Reason behind omitting the diminished chord buttons?

[Morne]

Is there an "official" reason why the diminished buttons are excluded on some configurations (like 60, 80 bass)?

I assume the cost and weight differences are negligible when going from 72 to 60 and 96 to 80 (and 120 to 100 on bayans) bass buttons if the treble sides stay the same. Since you're just dropping some buttons and rods I cannot see it being that much cheaper or lighter. Also, I cannot see the bass side getting that much thinner as a result of the omission.

If my assumptions are wrong then I suppose one of them could be a reason.

The reason I am asking is if, say, you went to a store and they had new (as in current) 72 and 60 or 96 and 80 basses of the same model, and my assumption above holds, why would you choose one without diminished chords?

I am aware that certain kinds of music use those chords and you can do certain stylistic intros/endings/runs if you have them (I think somebody on this forum mentioned examples) and that certain kinds of music don't. But if there was no real difference in having them, wouldn't it be better to have the chords just in case?

My questions so far are based on the premise that you could actually go into a store and find all of them at the same time (as in current models, not a collection of previous models). This, then, is the more interesting part of what I want to know. Did manufacturers actually produce the full and reduced chords configurations during the same time periods? Or did the available configurations depend on what music was popular at the time? Specifically, when was the reduced chord versions first introduced and were there certain time periods that they were more popular to the point of almost replacing the full chord versions?

Or more generally, is there more information somewhere on the history and evolution of the Stradella bass?

-

An example of what got me thinking, my Russian book mentions that everything in it was intended to be played on a 34/80. I have a 1971 edition. I looked at a newer version (1984) online and it still mentions the 34/80. It's not that other sizes were unknown, but it's also not a 80 bass edition in the sense that the specific book also had 96 and 120 bass editions. I have an oldish German Hohner book which I think mentions it's an 80 bass version so I assume they had editions for larger sizes. From what I've seen a bunch of older bayans did not have diminished chords and some of the bayan books I've seen show only 5 bass rows (although there were also full basses at the time). The Russian garmon also does not have diminished chords.
it might be the case that some kinds of Russian music simply did not use that chord. But I don't know that for sure and I might just be making guesses based on totally anecdotal evidence.

 

[Morne]

An example of an actual current model I know of is the Weltmeister Achat.

34/72
Price: 1.327,00 EUR
Weight: 7,6 kg

34/80
Price: 1.349,00 EUR
Weight: 7,8 kg

Id say the price and weight are negligible overall and they have the same dimensions.
Source: http://www.akkordeon-weltmeister.de/piano-accordion-c-5.html

(Their 60 bass models have only 30 treble keys and the 96 ones have 37, so it is not completely fair to compare in weight.)

However, the Achats grouping is 72 and 80, whereas my grouping was more in line of going from 96 to 80. So in this case the choice is if you want the repeats or the chords and not if you want the chords or not.

Is my logic flawed in that this (34/72 - 34/80) is the kind of configuration options you would have had available at a certain time period whereas my idea (say, 37/80 - 37/96) is anachronistic?

 

[Soulsaver]

No, I agree with you. I've always thought there was no material gain for the user, only less usability(resisting using 'diminished' here, ha!).
But sometimes these things are driven by a tax implication - ie maybe that children's instruments are VAT Free, for example, in some regions and the maybe a definition for tax purposes of a childs instrument revolves around the number of basses?
In the UK childrens clothing is vat free (or reduced?) and the 'children' for vat purposes in this category are defined by the size.

 

[Morne]

I didn't even think about non-musical reasons.

But wouldn't it have been a lot of coincidence (or copying) for manufacturers from different countries like Italy, Germany, Russia and China to all have similar tax rules, especially a few decades ago?

 

[Anyanka]

I can't come up with a reason for omitting the dim chord row; however, I'd be happy to have it replaced. I'd like the French layout, with 3 rows of single notes and 3 rows of chords (maj, min & 7th), as I use the counter basses a lot.

 

[TomBR]

The small price difference on the Achat is interesting, but it's notable that the change is 72 to 80. I assume a manufacturer wouldn't normally offer both a 34/60 and a 34/72.

Once upon a time I guess a range of accordions would be priced with the expectation that they'd be sold in a shop, so a matter of classic sales techniques of getting a customer to go a bit further up the range than they had in mind! Now they have to bear in mind online sales as well.

On the very unscientific basis of looking at Ebay listings I get the impression that there were 80 bass accordions pre-war, but I don't see 96s before fifties/sixties?

Pre-war choice 48 (4x12) 80 or 120? No 72, 60 or 96?

 

[Soulsaver]

I didnt even think about non-musical reasons.

But wouldnt it have been a lot of coincidence (or copying) for manufacturers from different countries like Italy, Germany, Russia and China to all have similar tax rules, especially a few decades ago?

