I feel was superior to Zamfir), but during the break, he (the cymbalist) was playing Liszt piano compositions... beautifully, on the cymbalom (a glorified sort of hammered dulcimer).

 

And this leads me to another aspect of the "virtuosity" debate. Who defines the "standards"? Some "folk" musicians I've heard have highly developed styles and techniques which are revered in their own traditions, but which are dismissed as "inferior" or even "unpleasant" by too many self-important adjudicators of "Western classical" music. Yet few of the latter musicians could come close to duplicating those "folk" styles even if their lives depended on it.

 

For my final point (in this post) I return to the cymbalist, Larry Adler, and other relative "unknowns": How much of the judgement of "virtuosity" is based on true ability, and how much on publicity? Few people would class Larry as a virtuoso, simply because few people -- especially in America -- know his playing. But that's because he was blacklisted in McCarthy-era America and forced to emigrate to England in order to make a living. (By the way, I also consider him to be a "virtuoso" storyteller, something that doesn't appear on the recordings I've heard, but in live performance....) As for virtuoso concertina players, they do exist, but they simply aren't in the media spotlight. Mention is often made in these forums of Michael Hebbert's playing on the Jeffries duet. I would personally nominate both Simon Thoumire and Robert Harbron for "virtuoso" status on the English. And Alistair Anderson, whose style is not as complex as Simon's or Robert's, but whose performance is both technically excellent and exciting. Anglo candidates should probably include John Kirkpatrick, Noel Hill, and Niall Vallely, among others. And I couldn't care less that those who consider themselves '"serious" arbiters of "serious" music don't take these musicians seriously. (And how much of that is because they've dismissed out of hand the "seriousness" of the instruments they play?)

[david_boveri]

Well - I'll go along with your no.13. I know one of my weaknesses is being a bit lazy when I have to play the same note in succession. i.e. I'm a bit inclined to mush them together rather than articulate separately or separate cleanly with a cut. Was listening to the Mrs Crotty CD the other day and she sure plays them cleanly.

 

she sure is a feisty one. i havent even begun to tackle her playing. i'm saving that for when i feel like getting my butt kicked by an old lady, ;p

 

 

So what if "standards" are not the same as other instruments?

Are you having fun playing the 'tina?

 

Because that's all that matters.

 

/not trying to be a troll, just stating my opinion.

//heading back to lurkerdom

 

i actually agree. i am actually very much against the whole idea of a dogmatic approach to anything. i believe that playing with a spirit of creativity, enjoyment, and exploration is the most important thing. methodological practicing or instruction can destroy all of these things. so, i guess i am sort of my own worst enemy, in that i wish there was a dearth of suffocatingly precise instructions for playing the concertina.

 

although, it's kind of fun... you always wonder such things as "who decided you have to hold the violin bow that way" or "who decided that is how the scales are fingered on the piano?" i love the idea that any one of us or all of us can have a deleterious affect on the psyches of future concertina players, by codifying methods and techniques, .

Edited May 29, 2009 by david_boveri

[Rod]

There is no logical reason to suppose that a top quality Concertina in the hands of a sufficiently talented musician is not every bit as legitimate and deserving of respect as any other musical instrument. However there is little doubt that the Concertina continues to be perceived, by those who have not yet fallen for it's undoubted charms, to be a musical instrument unworthy of being taken seriously. If we wish to transform this perceived image, we have to raise our sights, strive a little harder and reduce the quantity of embarrassing videos and recordings which do the instrument's image no favours. On the other hand does it really matter so long as we are all enjoying ourselves and not causing offence in the process ?

 

Raising our sights, striving a little harder and reducing the quantity of embarassing videos posted (and I have to admit, this is a crime I'm guilty of..) sounds good - it would indeed help to improve the image of the instrument, which would mean more players, which could only be good. Raising the bar would also mean that more players would be encouraged to practice to a greater level of proficiency, and, personally, I think that would mean enjoying themselves more as well. The more proficient I am playing an instrument, the more enjoyable I find it.

 

Of course, I didn't mean any of this to imply that there's anything wrong a model of musicianship different to my own - quite as you say, as long as it's enjoyable, the details aren't too important!

Hi Tzirtzi and Rod

 

From the information that I receive, you seem to be in the minority by a great margin. The opinion is running close to 90% in favor of finding concertina related videos (via PM, and emails). Two years ago, in Jan 07, there were virtually no videos at all and I started finding them and talking about them. (See the monster thread that started it all, you can' miss it.) During that time surprisingly now they pop up more frequently in the most unlikely countries with no continent untouched.

 

So on the one hand we've gotten more players which could only be good, (Who said that?) and quite a few who have said "Happy me, I bought a concertina". The ones with the smiley next to the title are members of this board that I recognize. Since I'm not a good judge, by which criterion would you like to grade embarassing and not show again. Keep in mind that among the beginners, given enough time, some just might be the next Noel Hill, Edel Fox, or whichever celebrity you favor now.`FWIW, neither are on my favorite list, but that's just me and another story.

