PipeChat Digest #211 - Thursday, January 22, 1998 Re: on correct Bach tunings for organ by Mac Hayes <firstname.lastname@example.org> MIDI vs copyright by Bass, Bill <bbass@LibertyCorp.com> Re: Virgil by Jillian (Bach) Schultheis <email@example.com> Re: on correct Bach tunings for organ by Gordon Lucas & Larry McGuire <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: Jack Ossewarde NYC - Was Virgil by CoppBob <CoppBob@aol.com> Re: Jack Ossewarde NYC - Was Virgil by Otto Pebworth <email@example.com> Re: Virgil again by Douglas A. Campbell <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: Re: Virgil's Defense by DudelK <DudelK@aol.com> Re: MIDI vs copyright by Ron Yost <email@example.com> SANFILIPPO COLLECTION BROCHURES by Robert Ridgeway <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: SANFILIPPO COLLECTION BROCHURES by William Coale <email@example.com> Virgil -- an apology by Dave Pitzer <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: MIDI vs copyright by o\r fiol <email@example.com> Re: on correct Bach tunings for organ by o\r fiol <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: RINGS AND PLAYING by Glenda <email@example.com> Re: Virgil & Diane by CDKrug <CDKrug@aol.com> Playing the right notes by CDKrug <CDKrug@aol.com> Re: Jack Ossewarde NYC - Was Virgil by CDKrug <CDKrug@aol.com> Re: RINGS AND PLAYING by FireAlarmz <FireAlarmz@aol.com> Re: Midiscan - junk software by John Balboni <JohnB@GCQ.net> Re: Organs for a lifetime by GHamil9709 <GHamil9709@aol.com> Re: MIDI vs copyright by PHarri5833 <PHarri5833@aol.com>
(back) Subject: Re: on correct Bach tunings for organ From: Mac Hayes <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:03:09 -0800 I wrote this as a personal reply, but maybe newer members of the list would find the link to the Bicknell essay rewarding: Gordon Lucas & Larry McGuire wrote: > ... > As has been very well documented here and in Europe, Bach HATED meantone or > unequal temperament of any kind, hence the above. For differing opinions, check the writing of Owen Jorgensen (University of Michigan), author of several definitive books on temperaments, and Stephen Bicknell's web page on the same: http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~oneskull/3.6.04.htm -- Mac Hayes email@example.com Notary Sojac
(back) Subject: MIDI vs copyright From: "Bass, Bill" <bbass@LibertyCorp.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:59:46 -0500 Concerning converting sheet music into MIDI files Peter Harrison wrote: > Great for what - breaching copyright in yet another way! Not everyone with musical interests has the ability to play an instrument. The only way I can play any musical instrument is via MIDI. When I purchase sheet music I must convert it to MIDI just to use it. I am NOT violating any copyright by doing so! If I could purchase the music as a MIDI file instead of on paper, I would gladly do so!. Just because I convert the music to MIDI files does not imply that I will distribute those files in violation of copyright. When I purchase sheet music, I am purchasing the right to play the music myself! If I choose to play it by MIDI, that's my business! Bill Bass (firstname.lastname@example.org) Sr. Consultant Programmer/Analyst Advanced Technology Systems Inc. Greenville, South Carolina, USA
(back) Subject: Re: Virgil From: "Jillian (Bach) Schultheis" <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:27:59 -0500 Well... all I can say is that I have heard the music of Virgil Fox since I was, well, really since I was born. And it was his flambouancy and ability to play well that drew me into the music world. Actually, my first memory was running from a record of playing J.S. Bach's Toccata and fuge in Dm. I also was a fan of Dianne Bish at an early age (8). Then, in my early teens I found that Virgil's music was so much "cooler" that the was Dianne played it. The point is, Virgil seemed to draw in teens, and still does. That's all I have to say... Jill ------}------}-------}-------}--------}------}------ Visit Trompette! at http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/Strasse/4343 *****THEATER LIVES!*****
(back) Subject: Re: on correct Bach tunings for organ From: Gordon Lucas & Larry McGuire <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:32:20 GMT At 03:19 PM 1/21/98 -0600, o\r fiol wrote: >I hate to say this, but you're wrong on both counts. Sorry to disagree with you. Try playing any of JS Bach's work which is composed in the extreme keys on a meantoned instrument, and you will find out that it howls. (What is referred to as the 'wolf' by violinists). The word 'welltempered'is a literal translation from the Gothic German, and actually means 'equally tuned'!! Larry
(back) Subject: Re: Jack Ossewarde NYC - Was Virgil From: CoppBob <CoppBob@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:18:23 EST Here's someone who remembers Jack Ossewarde very well, both from visits to Saint Bart's and for his oustanding double CD Great Hymns (47 hymns from the Episcopal Hymnal 1940 played on the Saint Barts's 225-rank Aeolian-Skinner). All organ -- no vocals. Double CD available for $26 postpaid from Peter A Smith, 2 River Road, Belle Mead NJ 08502. Includes organ specifications Jack is a distinguished graduate (BMus 1940) of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, where I was his contemporary. Bob Copp Ann Arbor (AGO and OHS)