Not really - if there was one country, say China, that offered the tax break, all manufacturers would want to compete in that market, wouldnt they.
I accept this is pretty much semantics because I dont know if there is a tax reduction anywhere. And they (80 bass) turn up here (UK) fairly frequently so there is/was a demand for them without, to my knowledge, any tax break.

 

[Soulsaver]

The small price difference on the Achat is interesting, but its notable that the change is 72 to 80. I assume a manufacturer wouldnt normally offer both a 34/60 and a 34/72.

Once upon a time I guess a range of accordions would be priced with the expectation that theyd be sold in a shop, so a matter of classic sales techniques of getting a customer to go a bit further up the range than they had in mind! Now they have to bear in mind online sales as well.

Good point.

On the very unscientific basis of looking at Ebay listings I get the impression that there were 80 bass accordions pre-war, but I dont see 96s before fifties/sixties?

Pre-war choice 48 (4x12) 80 or 120? No 72, 60 or 96?

They did exist, Ive seen pre war 96 basses, but rarely; so true, not commonly seen today.

 

[Morne]

The small price difference on the Achat is interesting, but its notable that the change is 72 to 80. I assume a manufacturer wouldnt normally offer both a 34/60 and a 34/72.

Once upon a time I guess a range of accordions would be priced with the expectation that theyd be sold in a shop, so a matter of classic sales techniques of getting a customer to go a bit further up the range than they had in mind! Now they have to bear in mind online sales as well.

On the very unscientific basis of looking at Ebay listings I get the impression that there were 80 bass accordions pre-war, but I dont see 96s before fifties/sixties?

Pre-war choice 48 (4x12) 80 or 120? No 72, 60 or 96?

Looking at the Hohner model list it would seem to match your observation. Assuming, then, that the 80 bass was vastly more prevalent than 96 bass pre-war, it doesnt really suggest why they would continue making the 80 basses post-war when there is no advantage over a 96.

Unless there was/is some financial incentive, or music of the time dictated configuration, the only real reason I can think of was to have a staggered configuration in the product line. If they all ran at the same time, maybe something like:
* 26/60
* ?/72
* 34/80
* 37/96
* 41/120
where it would then be a kind of upgrade between sizes and not the removal I had in mind.

But then Hohner comes along and does the Bravo III in 37/96. They dont specify prices on the website, but the size and weight are the same apparently.

 

[TomBR]

Murray Grainger likes having his dim buttons but is happy to do without his 7ths. On his blog at this page
http://www.mgrainger.co.uk/blog/?p=80
he says
...we have changed from 72 bass to 96 bass. Now in honesty this is more because we could than need to but the 96 bass stops any possible restrictions when playing the more complex chords. The much more exciting change is not visible but is with the dominant seventh row. Now for may years I have felt this row to be pretty useless as you can play exactly the same notes with the adjacent diminished seventh button, for instance a C dom 7 plays C E G Bb, but if you play a C with a G dim 7th you get C E G Bb!! So why have the dom 7th row?! So on my new accordion we have dispensed with it and replaced it with a row of open 5ths!

So you could have 60 bass and get the same chords as a 72 (or an 80 vs a 96), in theory, and subject to dexterity*, if your end row was dim instead of 7ths?

* Should that be sinistrity since were talking about the left hand!

 

[ChrisH]

Is there an official reason why the diminished buttons are excluded on some configurations (like 60, 80 bass)?

Maybe the question should be What was the thinking behind including the diminished buttons?

It could be argued that they are popular in certain types of music (eg French walzes), but in other genres (eg English/Scottish/Irish folk) they are rarely used.

They are clearly an essential part of the jazz musicians arsenal, but the diminished seems a pretty arbitary choice. Why not the sixth, major seventh, or augmented?

I certainly wouldnt go along with the argument that any feature should be included just in case. Just as the majority of accordionists dont feel the need for a 120-bass box, there must be a sizeable minority who wouldnt miss the diminished buttons.

 

[donn]

So you could have 60 bass and get the same chords as a 72 (or an 80 vs a 96), in theory, and subject to dexterity*, if your end row was dim instead of 7ths?

Actually the French variation that Anyanka mentions is just about like that, except they go ahead and move that adjacent dim in for the dom7, so its now rather the diminished that can be found in an adjacent row. You might pay a price for this if you needed the common dom7 voicing to complete a more complex chord.

So I learned a little of one of those nice French musette tunes with a dramatic and ostentatious ascending and descending bass line, and it has a diminished too - I mean I learned it by ear, and I dont often hear diminisheds, but its clear there - and I of course learned to reach for that adjacent row. But Ive heard a couple other people play it, and they play that diminished thing on the right hand, which I think may be preferable in many cases. Of course, you dont have to think very hard about where to find a diminished on the chromatic button keyboard.

 

[Morne]

Maybe the question should be What was the thinking behind including the diminished buttons?

I went for the exclusion angle since many of the early 1900 accordions had the full 120, so I assumed that the 80s were exclusions.

