Melodeon.net Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to the new melodeon.net forum

Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: 2.5 row, not what I thought!  (Read 11769 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Thrupenny Bit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6831
  • happily squeezing away in Devon
2.5 row, not what I thought!
« on: August 17, 2014, 01:05:53 PM »

Hi All,
Something I've been wrestling with for ages - - do I aspire to a 2.5 row?:

I'm still digesting a very interesting chat with Derek ( DTN of this parish ) sat on a bench at Sidmouth having a pint of beer ( surprise surprise! ).
The subsequent chat resulted in my poor brain being scrunched up and thrown out the window!
In my innocence I thought a 2.5 row meant greater access ( easier access ) to the accidentals, saving a loooong stretch to the chin to get them. Also the chin end accidentals only allow chromaticity ( another new word Chris R? ) over the first octave whereas the helper row increases the chromaticity to the upper octave too.
I did realise the extra bases allow for playing in more keys, but hadn't twigged exactly what that meant, or perhaps more accurately, had never seen it demonstrated.
DTN went through umpteen scales, using the accidentals to demonstrate this and the penny then dropped as to what an immense thing a 2.5 row can be.
With such a huge range of keys available by playing across the rows, I'm blown away. Feel a bit agrophobic in reality!

As ever, any choice of instrument depends on what exactly you want to play, and there's the rub.
As you play more I've found my meanderings through tunes have taken me to places I'd never dreamt of when starting.
I'm fundamentally an English repertoire person, or those tunes that at least 'sound' English. I'm getting to grips with the chin end accidentals through learning some of JK's wonderfully bonkers tunes, and I feel like it's starting to come together a tad after starting from scratch 4 years back.
I'm aware of some excellent players who simply stick to a 2 row and produce wonderfully punchy tunes and I enjoy that type of playing. My local session is English based and if I started up something exotic it would be a solo not a joining in thing, which isn't me either ( and I find it quite rude if someone persists in solo's ). I've learnt the odd common Andy Cutting tune and with a 3 voice box I can play in the second octave and have a reasonable stab at them, for my own personal consumption at home.
On another tack, I'm an older starter and would perfer to be good at one thing rather than mediocre at two, so perhaps splitting my time between two paths would be counter productive.

Essentially I'm thinking aloud here, sharing these thoughts with other friends out there.
I hope to get some feedback from those that have also gone through this thought process - Who else has trod this path?

My absolute thanks to my mate Derek for taking time to show me the enormous compass of a 2.5 row and opening my eyes to what it can do.
I have a feeling I might be sticking to what I'm doing on a 2 row...........
Q
in contemplative mood.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2014, 01:07:50 PM by Thrupenny Bit »
Logged
Thrupenny Bit

I think I'm starting to get most of the notes in roughly the right order...... sometimes!

pikey

  • Addicted to squeezeboxes since 1975
  • Thread mod
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3348
  • If it moves, I'll squeeze it....
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2014, 01:17:58 PM »

I'm still getting to grips with the half row on the Liliput, but have no desire to play in weird keys. It gives me the extra accidentals for tunes like the Rose Polka and for the twiddly bits in Bluebell Polka .

IMHO a 2.5 row is well worth having.

Ps good to meet you at Sidmouth  (:)
Logged
Still squeezing after all these years.
Mostly on hohners , with a couple of Dinos and a smattering of anglos - and now a Jeffries duet

Thrupenny Bit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6831
  • happily squeezing away in Devon
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2014, 01:37:05 PM »

Hi Pikey, yes, great meet you in person  (:)

You've made an interesting point there - a 2.5 row / 8 bass does give you much greater access to the accidentals over both octaves without the added complications of getting into exotic keys.
I suppose that is the compromise, accessibility without getting complicated.
Do you get confused going back to a 2 row?
..... I presume you play twiddly tunes on the Lilliput and straight tunes on a 2 row?
Q
Logged
Thrupenny Bit

I think I'm starting to get most of the notes in roughly the right order...... sometimes!

pikey

  • Addicted to squeezeboxes since 1975
  • Thread mod
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3348
  • If it moves, I'll squeeze it....
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2014, 01:50:52 PM »

Yep, I can easily switch back to my 2 row with accidentals, and get frustrated as there are so e tunes where I have to fudge the missing accidentals ! It seems easier to use the accidentals on the 2 row, as on the 2.5 you have to stretch over to reach them instead of up.

