Starting Out On Hayden Duet, Advice?

[seanc]

hi all,

I have been playing anglo for a few months but, recently picked up a stagi hayden that should be arriving any time now.

The question is; any advice on getting started on it? There does not seem to be the cornucopia of tutors, lesson books and resources that there are for anglo or even EC.

Can anyone point me in the right direction to get started?

Thanks in advance

sean

[Ivan Viehoff]

Pretty much anything of interest is here: http://www.concertina.com/instruction/index.htm

 

Check out Brian Hayden's All Systems Duet Concertina Workshop Tutor and Cornell's Duet Concertina Arrangements (intended for Maccann (57+), but mostly OK for Hayden and Crane). Digby's "faking it" articles might be of interest.

 

That's about it. You are mostly on your own with Duet concertina. Find some music you want to play and find a way of playing it...

[Matt Girton]

Take a look at this site: http://www.well.com/~jax/rcfb/hayden_duet.html

 

The man is a squeezebox guru!

 

Matt

[Richard Morse]

Can anyone point me in the right direction to get started?

One of the first things is to get signed up for the Northeast Squeeze-In which is next month - only a couple hours drive for you! You'll find scores of concertina players including about 8 or so Hayden players who you'll be able to get lots of playing tips from. Perfect timing as by then you'll have a good handle on things yet not so entrenched into bad habits yet.

 

-- Rich --

[seanc]

thanks for the link. That seems to be more of more of a what is a hayden duet? why? and a button chart.. Which is definitely interesting and good for reference.

 

What I was thinking more of was something along the lines instruction on finger patterns. e.g on a C scale the root C should be played with the middle finger followed by the ...

 

and a major chord is best done with fingers...

 

I just took a quick look and did not see that. But, maybe I just need to dig around a bit more. I did see that on concertina.com the article by Hayden does have some suggestions on fingering charts for chords and that will be a good start.

 

I realize that for every way of playing a scale a certain way that there will be numerous exceptions. But, I was/ am hoping that some direction may help to head off some bad habits that tend to be difficult and limiting down the road (should I ever get there, of course)..

 

Thanks!

[Dirge]

I've sent you a pm

[Richard Morse]

What I was thinking more of was something along the lines instruction on finger patterns. e.g on a C scale the root C should be played with the middle finger followed by the ...

I've developed my "own" way of fingering which I thought was obvious... though have since come to know several other Hayden fingering patterns - including Brian Hayden's (!) which differ considerably from mine. The choice of which pattern one gravitates toward seems to be mostly due the the type of music one likes to play on it.

 

To begin with, as both sides are NOT mirror images - the fingering patterns WILL be different for both hands. On the right side it seems that most people fall into one of two camps:

		   notes				   Index Root			   Middle Root

	F   G   A   B			 I   M   R   P			I   M   R   P
	  C   D   E				 I   M   R				M   R   P

I happen to play with the "Index Root" pattern. Not that I always use those fingers for those notes, but I tend to use those fingers unless there is compelling reason not to. The reason FOR using those fingers is mainly so that I can play the 5 note (G in the key of C) with my Middle finger. Sure.... both patterns do that.... BUT! Quite often the note before that G will be the C.... So if want to use different fingers for the C and then the G, the Index Root method works better.

 

Sure you can fudge using the MR method by using M for C and R for G.... but that leaves you shy of fingers when you continue up to A and B (!!!). It also makes it hard to play the E right after the G as you'd have to play it with your Pinky which I find a bit awkward spacing. Another awkward sequence is D to B as there just is no easy way to use any other finger than your Pinky for the B.

 

To be fair the IR method has the same finger duplication problem though I find it easier as my more intelligent fingers can deal with those situations that my dumber (R and P) ones can.

 

The fix for both methods is similar - you just use another finger. Which finger becomes pretty obvious after a small amount of trial and error, though WHEN to use what finger seems to be more important to me. When dealing with the prospects of consecutive notes that would like to have the same finger, I favor using an alternate finger for the first of those consecutive notes (rather than have the alternate finger for the latter of the pair). That way I'm back in the groove sooner. Extending the unknown fingerings can be fraughtful!

 

Another reason why I like the IR method is because of the "circle of 5ths". So many tunes modulate up a 5th, and/or briefly use the 4th whole tone. In the key of C that note would be the F#. In the key of G it would be the C#. Those fall on the "Root" row, so if you are in the habit of playing in the IR method then your Pinky is ready to go! If you use the MR method, playing that note is tough if it is a part of the root run. If not, it's still a bit of a stretch.

