Reason behind omitting the diminished chord buttons?

[TomBR]

On most accordions (if not all) all chord buttons give you 3-note chords.

All the older Hohners, 1950s-1960s, Ive worked on have had four note sevenths. Cant remember checking the dims.

 

[Morne]

The bass diagram in my 1936 book shows 48 (4x12), 60, 80 and 120.

For interests sake Ive attached the last two pages of the book that deal with the diminished chords on an 80 bass.

It is in German, unfortunately. I tried scanning and OCRing but its coming out bad. I type Cyrillic faster than umlauts (or too lazy now), so I do not have a proper translation to paste. So if any German speakers can give us a quick translation, that would be appreciated. (Or Ill try again in the daylight.)


Basically, the first page explains that the seventh chord plays two roles - as 7th and dim. I think it goes on to say something along the lines of what Debra said.


The text at the bottom of the second page says something like:

Through the double meaning of the 5th row (7th), the literature for 80 bass instruments is no longer as limited as before, and it can be used for pieces that were only possible on 120 bass instruments.

 

[donn]

Yes, "ohne grundtone" is part of it, this is the same thing as in the French/Portuguese 3/3 stradella.

It's news to me that 80 bass configurations work that way. I wonder how many actually do? This has come up, but very few of us seem to play one, so we don't have much to go on.

 

[Morne]

I play an 80 bass (see post here). It is an unknown Italian brand, though, and a few decades younger than the book. Ive been planning on gutting it again soon, then I will make notes of what notes my 7th plays. Theres no way I can tell by just listening.

 

[Glenn]

Morne, try playing the C bass and the F7 at the same time. If it sounds like a C dim then it's as in the Hohner book above. If it sounds horrible then it isn't.

 

[Anyanka]

I speak, read & understand German, but that passage is painful for me - my music theory is primarily in English! I have to give you a translation based on words only, not on comprehension...

The chord in the 5th row has a double function.

Firstly, we use it as a dominant 7th, e.g. in the diagonal C-row it sounds the notes E, G, Bb. This chord can be regarded as C7 without the root note. If we add the root C, we get the complete chord. - There is another way of completing the dominant 7th chord, i.e. by playing the major chord situated in the same diagonal row as the diminished chord. By combining their C E G and E G Bb we get the dominant 7th chord C E G Bb. This can be done in any diagonal row.

Secondly, we used it as a double diminished 7th chord. If we again play the chord E G Bb, plus the bass note C#, the chord is complete. We can also interpret the E enharmonically as an Fb, which gives us the chord G Bb Fb, so that we have a double diminished 7th chord without the fifth: G Bb (Db) Fb.
The same button is played for C7 or Gdim (?). See Table.

Or something along those lines....

 

[Morne]

With all the chord breakdowns here I finally got the visual idea of what happens on this layout. The dim row on the Stradella diagram moves up (replacing the 7th) and then shifts one button to the left. Thats why the Hohner book shows both C7 and Gdim on the button.

Morne, try playing the C bass and the F7 at the same time. If it sounds like a C dim then its as in the Hohner book above. If it sounds horrible then it isnt.

The problem is I dont know what a C dim sounds like. What would horrible be, like the mashing of random keys? It doesnt sound bad in that sense. But doesnt adding a C make only the C sound louder in this case? Because it now sounds like a louder C has been stuck on. According to that book my F7 would be: A C Eb.

For reference:
Debra said:

• C diminished = F7 (A C Eb) + Ab7 (C Eb Gb) = A C Eb Gb
• C diminished = F7 (A C Eb) + D7 (F# A C) = A C Eb Gb

Hohner book said:

• C (double?) diminished = C7 (Bb E G) + C# = G Bb Db Fb

dunlustin said here:

• E G Bb Db (which matches the Hohner book)

:hb

...

Can one get away with just playing F7 for Cdim initially, at least in the case of oom-pa playing? I almost want to say that filling out the chord here feels like unnecessary finger displacement. Do you typically fill out your incomplete chords like that? Or is the full chord thing more useful depending on what music youre playing?