(back) Subject: Re: Jack Ossewarde NYC - Was Virgil From: Otto Pebworth <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:16:50 -0500 ---> I have not had a chance to meet the gentleman; however, I remember how impressed I was by his "Fanfare for Eastertide" played at Riverside by Fred Swann, using "that machine on the back wall" (as Virgil put it!). BOY, WHAT A SOUND!!!!! Otto
(back) Subject: Re: Virgil again From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Douglas A. Campbell) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:42:43 EST On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 23:39:55 -0800 Dave Pitzer <email@example.com> writes: >Douglas A. Campbell wrote: And the two new fans you mention...are they, as you say, >"Virgil >Fox fans" or fans of the *music* he performed. Could they, for >example, >name one composition (or composer) on any of Mr. Fox's recordings that >they heard? Have they since purchased any pipe organ recordings? Have >they expressed an interest in other organ compositions? Has Virgil >started them off on a love affair with organ music in general? If so, >then Virgil did his job; he served his instrument and the music. If >not... >David Pitzer David, YES YES YES ....and... YES ! Douglas A. Campbell Skaneateles, NY P.S. Virgil used an electronic (Black Beauty) primarily because there were so few venues available that had working pipe organs! When in Syracuse, Virgil, although scheduled to "use" Black Beauty in a concert, would do his daily practicing on the Casavant at First Baptist Church - THAT organ BTW is being re-built and re-installled in Florida by Mike Quimby. Fox often called it "one of my MOST favorite instruments" -DAC > > > >"Pipe Up and Be Heard!" >PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics >HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org >List: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org >Administration: mailto:email@example.com >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > >
(back) Subject: Re: Re: Virgil's Defense From: DudelK <DudelK@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:56:30 EST In a message dated 98-01-21 10:24:28 EST, you write: << he Revelation Lights years were theatrical. It was a time, (for you younger ones who don't remember) of Bernstein, etc... Television was just being discovered >> I believe we're talking about the 70s, and if my frail middle-age memory serves, television had been "discovered" a good long time before that. I seem to recall Bernstein and others being on TV when I was a good bit younger -- like in the mid-50s or so. None of which takes anything away from Virgil, who certainly doesn't need defending at this late date. Somewhere I read him described as a musician who happened to play the organ. I couldn't say it better! Dudel, who definitely remembers the first time he heard Virgil in 1961 and much of what he played on that occasion!
(back) Subject: Re: MIDI vs copyright From: Ron Yost <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:44:26 -0800 Amen Bill! No offense, folks, but WHY must EVERYONE'S motives be suspect on this list??? I cannot play keyboard either, and am in the same boat as Bill .. except that I wanted to use Midiscan for converting very early piano music, which is long since in the public domain! (Yes, I am sure.) Midiscan failed miserably! and I wanted to try and prevent other folks from purchasing it and wasting their money, if possible. I STRONGLY resent being prejudged as a thief!!! Please, Mr. Harrison, mind your own business! I have nothing to prove to you .. nor do any other people on this list! Assume the worst of your own actions, if you must, but please don't assume the rest of us are criminals. Oh .. the original poster wanted to utilize Midiscan because he is BLIND and cannot SEE a printed score, in case that little fact had escaped your notice. If the music were available in braille, he would have chosen that route. I'm truly sorry to be posting this, friends, but this realllly gets to me! :) Sheesh. Ron Yost Paso Robles, Calif. At 04:59 7:24 PM 1/21/98 -0500, you wrote: >Concerning converting sheet music into MIDI files Peter Harrison wrote: > >> Great for what - breaching copyright in yet another way! > >Not everyone with musical interests has the ability to play an >instrument. The only way I can play any musical instrument is via MIDI. >When I purchase sheet music I must convert it to MIDI just to use it. I >am NOT violating any copyright by doing so! If I could purchase the >music as a MIDI file instead of on paper, I would gladly do so!. Just >because I convert the music to MIDI files does not imply that I will >distribute those files in violation of copyright. When I purchase sheet >music, I am purchasing the right to play the music myself! If I choose >to play it by MIDI, that's my business!
