Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[uofdoboe]

I have a box out on trial from The Button Box – a Saltarelle Tramontane that’s been in their inventory for some time now.  The box is 3 row (G/C/#), 3 voice (LMM), 14 bass with stops for 3rds & low reeds.  Very good shape – everything seems very airtight.
The box I’ve been playing for several years now is a Saltarelle Cheviot: 3 short rows (C#/D/G), 2 voice, 12 bass with a stop for 3rds.

This is this first 3-voice melodeon (and first G/C) I’ve ever played and I’m truly impressed but how much more effort it takes, even when I play only two reeds as I’m used to.  To the point that I’m having serious second thoughts about keeping it.  Tunes with many bellows reversals are suddenly tiring and passages with many quick reversals are right out.  I’m curious, since the answer will steer what boxes I look for in the future:  What’s the variable that’s making this box so much more sluggish/effortful?

The right hand contains an additional voice over what I’m used to.  But the right hand is stationary on your lap, so I wouldn’t think that itself contributes to the weight.

I’m very used to a 12-bass left hand.  I wouldn’t think an additional two bass buttons would be this much of an impact?
The box itself is both wider and deeper, I assume to accommodate the 3rd voice.  This drives the area of the bellows to be larger.  Is it that I’m having to move that much greater volume of air each reversal, owing to the larger bellows?

The larger right hand to accommodate the 3 voices also drives the left hand cabinet to match in size.  So there is, technically, more wood in this larger left hand cabinet.  Is that what I’m feeling?

I also note that this deeper cabinet style means the edge of the cabinet falls farther down my left forearm, farther from my wrist.  This is so far bothersome when I have the bellows extended – the edge of the box now digs into my forearm whereas with the smaller box the edge is near my wrist and my wrist can articulate to “wrap” around and accommodate it.  A much larger chamfer on this edge would have improved the design.

Input appreciated.  Maybe I just need to really reconsider my desire for a 3-voice box.  Or maybe I just need to get used to a larger box and tailor my tunes to accommodate.

[squeezy]

It's undoubtedly the size of the bellows (cross sectional area) that is causing the symptoms you describe.  Essentially if you want to play passages of push pull notes for that rhythmic effect there is a kind of limit to how big the box can be before performance drops off.  The position of the bass corner with respect to your left arm might be contributing a little to how awkward it feels - but basically a big box is a big box.

In order to play to it's strengths (and there will be many) - you will need to consider adapting to it rather than carry on playing as you do on smaller boxes.  I don't want to change my push-pull style so my approach for many years is to have a 2 voice box with 2.5 or 3 rows but have another 3 voice box which is a small 2 row model that can still be thrown around - it's an expensive shame that I need 2 instruments to achieve what I want to ... but as they say ... size matters!

[oggiesnr]

I moved from a Black Pearl to a Loffet G/C/accs and I found the same thing.  Cross rowing makes a lot of sense but you can lose that bounce that a small two row gives you.  Most of the time I don't worry about it but I'm having to stand in as box player for a morris team next week and it's requiring a major rethink of fingering and style to make the music sound like morris music (if you follow what I mean).

Steve

[uofdoboe]

So squeezy - from your experience it sounds like you've found a 2 voices on 2.5 or 3 rows requires about the same effort as 3 voices on 2 rows?  I suppose that makes some sort of sense (2 voices x 3 rows = 6 reed "sets"; 3 voices x 2 rows = 6 reed "sets" -- does that logic hold?).

Did you guys find a big style adjustment and repertoire segregation was necessary when you took on a bigger box?  I already play cross-row far more than not, but even so this box has made me realize just how many bellows reversals are still required.

[Theo]

I think its something where there are no hard and fast rules.  You have to try the individual box and see how it feels. 

About 2 years ago I changed from a 2.5 row 2 voice to a 2.5 row 3 voice.   The new box is a better build quality and has more responsive reeds and I play it pretty much the same way as the smaller box, but I don't play for morris and I do cross the rows in some tunes, but I do still play on the row too.  Interestingly I had a 3 voice box of exactly the same make and model about ten years previously and that was just a lot of hard work to play.  How much of that was down to the box and how much to me having more playing hours under my belt I don't know, but I still see the old 3 voice occasionally and it is still not as easy to play as my present one.

[george garside]

Its probably more a question of getting used to the different feel of a big box with more voices.   The bigger the box the less bellows opening is needed as there is plenty of air available on a small opening.    Playing  a series of swift rhythmic ins and outs is not a problem  if the bellows are 'tight'  as very little bellows movement is actualy required  .  Two well adjusted straps also greatly facilitate  the control of a larger b
Even on a 117 bass  4 voice Shand morino  quite a lot of the normal business is  oftendone 'on the row'  depending on the key, the  particular bit of a particular tune  and the whim of the individual player.

george

[squeezy]

It's not so much the fact that there are more reeds to be driven ... as George points out - you actually need to move your hand less distance with bigger bellows - but in order to drive the same amount of air through the reed hole with a shorter distance, the force has to be bigger ... so you are having to push and pull with a harder force in order to have the same effect.  That is purely a function of the increased x-sectional area of the bellows - nothing to do with how many reed banks there are.  Of course boxes with more reeds tend to have bigger bellows to fit them all in too.