 

Among competitions that create "the best" remember that they are playing to the judges and noone else. One judge may prefer ornamentation above all else, and the next year another judge may say speed above all else and other judges may want only classical. It's an elusive criterion that in my mind doesn't mean anything for the music itself and creates an unrealistic expectation of standards that can't be kept from year to year. Sorry I don't buy into it.

 

As for the Suzuki Method, I wouldn't exactly call it a goldmine of societal wisdom useful for an adult. Might be ok for a 5 year old child, but they should outgrow it quickly since pure wrote learning alone is the least desirable method available along with all the other undesirable characteristics mentioned with the technique if you read about it. Personally I like the "Harold Hill Think Method" myself, since I would equate them about the same. Mark Speaketh with much wisdom about traps and teachers. (above in post 12) "The desire in full or in part did something with it..or not".

 

Striving a little harder is an individual internal thing that is impossible to impose on someone else no matter how hard it's tried. So post more videos as you reach a new level, I'll enjoy it. Maybe next year you'll be the one looked up to.

 

Thanks

Leo

 

PS. Just so you know I do have some discretion in my selections. Here's two examples I passed on:

Chad's Concertina Rock Out

 

Lonely kid plays the Concertina...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4-BfSkLFA&fmt=18

 

Dear Leo,

Please do not think that my comments regarding videos and recordings were in any way intended as a criticism of your regular postings of such things. You are doing a grand job and I eagerly await each new posting. If I frequently find therein performances that are not to my taste, that is a problem that is mine and mine alone. It is always fun to see and hear what other Concertina fanatics are up to. Keep up your good work.

 

Rod

[ceemonster]

well, i don't think i'm gonna weigh in on the general tenor, tone and theme of the laments over rampant philistinism in concertina playing, because they are so hilarious, i'm kinda thinking perhaps it's all a gag. but to speak to a couple of subpoints----

 

one of a few incomprehensibles in this disquisition is the deploring of a "failure" to play keys like e-flat on the c/g anglo while in the next breath citing of noel hill as one of the ownliest players up to the poster's standards (other than the poster himself, of course). nonsensical, because noel hill is exhibit A among those who switch to concertinas in flat or sharp keys to play in those keys. and he has good reason for doing so.

 

the reason is not that noel hill or any master-level player (news flash: there are gazillions in addition to mr. hill and the grandiose individual listing himself & mr. hill as the exemplars of high standards in these posts), can't play in keys like e-flat or b-flat backwards & forwards while swinging upside-down from a trapeze. tim collins told a class i was in that the standard of concertina virtuosity is so high in ireland right now that little kids will come into class having learned their D tune from the day before in e-flat, g-sharp and god knows what the night before just for kicks, "because we got bored."

 

the reason that players of very high proficiency still prefer to switch concertinas is because, though they can and do master these keys on c/g, the tonics, fifths, and thirds of these keys do not repeat in both directions on a standard c/g anglo the way those of G, D, A, e-minor, etc, do, and thus do not offer the scope of phrasing and expressive possibilities. on c/g these other keys are limited strictly to "on the row" playing, with annoying bellows issues and more stunted expressive range. it's somewhat akin to the two-row diatonic button accordions, which technically speaking are indeed "fully chromatic," but as a practical matter are annoying and limited to play in non-friendly keys. not to mention that there are no basses for these other keys on standard two-row diatonics---but that is a different matter from claiming that people "fail" to learn to play them in nonstandard keys.

 

 

which does kind of get me into the general tenor of the tut-tuts posted here over alleged "low standards." this tut-tutting rests on a fallacious assumption, i.e., that concertina has vast chromatic scope that just isn't being lived up to by all the cro-magnons out there. anglo concertina is a chromatic wonder compared to two-row diatonic button box, but, it is limited. it is more than adequate for traditional dance music, but if you want to go farther, you'd have to expand it. that is how the 30-key and the 38-key came to be, after all---those buttons arrived as expansions on the more stunted, 20-key, etc. models.

 

 

to make an anglo concertina still more fully chromatic has been done. this is called, the bandonion. and the bandoneon is a ravishing and marvelous machine, but it is too large and bulky to give you the back-and-forth sway & lift that is the essence of irish dance music.

same with the diatonic two-row button box. you CAN have full scope in all keys. it's called, chromatic button accordion, or piano accordion. i think irish music sounds great on PA, at least when played by musicians like jimmy keane or mirella murray, but you do lose much of that press-draw back-and-forth feeling. so there is a choice. on this one, i suspect we could hear some fascinating thoughts from monsieur bertram levy, anglo master, polymath and all-around wizard, who mentioned on this site that he wasn't using his 38-key dipper anymore now that he has transferred to bandonion.