 

Still another reason is that I find it more comfortable doing turns (rolls?) with the IR fingering. My fingers form a more compact sequence that MR. Try CDCBC with IMIPI. Now try it with MRMPM. Not so very different. But now try rolling the 2nd note DEDCD. I find the MP a bit more difficult. Now try rolling the 3rd note, etc. Now comes the interesting part.... I don't always roll in the "key". In fact I usually roll using the half-note below rather than in the diatonic. IOW CDCBC is fine but I do DEDC#D and EFEG#E. Those really only work well using the IR method. I also roll using the 3rd above (a common French-Canadian and Irish button accordion style - that fiddlers emulate too!) which very easy with IR and near impossible with MR.

 

Try both methods out and see how they work for you. Come to the Squeeze-In and see how they work for the other Hayden players and plumb them on their choices.

and a major chord is best done with fingers...

On to the left side...... Most Hayden players I seen/heard play mainly chords with the occasional run on that side. Not a lot of dexterity is needed for that but the regularity of using same fingers is very useful. Also nice is to use "strong" fingers (not the pinky).

 

Sticking to just that style of accompaniment is what many people call the "oom-pah" style which is essentially R on the root (the OOM or bass downbeat) and then MI for the chord (the PAH - a truncated chord).

													m		 m		  m
  m		   m			m				  R,  i		  i	  R,  i
R,   i			i	   R,   i	  M, I			  R,	
			 R,

If you get my drift there? You can also use your MI to get higher inversions easily as well. You can also do this pattern pretty easily using your Pinky for the root instead. When playing in this style I prefer the Ring finger root because it leaves my pinky free to play the root-7th note which is the note just to the left of the root note. I tend to play it there as it is often part of a run going down. It also lets me play 7th chords with the 7th being the octave above as well. That would be incredibly difficult (impossible?) to do if you used your pinky for the root.

 

BUT! Please don't get "stuck" on the oom-pah style of accompaniment. It can be very monotonous and thick sounding on a duet (another reason why I like 2-note chords rather than 3-note cords: less thick and overwhelming). There's a world of independent harmony and counterpoint over there just waiting to come out! Whereas I tend NOT to use my pinky much when playing chord style there, I almost always use it for single note work. My pattern would typically be:

		F   G   A   B				P   R   M   I
	  C   D   E					R   M   I

Which works out well with the chordal work too.

 

I hope some of this is helpful to you. Keep in mind that this is my preferred way of playing (though I know of others in this camp too). Explore your options and come meet up with a bunch of us at NESI!

 

-- Rich --

[ragtimer]

hi all,

I have been playing anglo for a few months but, recently picked up a stagi hayden that should be arriving any time now.

The question is; any advice on getting started on it? There does not seem to be the cornucopia of tutors, lesson books and resources that there are for anglo or even EC.

Can anyone point me in the right direction to get started?

Thanks in advance

sean

FIrst of all, the Hayden has the easiest learning curve of any concertina, certainly of Duets. You will quickly learn to pick out melodies by ear and/or read music onto the RH, and just as quickly learn how to do oom-pah chords on the LH.

 

As you progress to minor, blues and other exotic scales, the RH will get trickier, and when you break out of omm-pah on the LH to do countermeldoies, you will find it takes some work. But you'll be so much in love with your box by then that you'll just keep at it.

 

Rich Morse's posting gave exellent advice. (Rich, I could have sworn you used the Middle Root fingering. Now I don't feel so bad about using Index Root.)

 

I'll give some conflicting pieces of advice. One thing you must guard against is Pinky-Phobia, fear of using your little finger(s). Some passages will just require the stinkin' pinky, so get used to it

 

In fact, practice simple melodies and scales in Middle Root fingering to exercise your pinky. Have it ready when you need it.

 

OTOH, the RH pinky is hard to use in the upper corner of the buttons, so I work out fingerings (Index Root like) to avoid using the pinky way up there if possible. And like Rich, if I want trills or rolls or mordants or turns, I try to keep Ring and Pinky out of those.

 

I still don't like the pinky on the LH at all, maybe in a bass riff run (scale passage) or countermelody where needed. But maybe needed as root of Fmin and Cmin chords.