I certainly wouldnt go along with the argument that any feature should be included just in case. Just as the majority of accordionists dont feel the need for a 120-bass box, there must be a sizeable minority who wouldnt miss the diminished buttons.

I didnt mention that explicitly because I thought the implication was clear, but a just in case from 37/80 to 37/96 (based on my assumptions) isnt the same as a just in case going up to a 120 because that changes the treble count and weight (unless its a 37/120).

 

[KLR]

Some 140 basses have an augmented row. I was just reading The Mystery of the Diminished Chord

C major is C, E and G. C to E is a major 3rd interval (4 semitones) and E to G is a minor third interval (3 semitones).
To build a diminished chord you need 3 notes, starting from the fundamental (in this case, C) separated from each other by a minor third. C diminished is C, E flat and G flat.
The diminished 7th chord adds a further minor third to the list so C diminished 7th is C, E flat, G flat and A.
But remember that the accordion only plays 3 notes at a time on the chord buttons (more >>) and so G flat is left out, leaving the accordion C diminished 7th as C, E flat and A.
Amazingly, these 3 notes are an inversion of A diminished, which we would normally describe as A, C and E flat.
So, the accordion C diminished 7th button actually plays A diminished.

This is all in line with the no fifths policy for chords, I guess. It was very confusing for me for a while, Ive been getting the hang of the Stradella system lately and couldnt figure out why the dim chords didnt sound foreboding enough...

Anyways, I play the BCC# diatonic accordion too and they often dont bother with the dim row on that and go with 80 basses as dim chords are perhaps a bit superfluous in Scottish folk music. I play jazz songs on the PA and that music has to be diminished! BCC#s often have 96 or 100 basses with dim chord rows too, I should mention. But the top of the line at the moment dont bother with them, being a push pull instrument a lighter left hand is desirable, anyway.

 

[Panya37]

I'll freely admit this is a bit of a red herring, but it does involve buttons, and tax breaks, so I can't resist. I happened to be researching the possible customs import duty for someone in the USA who was buying a wooden flute from me here in the UK - and I noticed that for tax purposes, button accordions are rated at 0% duty, whilst piano accordions are specifically listed as 2.9%. Go figure :?

 

[debra]

On most accordions (if not all) all chord buttons give you 3-note chords.
On an accordion with diminished chord buttons the C7 chord is c-e-bes and the Cdim chord is c-es-a. To get a "complete" C7 chord you need to combine C major (c-e-g) with C7 (c-e-bes) and to get a "complete" Cdim chord you need to use Cdim (c-es-a) together with either Esdim (es-ges-c) or Adim (a-c-ges).
On an accordion without diminished chord the C7 chord is e-g-bes. To get a Cdim you use F7 which has a-c-es. To get a "complete" C7 you need to combine C major (c-e-g) with C7 (e-g-bes) and to get a "complete" Cdim chord you need to use F7 (a-c-es) with As7 (c-es-ges) or F7 (a-c-es) with D7 (fis-a-c).
So the possibilities are the same, you just get a different "incomplete" 7 and dim sound but the same "complete" 7 and dim sound.
There have been some cheap Chinese accordions that are missing the diminished row and still have C7 as c-e-bes which implies that you really cannot get diminished chords from these. Advice: stay away!

 

[Glenn]

Excellent explanation Debra. Thanks for that and the warning about poorly thought out Chinese instruments.

 

[JIM D.]

I've been reading this thread for two days now and find it informative on response's from the other side of the pond. You see the accordions here, both US made up to the 50's and then replaced by Italian import's from the 50's up have always had a Dim row. And this includes 48 to 120 bass models. Al the reeds needed for a Dim row are already in the reed blocks of a stradella bass and only a extra set of piston's are needed to produce them. The added weight of a added row of aluminum pistons only adds from 2 to 4 oz. to an accordion. The only advantage to eliminate the Dim row on an accordion is to the manufacturer in parts and labor saved in production. I you surf the web and look up US accordion distributors of all makes you will be hard pressed to find an accordion model offered without a Dim bass row.

 

[Glenn]

Jim, the other advantage is that if you stick to 6 rows, you can use the freed up row for something else.
In the case of many accordions here the traditional Stradella is shifted down a row and the row closest to the bellows is another bass row.
Thus it is a no easier or cheaper to make but has added opportunities for bass and a slightly different voicing for the dim chords (produced as outlined by Debra above).
I love this this arrangement whilst others don't like it at all.
I guess in the US the call for this was not there so it is never offered as an option.

 

[Morne]

Pre-war choice 48 (4x12) 80 or 120? No 72, 60 or 96?

I had another look at my Hohner book and it is in fact for 48, 80 and 120 bass. I remember that I couldnt find a date anywhere on the book, but this one mention 1936.

If the date is correct, and going by the Hohner model list, then 80 bass piano accordions wouldve definitely been in use in the 1930s already.

Ill have a look in the book later to see what 48 layout they use.