 

 

[parentheteically, i will say that in ireland there does seem to be a "block" to exploiting the anglo's fingering & phrasing potential fully, a block which has its roots in the history of irish concertina music being played first on one-row or two-rows before the 30 and 30-keyers bounced over from england's drawing rooms. the early "across the rows" players conceptualized cross-row playing as limited to the inside-front buttons rather than the entire concertina, and that paradigm seems to have held. i have an interest in bandonion and because of having read a lot about bandonion, began anglo from the start using the entire instrument, and i read a comment somewhere that bertram levy was doing this on anglo. this opens things up a lot, but even so, you are still gonna hit that wall i mentioned above, where in nonstandard keys, many important notes don't recur in both directions......i am playing with charts for a custom 38-key where the added buttons, plus replacing all the current super-high and super-low buttons on the original 30-key layout, would be used for the extra notes making C, F, e-flat, b-flat, a-flat, etc, really fun to play in. i think it's possible. i'm just not sure that i have the spatial intelligence to pull it off.]

 

the other subpoint i'd like to weigh on on is, a suggestion that we should aspire to the technique of, um, paganini. the thing about that, is that if you had paganini's technique, you might sound like paganini, which in the context of irish dance music. or any world roots music, would be repellent, not to mention tasteless. if you INSIST on sounding like paganini on anglo concertina, this would seem to imply a wish to play classical music on it. and if you wish to play classical music, well, there we go again. you are going to need more buttons to fill in the missing directional options i mentioned above. that's what the 52-button ones were getting at. but really, you'd need 60 or more. and at that point, we're getting up to a small bandonion and you may as well go the whole hog. i believe i read somewhere that mr. levy is taking on the classical repertoire on bandonion, and i'd wager there is a very good reason he is choosing to do so on bandonion rather than on anglo concertina. same with the accordion---there is a reason why people are playing piazzolla on chromatic button accordions with free bass, as opposed to on the two-row so-called chromatic diationic button box.

 

you CAN play piazzolla on diatonic accordion, or on anglo concertina, and you can do so beautifully.......but your arrangement will be.......highly......simplified........

Edited May 29, 2009 by ceemonster

[david_boveri]

I suspect that the reason there are so few good players is because there is no agreed methodology or approach to playing, along with a shortage of teachers.

 

I know there are a lot of wonderful players out there and I've heard a number of them. More teachers? God forbid! I'll not begrudge someone who's got the teacher-guru thing going for them, a blessing on your home...but cleaving to a "teacher" can be a trap if you loose a sense of yourself.

 

agreed 100%.

 

The Wizards of the Plectral Arts and I were having a discussion after session this week (maybe alittle drunk). Teaching came up. No positive responses issued forth. Let's be calm here. Most of us play some form of folk music...right? Someone to show you the way....okay, but after that...hop in your skiff, hoist sail and be off. Cleave to the tradition ye espouse, educate yourself, play with other people. Pick up their bits that work for you and have some freakin' fun. Is that not why most of us are nockin' around with the damned box anyway? If your fun comes from going to summer schools and seminars...I'm down with that.

 

i think something we loose sight of is that although many of the great players are self taught, an equally large part had a mentor who inspired them. especially those of the big names nowadays whose parents played.

 

i feel that spending time with an experienced player makes a huge difference, and i'm not so sure that formal instruction necessarily makes all the difference. the thing is, though, that there are rare instances where you can get to spend huge amounts of time with a musician who is at the top of their genre without giving them money for lessons.

 

i was lucky enough when i got started playing out to be able to go to chicago every sunday and spend a few hours at a bar with a top notch flute player named laurence nugent. i never took lessons even though he does teach, cuz i could spend 3 hours listening to him play for no more than the $5 train ticket--often times there was no more than one or two other musicians besides him. most people do not have those sort of free opportunities to spend hours and hours with such a high caliber player. i love sessioning, but there is a huge difference between sessioning with your buddies and sessioning with someone like that.

 

an other example is noel hill. he lives in ireland, i live near chicago. the only way i ever would be able to spend time with him would be at a workshop. once a year, i get to listen to him play for several hours a day for 5 days. this has had an unbelievable impact on me. i have learned so much from his instruction, but i have learned so much more from just watching and listening and absorbing everything i can.

 

This comes from a reformed voice teacher who made his daily bread off singers aspirations. I've shown some people my version of the way. The ones that had desire took in full or in part whatever my pedegogical flatulence had to offer and did something with it...or not.

 

so what have you been reformed into? flatulating pedagogically leaves so much room for improvement, and not many places you could sink lower to .

[Leo]

Dear Leo,

 

Please do not think that my comments regarding videos and recordings were in any way intended as a criticism of your regular postings of such things. You are doing a grand job and I eagerly await each new posting. If I frequently find therein performances that are not to my taste, that is a problem that is mine and mine alone. It is always fun to see and hear what other Concertina fanatics are up to. Keep up your good work.