 

Don't be ashamed to learn piecees in oom-pah style first. Once you know a tune and its chords, you can branch out into countermelodies, parallel 6ths, riffs, etc.

 

Get some traditional music books in "fake" (lead sheet) form. Bill Matthiesen's three Waltz Books, Susan Conger's collection "Along the RIver", and by all means Jody Kruskal's "Feet in the Clouds" book of 50 original tunes. The first two are available from The Button Box.

 

Jody's book is almost a tutor course in itself -- some easy tunes, some tough ones, and good examples of chords in inversions and walking basses, all in "fake" notation (melody and chords). Many musical styles are represented in Jody's compositions.

 

To break out of oom-pah style, start with easy piano study books -- Baroque period works well. 'Nuff for now, Mike K.

Edited August 13, 2007 by ragtimer

[inventor]

I would suggest 3 ways of aproaching the Hayden Concertina.

1 Melody and counter melody.

There is a set of work-shops that built up into a book; starting on one note per side and gradually building up to 6 notes on each side, plus a few more difficult duets. This you will find published on the "Maccan" site mentioned above.

2 Tune and Um-Pah bass.

Obtain a copy of "Easy Peasy Tunes" this has 100 traditional tunes, From England, Scotland, Ireland, and USA, using only the 14 notes d' e' f#' - g' a' b' c#" - c" d" e" f#" - g" a" b". Which surprise surprise form a compact hexagon of buttons on your concertina. Chords are very simple and can either be played Um-Pah or once you have learned the position and movements; squashed into simple runs, to give the basis for a counter melody.

3 For advanced players of classical music.

Write out score onto Treble and Bass staves then work out how to play it.

Inventor.

[seanc]

Just a follow up...

I bailed on the Hayden (at least for now). I traded by Rochelle (anglo) and the stagi Duet for an AC norman anglo.

While I liked the concept of the hayden, I am making more progress on the Anglo. I was at the stage where I wanted to move up from the Rochelle to something a bit nicer and faster.

 

While I liked the concept of the Hayden, I thought that the stagi was a bit on the difficult side both from the bellows, slow reeds and inconsistant button pressure (especially compared to the anglo).

 

The jury is out at the moment as to what direction to go. I will stick with the anglo, and am thinking about giving an English a shot as well..

 

 

Time will tell..

[Jim Bayliss]

I'd like to add my comments to this thread regarding the Stagi Hayden duet. The big problem with this instrument is that the buttons are arranged asymmetrically. The C button is a different distance from the F button than it is from the G button on the adjacent rows, and so on down the line. This is different from the other Haydens which have been made, including Bastaris, Wheatstones, Tedrows. Because of this, I would tend to hit the buttons off center, and I found this very annoying. The larger buttons (~8 mm diameter) help this problem, but it doesn't change the fact that the button arrangement on these instruments is illogical, wrong, and user unfriendly. We Hayden players deserve better. Stagi needs to re-tool and make these instruments correctly.

[inventor]

I thoughly agree with Jim above with regard to the button spacings on the Stagi. Stagi is the only company that I have never had any dealings or correspondence with. Several years earlier I had somewhat fallen out with Bastari as he expected many more orders than I was willing to give him at that time. After Stagi had taken over, a Gentleman (I can't remember who) phoned me from the States wanting more cheap Hayden system instruments, and as I didn't want to get involved again, suggested he order them direct saying that Bastari had all the details of the instruments. This proved not to be the case (Bastari must have destroyed the records of Haydens). What started to appear at Hobgoblin, London Accordions, and Button Box later appear to have been based on an enlarged distorted photograph of a Bastari 46 buttoninstrument.

Inventor.

[Richard Morse]

You would think that if someone was to rip off a design then they'd put at least a modicum of effort in to it. After all, they're got to spend some effort on the layout and tooling. I think it's so bizarre to have the slant of the buttons different of each side. What were they thinking? Apparently NOT!

 

-- Rich --

[seanc]

I would most definitely defer to all of your considerable knowledge on this.

 

All I can say from a newbie beginner standpoint was that the concept was great, very logical arrangement of the keys as long as your were playing in the scale. I found that non diatonic notes tended to be odd and I felt like I had to go fishing there. I also felt like the reeds were very slow compared to the rochelle. On the upside, I really did like the tone. It was very warm and rich sounding, reminded me a lot of a sax or clarinet, very woody and mellow..

 

Well, if I were able to find a better hayden system at the same kind of money >700 I would give it a go again..

[ragtimer]

I'd like to add my comments to this thread regarding the Stagi Hayden duet. The big problem with this instrument is that the buttons are arranged asymmetrically. The C button is a different distance from the F button than it is from the G button on the adjacent rows, and so on down the line.

Isn't that funny -- I've been squeezing away at my Stagi Hayden 46 for 3 years, and never really noticed that! (Well I noticed, but didn't care).

 

It is true that the C is horizontally closer to the F above than to the G, with the result that the columns of buttons slope to the left as you follow them upwards. I guess I jsut learned to paly it this way and never was bothered by it, But ...

This is different from the other Haydens which have been made, including Bastaris, Wheatstones, Tedrows.

True, my newly acquired Bastari 67 does have equal spacing. Maybe that's another reason why I have troulbe hitting the right notes on it, thou the biggest difference from the Stagi is that the rows are mcuh closer spaced vertically (17 mm versus 25 mm).

Because of this, I would tend to hit the buttons off center, and I found this very annoying. The larger buttons (~8 mm diameter) help this problem, but it doesn't change the fact that the button arrangement on these instruments is illogical, wrong, and user unfriendly. We Hayden players deserve better. Stagi needs to re-tool and make these instruments correctly.

What did you originally learn on?

I do like the larger buttons on the Stagi, and the extra vertical spacing does make certain finger transitions easier. Centering the buttons as you suggest would probably be OK.

 

I believe Brian's patent specifications covered things like button spacing and how mcuh the button field should "tilt" relative to the hand rest. I wonder if Stagi's current 46 is in line with Brian's specs?

 

Relative to SeanC's posting, I also dislike the uneven button pressure of the Stagi, but mostly I jsut wish all the buttons were less firm. Except for the deep bass, the reeds speak plenty fast for me.

--Mike K.

Edited October 12, 2007 by ragtimer

[Richard Morse]

I wonder if Stagi's current 46 is in line with Brian's specs?

Absolutely not!

 

-- Rich --

[ragtimer]

All I can say from a newbie beginner standpoint was that the concept was great, very logical arrangement of the keys as long as your were playing in the scale. I found that non diatonic notes tended to be odd and I felt like I had to go fishing there.

Yes, accidentals outside of the scale of the key you're playing in, are sort of the elephant in the living room of the Hayden Duet. Like most other Duet systems, the Haydne puts the "white" notes up the middle and the "black" sharps and flats on either side. However, the sharp or flat of a note is not in the same row or very close, but in the row above or below and rather far away, leading to pinky stretches and mis-hits.

 

A consequence of this is that, if you want to play a certain note sharp or flat, you must use a different finger than you'd have used for the natural note. And so you have to adjust the fingerings of notes preceeding and following that note. So a tune may need more practice, and more writing-in of finger numbers above the spots on the page.

 

I've been playing some Klezmer music lately, and the odd notes do make for more work. But all it takes is more practice. And in defense of the Hayden system, the location of a note's sharp or flat is the same regardless of what key you're in, tho you may ahve to use the alternate side of the button field if you've run off the end (happens a lot on the 46-key jobs).

I also felt like the reeds were very slow compared to the rochelle. On the upside, I really did like the tone. It was very warm and rich sounding, reminded me a lot of a sax or clarinet, very woody and mellow..

I also like the Stagi's sound -- mellow but it carries in a group, and blends well. I find the reeds plenty fast enough, but then I've hardly ever played a "good" box. I just wish the button pressure was A LOT less.

Well, if I were able to find a better hayden system at the same kind of money >700 I would give it a go again..

If you do find one (for less than $2000,even), be sure to order yours first before posting about it here -- because the line/queue will be pretty long --Mike K.

[ragtimer]

I wonder if Stagi's current 46 is in line with Brian's specs?

Absolutely not!

-- Rich --

Uh-oh! Is there an accessible listing of Brian's official specs? Millimeter spacings, tilt angles, etc.?

 

I'm hoping my Bastari 67's button layout conforms, or at least is the same as Rich's Wheatstone and the Tedrow and Wakker models -- so once I finally recalibrate my cerebellum for the Bastari, I'll be all set to play an upgrade instrument --Mike K.