More than one correct way to finger the bass?

[TomBR]

I liked the first piece best, especially the darker passages.

Yeah, there are lots of players with astonishing technique, not as many who put any detectible feeling into it.

I wasnt really aware of a 3/3 before but doesnt surprise me given all the other variations of free reedery out there. Would it be standard to say the inside row is usually a major third of the second row?

Yes ... on both of mine, each bass row is related to the next in the same way, so, starting with primary C, the next row is E, then G#. How useful, eh? G#, goes with so many C chords. But the way the columns are tilted, the easily reached button from C isnt in its column, but rather in the G column - G/B/D# - and that D# is the minor third.

Ive read that this configuration isnt the only way its done, some 3/3 configurations move the 3rd row over so the minor third will be in the correct but harder to reach column. I hope thats rare.

I assume one of the reasons for shifting the minor counterbasses by one step is to keep the relationship between major and minor counterbasses the same as between bass and counterbass. On the major and minor counterbass rows scales/runs are in the same pattern as bass/counterbass.
I feel that I like, 3+3 bass, though Ive only got as far as some cautious use of the minor row.

 

[Glenn]

Here in Holland the minor third variant appears common. I have 3 acoustic accordions with 3x3 and all the same arrangement. I never came across a C-E-G# arrangement here.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[donn]

I assume one of the reasons for shifting the minor counterbasses by one step is to keep the relationship between major and minor counterbasses the same as between bass and counterbass. On the major and minor counterbass rows scales/runs are in the same pattern as bass/counterbass.

Not sure what you mean. The outcome of the same pattern/same relationship principle, is the C/E/G# column. And it has the virtue that Eb is more easily reached from C - because of the column tilt, in the ordinary Stradella configuration, which makes the G column G/B/Eb closer by the time you get to the third row. Since it's the obvious progression, where each row is related to the next in the same way, it seems to me it's any alternative that's shifted.

One obvious reason why anyone might consider shifting the 3rd row, is a configuration that isn't on a diagonal, but rather square as is done for example in Belgium.

 

[TomBR]

I assume one of the reasons for shifting the minor counterbasses by one step is to keep the relationship between major and minor counterbasses the same as between bass and counterbass. On the major and minor counterbass rows scales/runs are in the same pattern as bass/counterbass.

Not sure what you mean. The outcome of the same pattern/same relationship principle, is the C/E/G# column. And it has the virtue that Eb is more easily reached from C - because of the column tilt, in the ordinary Stradella configuration, which makes the G column G/B/Eb closer by the time you get to the third row. Since its the obvious progression, where each row is related to the next in the same way, it seems to me its any alternative thats shifted.

One obvious reason why anyone might consider shifting the 3rd row, is a configuration that isnt on a diagonal, but rather square as is done for example in Belgium.

I probably gave the wrong impression, but yes, we actually agree about C/E/G#

 

[Mr Mark]

The more I learn the more I am fascinated by the differences and thus possibilities. The 3/3 system definitely makes more sense and appeals better to me. I wonder why the standard Stradella became more of a mass produced thing - I tend to want to think easier access to minor thirds is more functional than diminished sevenths - but maybe this is more a limitation of my current ability.

It is definitely of value to hear about different configurations out there!