 

Rod

Hi Rod

 

Sorry, I was thinking more about the content of the videos in that they/we should be encouraged with a sincere critique, not false cheers to be nice. Unfortunately it didn't come across that way.

 

Thanks

Leo

[JimLucas]

This comes from a reformed voice teacher who made his daily bread off singers aspirations. I've shown some people my version of the way. The ones that had desire took in full or in part whatever my pedegogical flatulence had to offer and did something with it...or not.

so what have you been reformed into? flatulating pedagogically leaves so much room for improvement, and not many places you could sink lower to .

Well, Mark currently plays English concertina.

Perhaps he could sink to playing anglo?

[JimLucas]

i feel that spending time with an experienced player makes a huge difference, and i'm not so sure that formal instruction necessarily makes all the difference.

A good point.

Many excellent musicians are in fact not good teachers, but someone who is good at observing (not everyone is) can still learn a great deal by watching them.

 

I'm reminded of the man from whom I learned to play the bones. (I do not claim that either of us is champion caliber. I leave that to a Scottish friend living in Denmark, who won the national bones championship in the USA.) I got him to show me very carefully how he played the bones, but I just couldn't seem to get it to work. Then I watched him carefully, and I discovered that what he had carefully showed me -- what he thought he was doing -- was in fact quite different from what he actually was doing. So I copied what I saw him doing, and it worked.

[david_boveri]

as a first note, i would like to point out i made an entirely separate post emphasizing that i do not deem myself to meet my own standards of technique, and i tried to make it very clear that i do not even think i make good music.

 

if you want to get down to it, technically no one meets my standards of virtuosic technique... which is the entire point of the series of posts, which i might not have made clear.

 

and again, i made sure to mention that making good music is much more important than any idea of virtuosity or technique.

 

i discuss this later, but i will pre-post this link now. despite what you might think, this is the standard of musicianship i hold myself to:

.

 

well, i don't think i'm gonna weigh in on the general tenor, tone and theme of the laments over rampant philistinism in concertina playing, because they are so hilarious, i'm kinda thinking perhaps it's all a gag. but to speak to a couple of subpoints----

 

one of a few incomprehensibles in this disquisition is the deploring of a "failure" to play keys like e-flat on the c/g anglo while in the next breath citing of noel hill as one of the ownliest players up to the poster's standards (other than the poster himself, of course). nonsensical, because noel hill is exhibit A among those who switch to concertinas in flat or sharp keys to play in those keys. and he has good reason for doing so.

 

the reason is not that noel hill or any master-level player (news flash: there are gazillions in addition to mr. hill and the grandiose individual listing himself & mr. hill as the exemplars of high standards in these posts),

 

the reason i cite noel hill as an influence is because he has influenced me directly. i also cite brian peters, who i only spent one afternoon with. i cannot cite someone who has not taught me. this was NOT a discussion of my standards, as i made very clear, but rather a discussion of what i think virtuosi in the classical sense would advocate as important. i am reluctant to cite noel hill as i knew it would open a can of worms... but too bad. i think it is good form to cite your sources, so that the validity of your sources may be debated. that is why it is a separate post, as it is a separate issue. the reason myself pops up so much rather than--say--tim collins, is because i have never had the pleasure of learning from him. i know of several people in ireland who have taken lessons from noel who later switch to lessons with mr. collins. i also enjoy mr. collin's music immensely, but can not have learned anything form someone i have not learned from.

 

i spend most time with myself and my concertina. i could cite my concertina as a source (which is actually how i view it), but that would seem a bit deranged,

 

the situation gets sticky when you start to talk about standards of technique, because as i think i made very clear, technique is not the most important thing in the world. if we are to talk about technique... no, i dont think mrs. crotty has as refined a technique as tim collins, but yet i like to listen to both. the post was made in response to someone who said that the concertina is flawed as an instrument, and that the reason there are no virtuosi in the sense that they exist on other instruments is due to the nature of the instrument.

 

likewise, i would say that mike rafferty does not have as refined a technique as matt molloy. matt molloy's technique is unbelievably more advanced than mike rafferty's, but i would say the music they make is just about the same in quality. actually, i do not own any of matt malloy's cd's, but i cherish the one i own by mike rafferty. if you were to ask me who my favorite flute players were, i would list mike rafferty as one and never mention matt molloy.

 

i also made it clear i was emphasizing control as a primary element of the discussion. i think bellows and tone control over the instrument is very important, and if you would like my standards of technique in this regard, i hold mary mcnnamara and noel hill to have the best control of the bellows and the tone of the instrument. again, this is subjective and irrelevant... tim collin's most recent cd with brian mcnamara cd, "reed only," puts a shiver down my spine every time i hear it, and i consider it such a special treat that i do not listen to it very often so that it will always sound fresh and vibrant to me.

 

again, it is a matter of what i am discussing, not who do i think is very good or sets my standards. if you want my all time standard for musicianship, this is it:

. my youtube comment on this piece is under the name consairtin, and is as follows:

 

it is one of the most beautifully sung things i have ever heard. it is not only sincere and honest, but passionate, humble and innocent, yet profoundly mature, [sic]passionate, and artful in the highest sense of the word.

 

so please... that is my standard. if you want to discuss my ideas of standards, please judge me according to that and then continue. no matter what, i do not think i will ever make any music that good for as long as live.

 

 

can't play in keys like e-flat or b-flat backwards & forwards while swinging upside-down from a trapeze. tim collins told a class i was in that the standard of concertina virtuosity is so high in ireland right now that little kids will come into class having learned their D tune from the day before in e-flat, g-sharp and god knows what the night before just for kicks, "because we got bored."

 

i didnt know that! thanks for that quote.

 

the reason that players of very high proficiency still prefer to switch concertinas is because, though they can and do master these keys on c/g, the tonics, fifths, and thirds of these keys do not repeat in both directions on a standard c/g anglo the way those of G, D, A, e-minor, etc, do, and thus do not offer the scope of phrasing and expressive possibilities. on c/g these other keys are limited strictly to "on the row" playing, with annoying bellows issues and more stunted expressive range. it's somewhat akin to the two-row diatonic button accordions, which technically speaking are indeed "fully chromatic," but as a practical matter are annoying and limited to play in non-friendly keys. not to mention that there are no basses for these other keys on standard two-row diatonics---but that is a different matter from claiming that people "fail" to learn to play them in nonstandard keys.

 

as i live in the states, i do not see anyone playing in sessions in nonstandard keys. i also aware of the fact that when you go further and further from the home keys that you are severely limited by the instrument. this is why players have concertinas in different keys. but part of me is not convinced that it is worth another several thousand dollars for me to buy a concertina in Bb/F when i am not a professional, and thus do not need the full expressive capabilities of my instrument, as i am not trying to communicate anything meaningful with my music. it seems worth my time, however, to learn how to to be able to play in any key.

 

on the contrary, i have seen diatonic accordion players play in a myriad of keys. i have met players who will play in the strangest keys just for fun. of course if they were doing some serious music on stage or for an album, they would probably grab a box in another key.

 

i am completely aware that the really good players could play any key they wanted if they practiced. it is not too difficult. but the average, everyday player i have met does not venture very far in that direction (though your aforementioned quote might suggest i am wrong in this assumption). most instruments exist in multiple keys, because each instrument sounds best in certain ranges and in certain keys. there are even some instruments made to be very close in pitch--they make Bb and C trumpets, because for some reason (beyond me, as i dont play the trumpet) the half step makes a difference. some players even will play a C trumpet and transpose everything they play down a half step.

 

i have never heard a concertina player say something like "oh, i like to play in the relative key of Bb on my Bb/F concertina in orderto play in concert G#." so, although people do stray from the home keys, i do not think that they do as much transposing as classical players do. so, if you were to argue that this is unnecessary complication, i might agree with you, but the discussion is about virtuosic playing, and the development of technique. and again.... i will repeat that it is not necessarily a good thing, but we are discussing it as an idea purely for the fun of the abstraction.

 

i think you will agree that concertina players are not as adept in playing in all keys AND chromatically compared to players on other musical instruments OUTSIDE of folk music, which was what i thought we were discussing (though it may not have been clear). i use folk music as a context because simply put, the anglo doesnt exist very much outside of folk music and we dont have anything to bear on.

 

which does kind of get me into the general tenor of the tut-tuts posted here over alleged "low standards." this tut-tutting rests on a fallacious assumption, i.e., that concertina has vast chromatic scope that just isn't being lived up to by all the cro-magnons out there. anglo concertina is a chromatic wonder compared to two-row diatonic button box, but, it is limited. it is more than adequate for traditional dance music, but if you want to go farther, you'd have to expand it. that is how the 30-key and the 38-key came to be, after all---those buttons arrived as expansions on the more stunted, 20-key, etc. models.

 

i disagree in part. i do believe 100% that the concertina is not as limited as people assume it to be, though it may be difficult in comparison to instruments which were designed to be played in all 12 keys. though, i do agree with you that more buttons makes this easier... i want a bunch of more buttons on my concertina than 30, but i just simply dont have them.

 

i was talking to a player once who marvelled that we ONLY have 30 buttons on our concertinas, and he said he would never buy a concertina with any less than x buttons (36? 42?, i cant recall). i believe he was either from africa, or played boehr music. he thought we were all crazy that we would even consdier making an instrument with 30 buttons, as he thought it was so limiting.

 

to make an anglo concertina still more fully chromatic has been done. this is called, the bandonion. and the bandoneon is a ravishing and marvelous machine, but it is too large and bulky to give you the back-and-forth sway & lift that is the essence of irish dance music.

same with the diatonic two-row button box. you CAN have full scope in all keys. it's called, chromatic button accordion, or piano accordion. i think irish music sounds great on PA, at least when played by musicians like jimmy keane or mirella murray, but you do lose much of that press-draw back-and-forth feeling. so there is a choice. on this one, i suspect we could hear some fascinating thoughts from monsieur bertram levy, anglo master, polymath and all-around wizard, who mentioned on this site that he wasn't using his 38-key dipper anymore now that he has transferred to bandonion.

 

in the 1800's there was a flute player by the name of charles nicholson who was so good that theobald boehm decided to invent the boehm flute. though he himself was considered a master of the instrument (as well as a talented composer), he did not believe he could ever play the 8-key flute as well as nicholson, and designed an instrument that would let him do so (boehm admits this in his treatise about the flute he invented, which we now use today). i have a flute designed after nicholson's preferences (ca. 1864), and of course i have a modern silver flute, and it is clear that the silver flute is a superior instrument.

 

after having my wooden flute a year or two (and being able to play it in irish music as well--or as poorly--as i could play my silver flute), i spent a couple weeks trying to play charles' nicholsons variations on twinkle twinkle little star on my nicholson-type flute. i could not even get through the initial statement of the theme. finally, i gave up and played it on my silver flute, which took me a whole of two minutes.

 

so, i will agree that the concertina is limited in comparison to the bandoneon or the chromatic button accordion. clearly that is why they were invented. also, that is why the silver flute was invented, due to the limitations of the 8-keyed flute. but the fact remains that when you go to the symphony nowadays, much of the flute repertoire you will hear was played originally on the inferior version of the flute, and in tune, i might add. here is an example of how out of tune these flutes are--keep in mind that this particular flute is considered to be one of the best flutes ever made during this era.

 

i would also say that 8-key flute players today by and large hold themselves to a lower standard than players on the silver flute, just as i say that concertina players by and large hold themselves to a lower standard. there is a common maxim on the chiff and fipple flute boards: it is not the flute, it is the player. wim made a point similar to this, which i quote here.

 

if i was on an irish flute forum, i would say that there is a lack of virtuosic players on the 8-key wooden flute, just as there are on the concertina. the difference is, however, twofold: 1.)there are more players on the 8-key flute who i think are closer to virtuosity than any on the anaglo, and 2.) we could not discuss the hypothetical things that a virtuoso would say. this is because we actually have the treatises these people wrote, which are extensive and numerous. so, instead we discuss what they ACTUALLY did say. no one has ever written about the minutiae of every aspect of concertina playing, so here i took the opportunity to surmise what i think they might say, or might have said.

 

and the fact remains, that there has never been someone so good on the anglo that someone said, "i will invent the bandoneon." i stand behind my argument that to play the anglo concertina across all keys to a virtuosic level (and i will concede you need more buttons) is minimally as difficult or less so than the 8-key flute, the traditional piano layout, french-horn, basoon, etc, and not so impossible as you and many people surmise. my main point is that the instrument is capable of virtuosity, and that no one (or few) have ever done it--my point is not necessarily that it is ideally suited to play this way. i do believe that the anglo is capable of such amazing feats that would make one invent an instrument like the bandoneon and that no one has ever achieved this level of playing. unlike the flute, rather than someone saying someone was so good that they could not ever meet that his or her standard of playing, players said that the anglo and the english were deficient, and invented duets etc. and the bandoneon (i will add this is a gross simplification of the history of the bandoneon).

 

[parentheteically, i will say that in ireland there does seem to be a "block" to exploiting the anglo's fingering & phrasing potential fully, a block which has its roots in the history of irish concertina music being played first on one-row or two-rows before the 30 and 30-keyers bounced over from england's drawing rooms. the early "across the rows" players conceptualized cross-row playing as limited to the inside-front buttons rather than the entire concertina, and that paradigm seems to have held. i have an interest in bandonion and because of having read a lot about bandonion, began anglo from the start using the entire instrument, and i read a comment somewhere that bertram levy was doing this on anglo. this opens things up a lot, but even so, you are still gonna hit that wall i mentioned above, where in nonstandard keys, many important notes don't recur in both directions......i am playing with charts for a custom 38-key where the added buttons, plus replacing all the current super-high and super-low buttons on the original 30-key layout, would be used for the extra notes making C, F, e-flat, b-flat, a-flat, etc, really fun to play in. i think it's possible. i'm just not sure that i have the spatial intelligence to pull it off.]

 

i agree with you. i think that maybe my posts come off as too disdainful of others' playing, which was not my intention. people used to always disagree with me or get mad at me when i discussed my radical opinions about education. then i started saying the same exact opinions but in a way that came off as being less critical and more praoctive. since then, people still disagree with me, but are at least interested in my ideas, and dont get mad. likewise as this is the first time i have publicly discussed what i think about concertina technique, i think i might have phrased it in a way that might have made it seem like i was being negative, when really all i am is interested in how an instruments limitations could be exploited.