But anyhow, this chord combination discussion is getting a bit too technical now as I do not play any dims, nor do I see any coming up soon. Im not too clued up on chord theory and I dont want existing information to be repeated to me just because Im probably missing something. Ill keep a reference to this thread and some others on here that have discussed chord combining once I get to a point where I need to know more about chord construction.

 

[TomBR]

Fair enough Morne, I'll just say that I think playing chords on the right hand is useful for understanding what's going on on the left.

 

[Morne]

Haha now I feel right stupid claiming I don't know what a C dim sounds like. I should try it on the right and compare! Thanks, Tom. I'll give it a go tomorrow.

 

[donn]

If you have a "common" dominant seventh, I believe that F7 will be F A Eb, and the C bass will simply be the missing 5th. In which case it really wouldn't sound so horrible - it would sound much like the F7 with F bass, just a different voicing.

Now if you were to try a G bass with the F7, per your book that would be a Cmin7, but G + common FAEb F7 would be quite dissonant.

 

[Glenn]

One nice thing about my Roland FR- 8X is that I can change the bass layout at the flick of a menu. When I get back home I'll make a recording of the differences between 4 note Stradella dim chords and 3 note so we have an audio reference at least.

 

[Anyanka]

I take it translating that passage into English was a complete waste of time, then...

 

[TomBR]

I take it translating that passage into English was a complete waste of time, then...

I thought it was very interesting, thank you!

 

[Morne]

I take it translating that passage into English was a complete waste of time, then...

Sorry if I gave that impression. I appreciate the proper translation.

It's just that this chord construction business is a bit ahead of me right now.
For example, when I look up what a Cdim is I will find something like: C, Eb, Gb, A
Then that (translated) book comes along with "double diminished 7th chord without the fifth": G, Bb, Db, Fb
And then it just gets a little confusing because I have not learnt these things (like the intervals in chords). I have a rudimentary understanding of some things, but I don't want to complicate my mind with this right now as I'm not even playing diminished chords. That is what I meant earlier.

I'm not looking for combinations so much as I am trying to find out why they make accordions without the dim row, although all this discussion did make some things clearer in terms of the latter (which I will summarise in a post below).

 

[Morne]

This is my summary of the answer that I was looking for in this thread so far.

I started with the assumption that they offered models with the dim chord buttons while at the same time also those without. This did not make sense to me since because as far as Im concerned the cost/weight/size differences are negligible compared to the total cost/weight/size of the instrument.

My error here was to assume concurrency. The story I have in mind now is even more interesting than that. I will take the date of my Hohner book (1936 [1]) as reference point because it implies that prior to that point the voicing was different. I will refer to this chart as the standard full 3-notes-per-chord Stradella bass.

Before 1936: Old 80 bass voicing
1936: New 80 bass voicing exists
1950+: 72 and 96 basses become more popular (few, if any, prior to that)

As I understand it the older instruments used 4 notes in the 7th chord. So, for whatever reason, if they took a full 120 and cut off some buttons the 7th would still have been a full chord. That would make it impossible to reuse it for a dim chord. Then, whenever they switched to 3 notes per chord, if they kept it as it is in a full 120 bass it would still not have been usable. Somewhere before 1936 they had the smart idea to shift the dim row up and to the left (at least, thats my interpretation based on the Stradella chart). This changed the composition of the incomplete 7th chord, but enabled you to play dims. Basically, on an 80 if you play a 7th on the column below (i.e. F7/Cdim) youd have the same incomplete dim as on a 120. Its just your 7th that would sound different between an 80 and a 120. An implicit difference would be in the fingering. Assuming youd play bass-then-dim (without completing the chord) youd use 2-4 on a single row with a 120 bass. On an 80 bass you would use 2 then 4-on-the-row-below.

So why then did they introduce 72s and 96s?
My guess is that players wanted to continue using the 120 fingering on a smaller instrument. I am not sure how quick it is to (temporarily) unlearn the dim fingering on a 80 if you suddenly had to play on a 120 (and vice versa). But if you could reuse your fingering it wouldve been easier to move between sizes.
The other reason could be that the 7ths voicing difference between the 80 and the 120 was important.