Better reed quality helps negate this by responding quickly ... but only to a certain degree - and you need the superhuman strength of Saul Rose to get the kind of punchy dynamics out of an 18 bass Handry that most of us would feel happy with on a Hohner Pokerwork.  Needless to say ... I can't beat him at an arm wrestle!

[uofdoboe]

Yes - to that point, this box would save me on gym membership in the long-term!

[waltzman]

I had that box on trial myself about a year ago and I think a lot of the difficulty in playing it is due to the fact that it is not set up very well.  I remember that many of the reeds just aren't very responsive. See what you think.  If the reeds are 'breathy' it just may need set up.

[Christopher K.]

Given that a big accordion in GC doesnt want to be played in the same jaunty way as a smaller one, how does it handle when you cater to its size and layout, rather than the other way around? I remember being very turned off the first time I played my 3 voice club, until I stopped treating it like the pokerwork. I haven't played a Cheviot or Tramontane but the Pokerwork to giant 30s Club III felt pretty dramatic.

[AirTime]

Input appreciated.  Maybe I just need to really reconsider my desire for a 3-voice box.  Or maybe I just need to get used to a larger box and tailor my tunes to accommodate.

I saw the Tramontane the last time I was at the BB.  It does have all the stops - 3 treble stops & 2 on the bass side - but somehow didn't seem like a very appealing box. It struck me as having a very large body - I wonder what the weight is?

Theo appears to have had an intimate encounter with a Tramontane:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.50177028166.61330.709188166&l=c221326df9

Perhaps he has an opinion on it?

[george garside]

Whilst obviously not disputing that larger boxes with bigger bellows are heavier than small boxes with small bellows  I  think that  others  factors such as reed response, number and size of bass reeds in play  , amount the bellows are open, one strap or two, are factors that are as important or more important to the ease of playing  than just the weight. 

Also the playing style of the individual  makes a big difference - eg wide open bellows waving around in the air,  great thumps or long notes on the bass end,  struggling to control a large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap) all  waste an enormous amount of energy and result in big boxes feeling clumsy to handle and very heavy .

So perhaps changing to a larger box simply requires a reappraisal of ones  modus operandi ( or something like that!)

george

[Lester]

struggling to control a large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap) all  waste an enormous amount of energy and result in big boxes feeling clumsy to handle and very heavy .

Video of someone struggling with a 'large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap)' will he never learn?   

[Theo]

On the plus side, a bigger box, because of its extra inertia can actually be easier to control.  A bit less effort is needed to keep the right side stable.  I find the reverse of this to be true if I try and play a very light box such as a Lilly when I am conscious if the care needed to stop the right side from flapping about.

[Nick Collis Bird]

struggling to control a large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap) all  waste an enormous amount of energy and result in big boxes feeling clumsy to handle and very heavy .

Video of someone struggling with a 'large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap)' will he never learn?   

Ooh! 

[george garside]

struggling to control a large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap) all  waste an enormous amount of energy and result in big boxes feeling clumsy to handle and very heavy .

http://forum.melodeon.net/Smileys/default/wink.gif

Video of someone struggling with a 'large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap)' will he never learn?   

 

[oggiesnr]

struggling to control a large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap) all  waste an enormous amount of energy and result in big boxes feeling clumsy to handle and very heavy .

Video of someone struggling with a 'large box that's semidetached from the person ( 1 strap)' will he never learn?   

In all fairness he's anchored that box pretty firmly on his knee :)  I play standing up so I do use two straps which keeps it stable.

Steve

[911377brian]

I think Lester might be being ironic, Steve...

[Thrupenny Bit]

Few months back  me and box playing friend were looking up the stage at the previously mentioned melodeon God..... both agreed, it as a huge box!
He did seem to do quite well though 
Q

[Chris Brimley]

What’s the variable that’s making this box so much more sluggish/effortful?

As player of two very different Tramontanes, I'd be very interested in the answer to this.  My experience has been that I initially found my slightly smaller but more responsive version easier to play, and I still use it as my main dance music box, but I now prefer the heavier one for other music, because it now feels actually more responsive, and 'sweeter'.  This could be due to getting used to different 'feels', as you say.  Any photos of the box, or videos of you playing it?  I would have really liked to have come to have a go on it, but I'm afraid you're a bit far away.