 

i am always trying to think of ways to make the anglo more capable of being played more versatilely, while not loosing its essential design. i too have been surprised at the way that extended layouts dont seem to solve very many problems. today i was musing over having two sets of bellows, one for each end of the concertina, and strapping one bellows to each knee, so i could play each side independent of the other. but then again.... that would change the basic nature of the instrument,

 

the other subpoint i'd like to weigh on on is, a suggestion that we should aspire to the technique of, um, paganini. the thing about that, is that if you had paganini's technique, you might sound like paganini, which in the context of irish dance music. or any world roots music, would be repellent, not to mention tasteless. if you INSIST on sounding like paganini on anglo concertina, this would seem to imply a wish to play classical music on it.

 

yeah. that is what i meant, and what maybe we ALL meant. we were discussing over the top, classical like virtuosi. or at least i thought we were. again... i think i was not being clear. i think that music styles are distinct enough that even if you have classical technique, you should not play folk music as if you are playing classical. tom doorley (flute player in danu), is apparently also a very talented classical player on the silver flute, but you would never know any of this by listening to his irish playing.

 

however, i think there is a lot to learn from classical music. one of the reason ravi shankar is so good at the sitar, was because his teacher used to make him listen to classical musicians, and ask him why no one in india can play that precisely. he learned from classical musicians how to hold himself to a high standard, but instead of playing cheesy meaningless music, put reinterpreted that standard into the classical music of india.

 

before anyone gets mad, i mention this because i think that this analogous process happened ago in irish music. by now, it seems that the genre as whole has learned its lessons from classical music--how to play more precisely, play in tune, have good tone, play in sync, etc. likewise, the genre has by and large rejected other ideas from classical music, such as classical ideas of vibrato, arrangements, instrumentation, over-perfection, etc. in case any sticklers are reading, i'm also going to mention that some irish players are starting to go back to the old notions of "irish tuning," and rejecting equal temperament.

 

however, again... the overarching point is that i think that the concertina as instrument is capable of these classical ideals of overperfection and virtuosity, and i would agree with you (and did not make clear) that it is not appropriate to flex these sort of musical muscles in irish music.

 

and if you wish to play classical music, well, there we go again. you are going to need more buttons to fill in the missing directional options i mentioned above. that's what the 52-button ones were getting at. but really, you'd need 60 or more. and at that point, we're getting up to a small bandonion and you may as well go the whole hog. i believe i read somewhere that mr. levy is taking on the classical repertoire on bandonion, and i'd wager there is a very good reason he is choosing to do so on bandonion rather than on anglo concertina. same with the accordion---there is a reason why people are playing piazzolla on chromatic button accordions with free bass, as opposed to on the two-row so-called chromatic diationic button box.

 

you CAN play piazzolla on diatonic accordion, or on anglo concertina, and you can do so beautifully.......but your arrangement will be.......highly......simplified........

 

well... i think that's a challenge. i'll get back to you in several decades,

Edited May 29, 2009 by david_boveri

[david_boveri]

This comes from a reformed voice teacher who made his daily bread off singers aspirations. I've shown some people my version of the way. The ones that had desire took in full or in part whatever my pedegogical flatulence had to offer and did something with it...or not.

so what have you been reformed into? flatulating pedagogically leaves so much room for improvement, and not many places you could sink lower to .

Well, Mark currently plays English concertina.

Perhaps he could sink to playing anglo?

 

haha, us un-refined brutes would love to have him. mark? come to the dark side. you dont need simple chromaticism or logical layouts .

[Mark Evans]

so what have you been reformed into? flatulating pedagogically leaves so much room for improvement, and not many places you could sink lower to .

 

I avoid teaching...voice. It's a very personal thing the voice, trapped inside an' all. You can't take it out and look at it and what it sounds like in your head isn't what it sounds like to those yer aiming it at. Everything within a singer needed to sing is used perfectly every day....but not in singing. I refuse to judge singing competitions. The last one I foolishly agreed to nearly ended up in a real punch up at judges table. Vocal pedagogy, the last bastion of the snake oil saleman.

 

In most cases a Sister Assumpta somewhere to some darling little kid in some music class said "don't sing darlin', just move your mouth." They spend most of a life not singing because they were told they couldn't. Eventually those folks hit middle age and want to find out...and some of them would show up at my studio door. I could no longer sustain the Jacob wrestling in the wilderness thing. It was so painful.

 

The motivated singers with gifted instruments had the Jacob thing as well, but like badgers a percentage of them did not let go. Some of them have found me on facebook close to 15 years hence. My most talented student who I have mentioned on this site before sent me a message with sound clips that started "Dear sensai"....I wept and wept with joy to know that his struggles were not in vain, that his magnificent voice and soul found release and claimed their rightful place.

