DIYAPASON-L Digest #512 - Sunday, February 3, 2002
 
Re: [Residence Organs]  Speaking of reverberation in new home constructio
  by "Roger Brown" <rbrown7@bigpond.net.au>
Re: [Residence Organs]  Speaking of reverberation in new  homeconstructio
  by "F. Richard Burt" <dorian.organs@verizon.net>
Re: Digital Stops & Etc.
  by <Jess4203@aol.com>
RE: [Residence Organs]  Re: Digital Stops & Etc.
  by "Gregory Rister" <grandcornet@earthlink.net>
 

(back) Subject: Re: [Residence Organs] Speaking of reverberation in new home construction check this out From: "Roger Brown" <rbrown7@bigpond.net.au> Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 22:09:23 +1100   On Sat, 02 Feb 2002 22:09:39 -0400, Daniel Hopkins <danielwh1@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:   >When all of us are trying to liven up the acoustics . this particular = sound engineer is trying to do the opposite for a music room of a = persons house on PBS this old house. they are using all kinds of sound = absorbing material >for this persons Music room   The room size is not clear from the web article but I think it needs to be remembered that there are somewhat different acoustic considerations for piano and chamber music.   The aim appears to be warmth but with maximum clarity rather than mere sound absorbency. Not treatment one would use if the organ were the primary instrument but perhaps not quite as indefensible as you suggest.   Whether it is value for money (at $25,000) is quite another matter.     Roger       Roger Brown rbrown7@bigpond.net.au http://rogerbrown.tripod.com  
(back) Subject: Re: [Residence Organs] Speaking of reverberation in new homeconstruction check this out From: "F. Richard Burt" <dorian.organs@verizon.net> Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 08:45:39 -0600   Daniel Hopkins wrote: > > When all of us are trying to liven up the acoustics . this > particular sound engineer is trying to do the opposite > for a music room of a persons house on PBS this old house... I looked that situation over carefully. I believe they are actually concerned (maybe overly concerned) with the potential for "slap-back echo" problems. I've been in enough large old house when empty to hear echo. While that is a "liveliness" natural response, it is devastating to a person trying to play piano. Also, consider that the acousticians have considerable experience with studio-type designs now. They may be thinking that a studio type (completely flat response time) is preferable to echo.   I installed a Saville organ many years ago in First Methodist Church, Pineville, LA. The church organ committee chairman proudly announced to me that the acoustics are "perfect." When I inquired what that meant, he further boasted that their acoustical engineer guaranteed them no reverberation so they could hear every word from the preacher. Sure enough, that was the case, but the organ sound died immediately when the tone was released. They had one compensating property in the church that made it tolerable. The room was large enought that a lot of air was set in motion and the organ sound moved freely in the room. Got a decent recording of an organ setting of the "Kyrie from the Solemn Mass" by Louis Viern. If you are dealing with acousticians, try to find out where they are coming from and where they are going. Many really believe they must set up for an environment where you can put on a rock and roll concert (absorb all sound; no reflections). They will even offer suggestions about how to install speaker towers (think Willie Nelson or Garth Brooks in an outdoor venue). When you get the chance, advise the acoustician that you really are more interested in sound reinforcement (gentle type that does not call attention to itself) of the natural sounds created by the organ, piano, choir, ensemble, or soloist. Even The Three Tenors now sing to large audiences with sound reinforcement systems, so you can't say serious musicians don't need sound reinforcement. They will laugh at you. F. Richard Burt ..  