(back) Subject: SANFILIPPO COLLECTION BROCHURES From: Robert Ridgeway <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:12:18 -0600 The second printing of the Sanfilippo Collection brochure is now available. It is revised extensively and is, like the first printing, in full color with many fine photos of instruments and items in the collection. It is available by mail for $10.00 plus $1.00 s/h for a total of $11.00. Checks should be made out to THE VICTORIAN PALACE and sent to: John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. Attn. Laura Rogers 2299 Busse Road Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 Please indicate on your check that it is for brochures and the quantity desired. They will be mailed out promptly. Two new CD's of the 5/80 Wurlitzer pipe organ are due to be released within a couple of weeks and I shall post that information when they are available. Thank you to all for your continued interest in the collection. Sincerely, Robert Ridgeway, Curator SANFILIPPO COLLECTION
(back) Subject: Re: SANFILIPPO COLLECTION BROCHURES From: William Coale <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 20:34:05 -0500 Hi! I've been "out of it" in regards to theatre organs for about 10 years...could you tell me a little about the Sanfilippo collection? What's the story of the HUGE WurliTzer? Thanks....looking forward to hearing the new CD's when available. Bill Coale, BME, MM, EdS Principal, Pinehurst El. Mt. Morris, MI 48458
(back) Subject: Virgil -- an apology From: Dave Pitzer <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:32:29 -0800 List, I had no idea that my comments re Virgil Fox would elicit such....ahhh..."spirited" replies. To those whom I offended with my comments, I apologize. I obviously don't care for Mr. Fox's style of organ playing, much less his ideas of music making. That's my personal "take" on Mr. Fox based upon hearing him play in recitals at The Riverside Church in NYC in the late 50s - early 60s and listening to some of his early recordings. Not my cup of tea, as they say. Registrations inappropriate, tempi way too fast or too slow -- in my opinion. To the respondant who wondered if my dislike of VF was based on envy... not likely. I know about pipe organ architecture and construction and I know about mucic -- pipe organ music in particular. I am not a player and if I were I would not emulate Mr. Fox's particular ....ahhh... style. To the respondant who -- in a private e-mail -- accused me of being an elitist...I plead 'guilty', since, in this person's mind, being an elitist is a crime. I *am* an elitist, have been for years. I have no problem with that. Suffice to say that I don't like the way Virgil Fox played music. Nothing wrong with that. Others do like the way he played music. Nothing wrong with that. Based upon the responses to my opinions, I think that I am perhaps subscribed the wrong list. I apologize and will move on. Sincerely, David Pitzer
(back) Subject: Re: MIDI vs copyright From: "o\r fiol" <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:11:49 -0600 Dear Bill and list, As many have heard by now, I am totally blind. Consequently, the only ways for me to embibe printed music are to read it in braille, to have someone transcribe it for me into braille, to have someone dictate it to me, to have someone play it for me or to somehow convert into midi. Since fulltime transcribers would be financially prohibitive for any nonmillionaire and since most music hasn't made it into braille, I happily await the day on which music recognition by scanning programs will make my love for Classical music easier to explore and fortify. On that day, I will have absolutely no danger of being accused of violating copyrights because my intentions have now been made clear to the concerned public. Love, Orlando
(back) Subject: Re: on correct Bach tunings for organ From: "o\r fiol" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:24:41 -0600 In circular tunings, all the fifths are either perfect or at the worst 696 cents above the roots. Thus, the main differences in keys within circular tunings lies within the types of thirds found. For the most part, the extreme sharp and flat keys in a tuning like Werkmeister3 contain fast-beating, Pythagorian thirds, while the commonly used keys contain better thirds. Most of these better thirds range between 390 and 400 cents above the roots. Thus, if we examine the WELLTEMPERED KLAVIER, we find that all keys would work well in something like Werkmeister or Kirnberger, distinguishing keys by the width of their major thirds. For example, in the C-Sharp major prelude and fugue of Book I, we find little resting on thirds, since the major third between C-Sharp and E-sharp in Werkmeister would be quite wide. Only at the ends of of the prelude and fugue do we find these wide thirds sounded and sustained, partially because of musical convention, the imperfections of the temperament notwithstanding. Furthermore, to prove that Bach wrote his organ music for mostly meantone instruments, I defy anyone to find me any organ work of Bach which, when played on a correctly tuned meantone instrument, would sound the wolf for more than a millisecond at most. In other words, Bach's organ works are written in keys that would have been quite consonant and pleasant sounding on a meantone instrument. Hope this clarifies some controversy, Orlando
(back) Subject: Re: RINGS AND PLAYING From: "Glenda" <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 20:21:07 -0800 Regarding wearing rings and playing, I wear two rings at all times, and never take them off except to clean. However, sometimes the stones start "running" around the fingers when I am playing sometimes. Do others, particularly females, have this problem? Does it worry you at all, or do you just let them keep turning around? I generally manipulate them until the stones are hanging down - then the rings don't bother me anymore. If I take them off I will forget them and leave them - and they are rather valuable! Just thought I would ask something truly trivial. Glenda ---------- > From: firstname.lastname@example.org > To: email@example.com > Subject: RINGS AND PLAYING > Date: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 10:37 AM > > > Speaking of rings and playing keyboards.....has anyone ever seen the trick that > pianists/organists use to wear a lot of jewelry on their hands while playing? > > (Hint: Custom designing) > > :-) > > Steve LaManna > > > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > Administration: mailto:email@example.com > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
(back) Subject: Re: Virgil & Diane From: CDKrug <CDKrug@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:23:38 EST In a message dated 98-01-20 21:46:30 EST, you write: << Would've been nice if he'd actually played the arrangement itself instead of a watered-down imitation in THE WRONG KEY! (I could see what notes he was hitting on the pedals... he was playing the piece in Cm instead of C#m. Boy, did THAT change the colour of the piece! >> How do you know he hadn't used the transpose switch?
