How Should I Lay Out My Keyboard?

or The Art of Compromise



A few words of Introduction


The main intent of this page is to give you some ideas on layouts for the keyboard of your custom melodeon. As such, much of the information here will be geared towards presenting you, the reader, with layouts developed by other people. Many of them have stood the test of time, others are experimental. All have their peculiar strengths and weaknesses. Where possible, I will try to point those out to you. The layouts presented here are by no means a comprehensive survey, nor should they be taken as such. I have spent a great deal of time collecting various layouts, and I have over 150 unique layouts in my collection. Presented here is a small sample.

It is not an easy task to fully analyze a layout and perceive its idiosyncracies without the benefit of playing the particular system over an extended length of time. Before choosing a layout, you should devote much time and effort in an attempt to understand the system and why it is the way it is. Once you have a full understanding of the system, you must examine your own goals and preferences and determine whether the system will satisfy your needs. As a buyer, you must educate yourself and live with the consequences of your choices. I have my own personal biases and, reasonable though they may be, you may not share them. Some of my biases will become clear in the text that follows, others may not. If you don't feel up to the task of figuring this out for yourself, seek the help of others. A solid foundation in music theory will help, as will experience in playing button boxes.

I haven't really come up with a good way to present a particular layout so that it is immediately useful to players of boxes in all key combinations. I find the thought of producing 4 or 5 versions of each layout a bit daunting, therefore I have decided to compromise. I will present each layout fully notated in the keys of D/G and G/C since those are by far the most common boxes in use today. Players of A/D, C/F, and other combinations will have to exert themselves to transpose the layouts into the appropriate keys. I would suggest that players of A/D boxes use the G/C layouts and simply add 1 whole step to the notes shown on each button. Players of C/F boxes might want to use the D/G layouts and subtract 1 whole step from the notes shown on each button. Players of other keys will surely find their own way.....they are likely used to transposing by now anyway (or soon will be). Its a good excercise in any case.


Some Universal Considerations


Transferrence


Transferrence is just my fancy word for a very simple concept. I want the skills that I build up on one button box to be able to quickly and easily transfer to any other box that I happen to pick up. I don't want to be tied to one instrument. There are loads of very good reasons for this to be an issue. Take the example of a performer who's very unique 3 row button box got kicked and fell off the stage during pre-show setup. Got enough damage to be completely unplayable. Borrowing or renting was out of the question, since he didn't know how to play his tunes on a "standard" box. Take another example, I've got a pretty nice version of the English tune "Princess Royal" worked up for my 2.5 row. I can't play it on a 2 row, so now when my Morris team dances out and "Princess Royal" is on the program, I am forced to drag my 2.5 row with me instead of one of the smaller boxes.

Obviously, there are plenty of tunes that will only be able to be played on a 2.5 or 3 row box, no matter what the setup. My contention is that my core repertoire...those universal button box tunes, should be playable the way I learned them on any standard box that I pick up....be it a friends, a demo in a music store, or whatever.

The way that you can make that happen is to make 19 of your treble buttons, and 8 of your bass buttons "protected", i.e. not open to modification. As shown in the diagram to the left, you can see the 'skeleton' of the standard diatonic notes in this 3 row layout. Those 19 treble and 8 bass buttons are "standard". You can move this skeleton around e.g. put it on the 2nd and 3rd row rather than 1st and 2nd, or start your scale on the 4th button rather than the 3rd, but those 19 adjacent buttons always retain the normal layout. You are free to modify the others in any way you see fit.

Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, but I would think long and hard before I chose to ignore this rule. Obviously, there are some very, very good players who do disregard this rule....Marc Perrone, Stephane Milleret, and Norbert Pignol are just a few of the experts who disagree in practice with what I have preached here. Then there is Hohner's "Club" layout which makes one of the 'protected' buttons unisonorous, and the Dutch system which reverses one of the 'protected' buttons. Minor modifications, both. So certainly there is successful precedent for tweaking the standard layout, but if you are going to do it, have good reason and consider well what you are doing. You may have to learn your repertoire over from the beginning, or you may lock yourself into one particular box.


Usefulness

The main reason we are even discussing layouts, is because we want our boxes to become more useful, versatile, capable. So always ask yourself the question, will this modification be useful? Don't stop there, ask yourself more questions. Am I modifying just for the sake of modification, or will this improve the box? Is this added button or set of reeds worth the weight, complexity and expense associated with it? What advantages does this 3 row layout offer that I can't get on a 2.5 row? Are those advantages worthwhile, or are they things that I will likely never use? Am I creating a monster? At this point would I be better off just going with a small chromatic button accordion?

The key to determining the usefulness of a particular modification is to analyze your needs. Certain accidentals are used more than others, some are more useful on the push than on the pull. There are advantages to having some accidentals available in both directions. Is this true of your repertoire? Look over your music. Analyze. Do you want your accordion to excel at playing in multiple keys or do you mainly want to have 3 octaves of accidentals for your 2 primary keys. It makes a big difference in the setup. Do you want to smooth out your bellows work? You might want to look at providing reversals of some of the notes in your diatonic scales. What bass chord do you most wish you had? Where would it best be located? Push or pull? Major, minor or neutral? How does your choice of basses match up with the treble layout? Is it really useful to have an Fminor bass on the pull when you can only play the notes in the Fminor chord on the push in the treble?

The questions go on and on, and there is no easy answer. Everything is a compromise and no accordion will do everything well. If you can't find your way through this maze (here is where solid music theory helps), maybe its best to opt for the layout that your favorite player uses, on the principal that if it works for him or her, it can work for you too.


Logic

Short and sweet. Try to set your accordion up logically. It will make it easier to remember and find your way around, it will be more useful, and you are less likely to be disappointed. Have a good reason for everything, apply music theory, don't scatter note around the keyboard willy-nilly.


Convenience

Keep convenience in mind. Think about the size of your hand and the distance you are going to have to reach to get the notes you want or form the chords you need. If you decide to start your scale on the 4th button rather than the 3rd, are you going to able to reach the accidentals on the 1st button easily? While playing? If you have 14 bass buttons, will you be able to reach your air button while playing on the lowest buttons? If you can't, maybe those lowest buttons should be the ones you plan on using the least. Again, its all a compromise. If you play a lot, ergonomics can certainly become a factor. Just one more thing to consider.






return to discussion page

return to home

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1