 

An opportunity presented itself for me to do the little gig I do today (with health benefits and a little something in possible retirement). I buggered off and ran away as did Brave Sir Robin. My students gave me more than I ever managed to give most of them. Perhaps I was their student.

[david_boveri]

i feel that spending time with an experienced player makes a huge difference, and i'm not so sure that formal instruction necessarily makes all the difference.

A good point.

Many excellent musicians are in fact not good teachers, but someone who is good at observing (not everyone is) can still learn a great deal by watching them.

 

I'm reminded of the man from whom I learned to play the bones. (I do not claim that either of us is champion caliber. I leave that to a Scottish friend living in Denmark, who won the national bones championship in the USA.) I got him to show me very carefully how he played the bones, but I just couldn't seem to get it to work. Then I watched him carefully, and I discovered that what he had carefully showed me -- what he thought he was doing -- was in fact quite different from what he actually was doing. So I copied what I saw him doing, and it worked.

 

haha. isnt that so weird? half the time we are never actually doing what we think we are doing*. maybe good teachers are just good at calling their own bluff, so to speak. the bones are especially tricky because when you slow them down it doesnt really work at all.

 

i had a friend a couple weeks ago asked me how i do "those accordion triplets" on the concertina. i said i dont do them, and he didnt belive me. so we went through my playing, and he pointed them out. they turned out to be cranns. so, i did cranns in slow motion, and he was totally shocked. he said to me, "that doesnt work at all when you slow it down!"

 

*nor do we even know what we want.

[david_boveri]

so what have you been reformed into? flatulating pedagogically leaves so much room for improvement, and not many places you could sink lower to .

 

I avoid teaching...voice. It's a very personal thing the voice, trapped inside an' all. You can't take it out and look at it and what it sounds like in your head isn't what it sounds like to those yer aiming it at. Everything within a singer needed to sing is used perfectly every day....but not in singing. I refuse to judge singing competitions. The last one I foolishly agreed to nearly ended up in a real punch up at judges table. Vocal pedagogy, the last bastion of the snake oil saleman.

 

In most cases a Sister Assumpta somewhere to some darling little kid in some music class said "don't sing darlin', just move your mouth." They spend most of a life not singing because they were told they couldn't. Eventually those folks hit middle age and want to find out...and some of them would show up at my studio door. I could no longer sustain the Jacob wrestling in the wilderness thing. It was so painful.

 

The motivated singers with gifted instruments had the Jacob thing as well, but like badgers a percentage of them did not let go. Some of them have found me on facebook close to 15 years hence. My most talented student who I have mentioned on this site before sent me a message with sound clips that started "Dear sensai"....I wept and wept with joy to know that his struggles were not in vain, that his magnificent voice and soul found release and claimed their rightful place.

 

An opportunity presented itself for me to do the little gig I do today (with health benefits and a little something in possible retirement). I buggered off and ran away as did Brave Sir Robin. My students gave me more than I ever managed to give most of them. Perhaps I was their student.

 

 

i try to sing from time to time. i agree it is very personal. i think that there is so much going on in education in all sectors that really inhibits people's natural ability to learn for themselves and explore their own creativity. it seems like much of our time in learning as adults* is spent fighting the constrictions placed on us as children. well, anyways... i'm glad you've found a way to live with honest music in your life, and i'm sure you reached more people than you realized.

 

*i say this as a naive-to-the-ways-of-the-world 22 year-old.

[Greg Jowaisas]

Well Dave,

I hope you put in at least a couple of hours of practice before your 5:57am response!!

 

Lots of room for opinions here. Totally uncodified, kind of like the Old West in America. Instead of "Draw partner" we have "Play!" and btw "Can you play that in Eb and twice as fast."

 

Best,

 

Greg

Edited May 29, 2009 by Greg Jowaisas

[tombilly]

if you want my all time standard for musicianship, this is it:

.

 

Jaysus, David .. it's a long way from discussions of virtuousity that young Tom Lenihan who features in that video, was reared. If that's your ideal, and I see no reason why it shouldn't be, methinks you need to get rid of a lot of baggage and analysis - get back to the simpler things in life..

[Mark Evans]

if you want my all time standard for musicianship, this is it:

.

 

Jaysus, David .. it's a long way from discussions of virtuousity that young Tom Lenihan who features in that video, was reared. If that's your ideal, and I see no reason why it shouldn't be, methinks you need to get rid of a lot of baggage and analysis - get back to the simpler things in life..

 

Now that gent had it by the short hairs indeed! Tenor voice strong and bright throughout the range displayed. Unwavering, perfect jig tempo, great story, a complete lack of arrogance and all without I'll wager, a teacher. From the twinkle in his eyes I'd guess he might clot some bed bug of voice teacher on the head with an axe handle should a critique foolishly be offered .

Edited May 29, 2009 by Mark Evans