As for why they continue making 60s and 80s now?
Maybe the voicing difference is still preferable for certain kinds of music?

The main question is still not quite answered as to why they made the 80 instead of 96 in the first place, since my premise of the negligible difference still applies. Maybe back then (before 1936) there was a more notable cost/weight/size difference?

<HR>

---

</HR>

[1] This is assuming the date is correct, based on two sources online. The one reference has the same cover, but I have no text inside the book stating a date or a revision/reprint, so I assume it is the same.

 

[dunlustin]

1. Anyanka that was very clear and helpful.
2. FWIW coming at it from two different directions gives 2 conclusions:
French 3+3 layout: By voicing the next door (eg F for C) 7 chord without its root, it is a ( C ) Dim chord, so drop the Dim row and have an extra bass row for minor thirds - saves a stretch.

Murray G: As I can get a 7 chord by going up one row ( for C go to G row) and use the Gdim button, I’ll dump the 7 row and replace it with a (made to order) Open chord (Power chord as guitarists would say) with no 3rd. I can see that sounding really effective in all sorts of Trad/Modal/Jazz. It’s a popular solution with diatonic makers at the moment although I guess the thinking there is more bang for your buttons – chords can be used as ambiguous minor/major, having no Third.

 

[donn]

As for why they continue making 60s and 80s now?
Maybe the voicing difference is still preferable for certain kinds of music?

Have we established as fact that 80 bass accordions produced recently use the diminished triad voicing? All of them, or if not, which ones?

The main question is still not quite answered as to why they made the 80 instead of 96 in the first place, since my premise of the negligible difference still applies. Maybe back then (before 1936) there was a more notable cost/weight/size difference?

Dont overestimate accordion players. The same logic applies to 72 bass vs 120 - same reeds, just more buttons - but you can talk until youre blue in the face and never put a dent in the notion that light accordions must be 72 bass. So of course, thats what gets made. If players feel that theyre saving weight by omitting the diminished row, then the accordion will feel lighter to them, so theyre happy, and Weltmeister sold an accordion, so theyre happy.

I think there are a lot of players like you, and me for that matter, who dont have any real use for a diminished chord. Im pleased that I have the option, but also pleased that my accordion doesnt devote a whole row to this not-so-useful chord, because on my 120 layout that allows for a 3rd bass row.

 

[donn]

The only curious thing in the translation - or the original - was the doubled diminished seventh. My best guess is that this is about the "seventh" that's really a sixth, so it could be said to be diminished, and since it's on top of a diminished triad, we've got a double diminished seventh. Oh well.

I could have sort of muddled through the German, or at worst there's always google translate, but I would for sure have missed the translation of "b" to "Bb" - for that we really benefit from someone who knows the language from a musical background.

 

[Morne]

I looked in another Russian book (Школа игры на аккордеоне by Бажилин, 2008) and found the following:

The design of some small instruments does not provide diminished seventh chords. In this case, you can replace the diminished seventh chord with a dominant seventh chord. For example, diminished from C on the dominant 7th of F, diminished from D on the dominant 7th of G, etc.

This is my rough paraphrasing and touch-up of a slightly rubbish Google translation.
Original text:

Конструкция некоторых маленьких инструментов не предусматривает аккордовый ряд уменьшенных септаккордов. В этом случае уменьшенный септаккорд можно заменить доминантсептаккордом. Например: уменьшенный от до на доминантсептаккорд от фа, уменьшенный от ре на доминантсептаккорд от соль и т.д.

Have we established as fact that 80 bass accordions produced recently use the diminished triad voicing? All of them, or if not, which ones?

I guess I cannot say so for sure. Debra mentioned cheap Chinese ones do not. But I am leaning towards, yes, a proper 80 bass ought to have that.

 

[donn]

I bet a quarter no one can demonstrate existence of a modern 80 bass with the diminished triad 7th.