Anything apart from the two mainstream default harmonicas (Solo-tuned fully-valved chromatic, and un-valved Richter 10-hole diatonic). Alternate tunings, different construction, new functionality, interesting old designs, wishful-thinking... whatever!
In this discussion viewtopic.php?p=4633#p4633 I invited your thoughts on three similar tunings. As of today the unanimous decision has been that OPTION A was the best.
Notice how that was in the context of 10-holed tunings – though I had alluded to the possibility of having those extended to 12-hole (and likely slide-enabled) harps.
In this discussion I wish to explore those 12- hole slide-harp possibilities. We may see that – in this format – OPTION A is not necessarily superior.
Screenshot 2025-02-18 132018.png (218.03 KiB) Viewed 292803 times
I make special note of the fact that all three options above now have three full diatonic octaves – or more. For this reason OPTION A-12 no longer has that clear advantage over the competitors.
Before I open this up for discussion I will hint that I am currently torn between two of the above. But right now I invite your thoughs.
Given that the 12-hole versions all offer full diatonic range, it might help to compare them based on note layout efficiency and ease of expressive bending. Which of the two are you leaning toward, and what’s tipping the scale for you so far?
It has occurred to me that if OPTION A-12 (above) were in a flat-slide format, the "missing" B notes would be available as 7- and 10- draw with slide-in.
I do not have prototypes of these for playing. And in any case, my medical condition now precludes serious play.
From a theoretical standpoint, I am growing fond of OPTION D-12. In the first position, it features expressive draw-bends in the tonics, thirds, fifths and 7ths of the upper two octaves.
And in the fourth position (Natural minor), the same is true of the thirds, fifths and 7th of the upper two octaves.
A reminder that all of these options feature all seven diatonic chords in the low octave.
