It's because what you are feeling is different than what others feel. You've put in the work, the time and effort. We just get to enjoy the final result.It’s funny how I get more positive reactions to some posts and not so many to the more cerebral pieces of music.
Thanks, @JerryPH . I find it a bit ironic that the pieces that are more difficult get less attention than the ones that I just “knock out”, so to speak.It's because what you are feeling is different than what others feel. You've put in the work, the time and effort. We just get to enjoy the final result.
I absolutely love that album. I even own an original 10” 33 RPM album. It’s got so much energy!I'm familiar with that album--it's wonderful. Appareti learned from the man himself, so he has a what I suppose we could call a "Frosini Number" (inspired by Erdős Number) that's even lower than yours, Zevy!
Appareti's son has put the whole album up on YouTube, and it's required listening, IMHO:
I have to agree with you. That is unless you are an accordionist who appreciates the more challenging music. But you are right.
I found a *less celebral" version of Espana in A in Frank Zucco's Accordion Music from around the world" and I think this also demonstrates your latest post in this thread which delights me as I prefer to learn a simple piece and "complicate" it rather than attempt to play a complicated piece which is beyond my limitations. I myself use 3-2 fingering, which I am told is restrictive, but I try to add embellishments around it.I probably looked into everything and anything I could regarding that music. That’s because when I study a piece of music I delve into it as much as I can. However, the version that I played is Frosini‘s arrangement. I wanted to play it ever since I heard it on Luigi Apparetti’s Frosini album (look it up). I study from time to time with Eddie Monteiro and he was able to help me with some of the difficult passages.
“Streamline Waltz” is a piece of cake compared to other things that I have posted. It’s funny how I get more positive reactions to some posts and not so many to the more cerebral pieces of music.
Either way, I’m glad you liked it and I only want to make people happy - it doesn’t matter what music they prefer.
I have to agree with you. That is unless you are an accordionist who appreciates the more challenging music. But you are right.
I also use 2-3 fingering (ok - let’s not start a sore topic here again) 99% of the time. I was a 4-3 guy until I began studying with Charles Nunzio. I do not find 2-3 restrictive at all.
That's very encouraging Zevy. Thanks for sharing that. I hope that maybe one day I'll play like you!
I believe it depends on how much you love the instrument and of course - practice, practice, practice!
At risk of taking things off-topic, I agree that 3-2 isn't necessarily restrictive. Or perhaps more accurately, it's as restrictive as 4-3, but in different ways.
) You'll find excellent 3-2 players and excellent 4-3 players. And, in practice, you may be called to switch things up in order to best execute what a piece calls for.
Exactly!
Thank you so much. Donald Hulme was his student in the late 50’s. Eddie Monteiro crossed paths with him at Mr. Nunzio’s school. I studied with Mr. Nunzio when he was much older. I did get to meet Donald back in 2004 at an AAA event where they honored Mr. Nunzio. They flew Donald Hulme up from Florida for the occasion. I am still trying to get a copy of the Ed Sullivan Show where Donald played Mr. Nunzio’s arrangement of the William Tell Overture.
)
I started 3-2 and never had issues. That said if a 4-3 was needed before a big jump or something it would be used without thought easily enough.
100%. I started with 4-3 and I used it for many years. That was until I met Mr. Nunzio and he told me that 3 is king. It was an absolute game changer.
.