Here's an idea  - why not add the missing accidentals to the high dusty end of a two row ?
Logged
Still squeezing after all these years.
Mostly on hohners , with a couple of Dinos and a smattering of anglos - and now a Jeffries duet

Mcgrooger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
  • Northern Roots
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2014, 02:10:59 PM »

I got my 2.5 row mainly for the extra basses and I like it for that BUT...since I got my 4th button Anahata scale 2 row (reconditioned Pressed Wood from Mike Rowbotham), I hardly ever reach for my Saltarelle Pastourelle III.  If you look at my TOTM postings most of the 2.5 row vids were before I got the 4th button start. I've found that this is the box I reach for even for more 'outre' sounding tunes like the recent Young Damon's Flight.  I suspect I could live without my 2.5 box but wouldn't like to be without the Pressed Wood. The 4th button also means you have to play in the upper register less often so you can get away with 2 reeds. Like you TB, I play mostly English stuff and have not gone far at all into the more continental repertoire and feel there are still ample tunes to go at without straying far from these shores.
Logged

Chris Ryall

  • "doc 3-row"
  • French Interpreter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10171
  • Wirral UK
    • Chris Ryall
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2014, 02:33:33 PM »

In practice you still play the beast in its main "session" keys, but things like A, maybe even E(!) finger much easier. The flipped notes assist with that. You might also need to play in C (F?) in some company, but not much further.  I use the other extras to play a bit "out" as I like swing, eg EFF#G "bebop" run in a G piece, or EGABbBDE Blues scale, which amazingly works against Em, Bm, Am,  E major and G chords 8).

Even the "fully chromatic" Pignol would recommend a DG basis on this island, to fit with our sessions. As for 2½ rows, I think that is a digression. You get same bonus across full keyboard for little extra weight/money from a full 3-row, which is why I am where I am (whitby). A freak bonus is that my "full" #3 row likes to play in Bb, which will see me through tomorrow's "flat hat" session ;)

But that 80's purchase of the (then teenage) Mr Cutting casts a long shadow? Final point is that it won't make you play like him, that's more about superb timing.

PS chromaticity is a standard "colour" word, "chromaticism" (already) a common "jazz" word :|glug
« Last Edit: August 17, 2014, 02:37:30 PM by Chris Ryall »
Logged
  _       _    _      _ 

Thrupenny Bit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6831
  • happily squeezing away in Devon
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2014, 02:38:58 PM »

Ooooeeeer Pikey, adding things up there would realluy mess things up for me I feel!
Tis an idea though.......

Mcgrooger - yes I too favour a 4th button start and both my boxes have been adapted. I'm quite amazed at my small hands coping with a stretch to the accidentals too, but perhaps the more I use these top chin end notes the more my hand adapts.
Another good point here - the English repertoire is immense, so as you say, there's always plenty of tunes to get your fingers around, and I have got a few nice Continental tunes going as well, without getting too exotic.

Ahhh Chris has posted.
I take your point about slightly off beat keys, but I've never encountered them down here.
We are a bit paroachial though  ;) best not stray too far from home.
As you say, for not a lot more a 3 row layout makes the most of the beast.
Yes Andy does cast a long shadow and I've heard of countless Mory's being bought in the belief that it'll let you play like him, then sold on because they realise they can't.
We forget he's a genious, which is where the real root of his playing lies.
Q
Logged
Thrupenny Bit

I think I'm starting to get most of the notes in roughly the right order...... sometimes!

Thrupenny Bit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6831
  • happily squeezing away in Devon
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2014, 02:41:01 PM »

Chris - curses, thought I'd added to your new word list  :(
Q
Logged
Thrupenny Bit

I think I'm starting to get most of the notes in roughly the right order...... sometimes!

Chris Ryall

  • "doc 3-row"
  • French Interpreter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10171
  • Wirral UK
    • Chris Ryall
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2014, 03:00:49 PM »

"Genious" is I believe, a new word here, though it's been offered in other places as containing an … inbuilt contradiction ;)
Logged
  _       _    _      _ 

Thrupenny Bit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6831
  • happily squeezing away in Devon
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2014, 03:03:16 PM »

Ahhhh, forgot to translate from native Devonian, where it's spelt almost the same  ::)
Sorry, it happens a lot  ;)
Q
Logged
Thrupenny Bit

I think I'm starting to get most of the notes in roughly the right order...... sometimes!

Nick Collis Bird

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3785
  • Been squeezing melodeons for over 48 years (badly)
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2014, 04:30:09 PM »

Hi Pikey, yes, great meet you in person  (:)


Q

Oh, stop rubbing it in the pair of you. Just because I couldn't make it!! >:(
Logged
Has anyone heard of the song. “ Broken Alarm-clock Blues” ? It starts   “I woke up this Afternoon”

pikey

  • Addicted to squeezeboxes since 1975
  • Thread mod
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3348
  • If it moves, I'll squeeze it....
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2014, 05:20:50 PM »

See you next year Snick Llico Ribd.   (:)
Logged
Still squeezing after all these years.
Mostly on hohners , with a couple of Dinos and a smattering of anglos - and now a Jeffries duet