(back) Subject: Re: Digital Stops & Etc. From: <Jess4203@aol.com> Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 10:06:46 EST   Hi F. Richard et alia:   I was dismayed to read my post and see that I had written that I couldn't = tell the difference between the Allen Renaissance digital stops and the = Schantz pipe stops. I misspoke. Remove the "not." Actually, let me = clarify further. What I heard were sounds that sounded electronic to me, = and clearly were coming from two sets of speakers at once. I really heard = very little that sounded attractive or sounded like a real pipe, and I = don't know whether Ms. Bish used only digital stops or whether the Schantz = pipes were covered by the digital stops used in combination with them or = whether the Schantz stops sounded so bad that they sounded digital, too, = but, at any rate, it was in no way thrilling and all sounded canned. = Since I don't have the most educated ear in the world, I am assuming that = this thing had to sound equally bad or worse to a musician with a good ear = and good training. I think the purchase price was somewhere upwards of = $150,000. The console is huge, rolls around and goe   As to Ms. Bish, I am happy for her that she can make money. With her TV = shows and concerts, etc., I think she long ago passed the point of hurting = for money. If I can hear what this thing sounds like, I believe she can, = too, and I view it as unethical to line your pocket by lying and telling = people that something is something that it isn't. Go give a few more = concerts or record the complete organ works of Reubke or something, = instead . . .   The reverb was added to this rather large church building (Central Baptist = Church of Bearden, Knoxville, Tennessee) because it is rather dead. I am = not against adding reverb, but this system didn't work well, to my ears. = My guess is that they would have done better to start by sealing the (I = guess) porous ceiling.   I do agree that you can have a big toaster for less money than an = equivalent pipe organ. However, in this case, $150,000 would have bought = fifteen more stops for the pipe side of the organ, maybe more if someone = like our friend R. Schneider did the deed and recycled used pipes. Or = some of the money could have been used to revoice the existing pipes. I = assume this was done in reconditioning the organ, but if so, it was lost = on me. Down the road from this organ about a mile is a very fine Richards = and Fowkes of about 26 stops (Westminster Presbyterian) which receives = continual praise. It is not necessary to have a myriad of stops if what = you have is excellent.   I would be interested to hear a State-of-the-Art digital installation, but = this wasn't one, IMHO. I notice that this list isn't for DIY digital = builders, what does that mean. Why did you-all choose pipes?   Best Regards, Roy Kersey  
(back) Subject: RE: [Residence Organs] Re: Digital Stops & Etc. From: "Gregory Rister" <grandcornet@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 18:21:32 -0800   Hi Roy,   Just a couple of thoughts.   > the (Schantz/Allen). . .was in no way thrilling and all sounded canned.   I have yet to hear an electronic environment in a large building (and I have heard a few) which was convincing. It may be my own bias; IMHO, good acoustics are created with the room, they don't plug in. . .   And the room is as important to the sound as the quality of the = instrument. We maintain a number of excellent organs that sound anywhere from mediocre to less-so, entirely because they are choked off by rooms which have the acoustics of a closet (a full closet). On the other hand, we have some rather awful organs which sound (dare I say it) almost glorious, because the room likes the instrument, and I am not necessarily speaking of rooms with a lot of reverberation; more like, the "right kind".   > As to Ms. Bish,. . .   I note that you knew it was an Allen and that digitals were lurking somewhere, so I don't see the deception on Ms. Bish's part. As for using electronics to "fool" an audience, most of the time they do (you can fool some of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, etc.). Your ears are sufficiently educated to tell the difference; = I wish such audial education was epidemic.   And bear in mind, if Ms. Bish is guilty of a "cardinal sin" for playing an electronic/pipe combination, Virgil Fox must be roasting in digital hell. Most of the people who flocked to his concerts didn't know what they were listening to. . .or care.   > It is not necessary to have a myriad of stops if what you have is excellent. AMEN. All list denizens take note. This is Really the key to a = successful instrument, in any venue.   > why did you-all choose pipes? I have owned about 12 to 15 electronic organs over the 39 (yikes) years I have been playing the organ. I'm on my third home pipe organ = installation, the first having been a pipe/electronic combination (relatively successful for 1966), discarded for money to pay for school, the second a small = 5-rank organ bashed by the Northridge earthquake, and the present instrument = which represents a smallish organ that will probably suit only me (about 21 ranks, very unified). Most of the electronic organs were so-so to dreadful, the good ones were not bad at all, but bored my ears rather quickly (and in fact became somewhat annoying). The little 5 ranker was better than most of them. What can I say; my ears have been educated, and don't want hamburger if they can have steak. . . :)   Greg Rister The Pipe Organ Craftsmen Pomona, California   > DIYAPASON-L: a Discussion list for owners and builders of their own > Residence Pipe Organs. > HOMEPAGE : http://www.diyapason.pipechat.org > List: mailto:DIYAPASON-L@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:owner-DIYAPASON@pipechat.org