(back) Subject: Playing the right notes From: CDKrug <CDKrug@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:35:33 EST In a message dated 98-01-21 14:51:57 EST, you write: << t just goes to show . . . . you can play all the right notes, at all the right times . . . and it still sounds boring. >> I recall a story about Horovitz and Heifietz. People go to a Horovits show, and hear him make a mistake. Everyone nods their head knowingly. The same people go to a Heifietz show and hear him make the same mistake. No one minded nor cared
(back) Subject: Re: Jack Ossewarde NYC - Was Virgil From: CDKrug <CDKrug@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:30:12 EST In a message dated 98-01-21 10:30:36 EST, you write: << Speaking of FAST players, I couldn't help but remember Jack Ossewarde, longtime organist at St Barthelemew's, Park Avenue, NYC. He could rip through anything faster than a speeding bullet. As a young pup, I was mesmerized by him. >> Is he still there? My wife has sung at St. Barts, and loved working with "Jack the Organist" Or is it a different Jack, or a different guy entirely that everyone calls Jack out of habit.
(back) Subject: Re: RINGS AND PLAYING From: FireAlarmz <FireAlarmz@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:10:37 EST Glenda- Oh, the problems you ladies have! Now, if I can only find my nose ring, I can quit practicing and call it a night. Bill Miller
(back) Subject: Re: Midiscan - junk software From: JohnB@GCQ.net (John Balboni) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:49:09 -0500 >Well, as a purchaser of Midiscan I can tell you it is a truly *terrible* >program!!!!! It is *barely* functional, crude, VASTLY overpriced and >just plain lousy!!!! (Yes, I HATE it!! AND the folks who peddle such >junk as 'professional' music recognition software!) It would barely >qualify as $20.00 shareware, much less its retail price of almost $300.00! Tell me about it. I wasted my money on it early last year. Difficult to use and very poor accuracy. And I'm using a top-of-the-line HP 4C scanner. I periodically check their web site, but no evidence they are planning to update it to Win95. John Balboni
(back) Subject: Re: Organs for a lifetime From: GHamil9709 <GHamil9709@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:57:48 EST In a message dated 98-01-20 00:46:07 EST, you write: > that the average person purchases 3 organs in their lifetime, if serious > > about it... I cannot escape the fact that 75 years are a bunch...as evidenced by the fact that I have had 8 organs or enough for 2+ lifetimes. Gene Hamilton
(back) Subject: Re: MIDI vs copyright From: PHarri5833 <PHarri5833@aol.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:02:51 EST The original post referred to the scanning of music "with an HP scanner" then converting to MIDI. We organists may get away with some eccentric behaviour at times, but that does not place us above the law! The electronic duplication, storage and retrieval of published documents is an offence in law both here in the UK as well as in the USA. Placing music on a scanner and making a copy in electronic form is without doubt not a legal activity. I had certainly not intended to label any group of people, let alone particular individuals, as being "criminal". However, the posts from Ron Yost and Bill Bass seem to imply that they both either break the law in this way or see nothing wrong in others doing so. If they or others wish to make public claim to particular labels, that is of course their right! The purpose behind the scanning of music does not affect the legality or otherwise of the act. However, enforcement of rights is up to copyright owners and it seems reasonable to suppose they are unlikely to be offended by a blind person going to such trouble to allow them to perform a piece - indeed they may well be delighted that someone considers their music worthy of such efforts. The same cannot be said for a sighted organist who admits to scanning for MIDI transcription because they lack the skills to perform the piece with their fingers - indeed to do that is to raise the question of whether the "performance" is a live one or not! The purchase of music already in MIDI format, is a quite different topic and what can legitimately be done with it will depend on the conditions attached to the sale. Copyright law can reserve a composer, arranger or editor's rights to determine what is done with that intellectual property and they may wish to forbid alterations to their creations. This could include outlawing any editing of the MIDI file. Of course many MIDI files are sold for just exactly the purpose of allowing them to be edited this is made clear in the conditions of purchase. Peter M Harrison