Ollie

  • Grumpy Young Git
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1900
    • Ollie King
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2014, 08:04:00 PM »

As I've said elsewhere before, 2.5 rows can do one of two things; open up more keys, or help you play better in and around the home keys. When I got my first 2.5 row (a Beltuna Alex 3), it was set up to play in more keys; the extra basses were Bb, Eb, and F major, and F# minor. However, I found myself never ever playing in these exotic keys (namely Gm, Bb, Eb, and Dm). When I was designing my layout for my Super-Erika, I thought about replicating the Beltuna layout, but realised I never really used half the extra notes. The layout I came up with was partially based on Squeezy's, partially on Andy's, and partially on the club system. The resulting layout helps me play better in the home keys, allowing more bass runs (nearly a whole scale of G in both directions) and more use of pedal notes (D, G, A and C in both directions). It does also open up other keys, such as C, A, E, Dm and Gm, but I am limited to chords I, IV and V in those keys, so only venture there occasionally.

From experience of your playing, Q, I'd suggest that you'd be better off with a 2.5 row system that aids playing in home keys, rather than exploring into more exotic keys. Get a Bb/Eb for that.  ;)
Logged
Hohner Erika 12 bass D/G : Hohner Erika Bb/Eb : Hohner 1 row 4 stop D : Hohner Erica 9 bass D/G :

http://www.olliekingmusic.com/

Free-Reed Specialist, Hobgoblin Leeds

The Walrus

  • Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2014, 09:53:47 PM »

Thanks Ollie,

I've drawn a blank searching for your Super Erika layout. Could you please point me in the right direction.

Thanks,

Stephen
Logged

Ollie

  • Grumpy Young Git
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1900
    • Ollie King
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2014, 09:58:03 PM »

Attached here.  (:)

Logged
Hohner Erika 12 bass D/G : Hohner Erika Bb/Eb : Hohner 1 row 4 stop D : Hohner Erica 9 bass D/G :

http://www.olliekingmusic.com/

Free-Reed Specialist, Hobgoblin Leeds

The Walrus

  • Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #15 on: August 17, 2014, 10:41:41 PM »

Thanks Ollie,

How does it play in Bm? I'm thinking of a 2.4 row SUPER ERIKA and see that the F# base choice of direction is quite variable. Clearly a bass that works well in both directions, but what are the advantages and limitations of F# push vs pull?

S

Edited 0900 18.8.14
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 09:21:18 AM by The Walrus »
Logged

Thrupenny Bit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6831
  • happily squeezing away in Devon
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #16 on: August 18, 2014, 08:00:21 AM »

Thanks for your thoughts Ollie.
I have seen similar layouts, with G and A reversals in the basses and hadn't realised their significance.
i.e. a 'super' 2row, with the helper row aided by bass reversals, a step on from Pikey's 8 basses version.
It also allows nice bass runs with that setup. At times I find my 8 bass frustrating that I've no F# to make a scale run ( which is why your 9 button basses make sense to me)
Q
Logged
Thrupenny Bit

I think I'm starting to get most of the notes in roughly the right order...... sometimes!

Chris Ryall

  • "doc 3-row"
  • French Interpreter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10171
  • Wirral UK
    • Chris Ryall
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2014, 08:16:55 AM »

Reversed basses are one of the most useful things I've encountered, and in particular a reversed G can open up Gm on a G major box. Think of all that money/weight saved on buying a Bb/Eb, getting Theo to fettle it, tickets to Whitby, B&B, exorbitant (though tasty) fish and chips? No brainer IMHO ;D
Logged
  _       _    _      _ 

The Walrus

  • Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2014, 09:22:07 AM »

I've edited my last question as it was a bit ambiguous.
Logged

Clive Williams

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3557
    • Home Page
Re: 2.5 row, not what I thought!
« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2014, 12:09:04 PM »

Thanks Ollie,

How does it play in Bm? I'm thinking of a 2.4 row SUPER ERIKA and see that the F# base choice of direction is quite variable. Clearly a bass that works well in both directions, but what are the advantages and limitations of F# push vs pull?

S

Edited 0900 18.8.14

Personally, I'm an advocate of F# on the push - I use a jumping chord when going from G->C (on a D/G) of Bm quite often - so it's G->Bm->C ; the F# on the push means you can do this playing in D too; D->F#m->G. Castagnari etc have F# on the pull, which I gather is useful for blues keys. For a tune such as In Continental Mood, where you have a (quite important) G->F#m->Em->D chord sequence, it doesn't matter - it plays perfectly naturally whether you have F# on the push or pull; different fingering, but neither particularly harder than the other.

Cheers,

Clive
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
 


Melodeon.net - (c) Theo Gibb; Clive Williams 2010. The access and use of this website and forum featuring these terms and conditions constitutes your acceptance of these terms and conditions.
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal