PipeChat Digest #666 - Friday, January 22, 1999
 
Walcker
  by "Donald Pole" <pandk@ciaccess.com>
Re: DJB'S "test"
  by <danbel@earthlink.net>
Re: Ray in Sugarland
  by "J. VANDERSTAD" <dcob@nac.net>
Re: Frantic stories
  by "B. Durden" <brendadurden@franticorganist.com>
Residence organ- suggestions wanted.
  by "J. VANDERSTAD" <dcob@nac.net>
Re: Walcker
  by <WiegandCJ@aol.com>
Re: Walcker
  by "Judith Coates" <jdcoates@thezone.net>
Re: Haskellizing Pipes
  by "Douglas A. Campbell" <dougcampbell@juno.com>
Re: Frantic stories
  by "bruce cornely" <cremona84000@webtv.net>
Re: Haskellizing Pipes
  by "bruce cornely" <cremona84000@webtv.net>
Haskellizing Pipes
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpncorn@davesworld.net>
Haskell basses
  by "Bud/burgie" <budchris@earthlink.net>
Fw: Haskell basses
  by "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net>
Re: Haskell basses
  by "Douglas A. Campbell" <dougcampbell@juno.com>
Re: Haskell basses-more yet!
  by <GRSCoLVR@aol.com>
 


(back) Subject: Walcker From: Donald Pole <pandk@ciaccess.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 08:40:04   For a research project, I need to contact the Walcker company in Germany, and have not found any addresses, electronic or otherwise. Can anyone provide a fax number, etc?   Thanks! Don ======================================================== Donald Pole Pole and Kingham http://www.pandk.com 519-354-8787 ========================================================  
(back) Subject: Re: DJB'S "test" From: danbel@earthlink.net Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 08:18:34 -0500   At 08:32 PM 1/20/99 -0600, you wrote: >Wonderful Stan! I almost sent something like that myself. Dan: the >list seemingly works fine. Why not create some constructive bull---- to >talk about, and use that as a test, not "djb's one-worder?" >   Having not had any messages from the list in quite a while I thought it prudent to send the test message. If Mr. Cartwright see fit to start throwing barbs as the one above, then I believe he should think again.   Take that any way you choose.   djb    
(back) Subject: Re: Ray in Sugarland From: "J. VANDERSTAD" <dcob@nac.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 08:14:34 -0500   Ray in Sugarland? I think is email address is either ray_ahrens@hotmail.com , rahrens@hotmail.com or rayahrens@hotmail.com   Hope one of those works for you.   bruce cornely wrote: > > Sorry, lost Ray's e-mail address. > Ray... > please contact me! TY > > bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org  
(back) Subject: Re: Frantic stories From: "B. Durden" <brendadurden@franticorganist.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 05:18:19 -0800   ok,ok,ok, I am a trouble maker. I was having so much fun reading the frantic stories on the other list until I got scolded. I hope this list doesn't mind. Thanks so much for the continued stories, Brenda The Frantic Organist -----Original Message----- From: bruce cornely <cremona84000@webtv.net> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 10:36 PM Subject: Re: Frantic stories     >I am looking for real life stories of church > musicians for my web site/catalogs and also a > book I am compiling of Frantic stories. Oh, hehehehe...... so now you're going to cause trouble on THIS list, too! ;-) I remember when I was playing in a church on a "3-slice toaster". On this particular model there is a little copper pin that holds the piston buttons in place. During the 11am worship one of the pins came loose and began "hopping around" as keys were released. Each time it would "hop" it would somehow make contact with the combination action and stops would be miraculously changing at will. I was almost a wreck, but the congregation just thought I was being creative.   Mug Please!!!!! ;-)   bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net     "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org        
(back) Subject: Residence organ- suggestions wanted. From: "J. VANDERSTAD" <dcob@nac.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 08:50:19 -0500   Hello everyone, Im new to the list. Working on planning for a residence pipe organ, but I feel myself in need of some suggestions. By the way, if anyone knows of used pipework that I could use in these specs. I would appreciate hearing from you. Perhaps I could have a unit organ utilizing around 2/3 of the ranks below, but I calculated that in my case the extended ranks of the unit organ would take up more space than that of a straight organ. Also, I have found early on that a straight rank chest is more compact. Am I correct? Here's the stoplist:   Rank Manuals 8' Principal, 61 pipes I 8' Gedeckt, 61 pipes I II 8' Gamba, 61 pipes I II 8' Celeste, 61 pipes II 4' Principal, 61 pipes I II 4' Rohr Flute, 61 pipes I II 2-2/3' Nazard, 61 pipes/ II Sesquialtera- I (draws 1-3/5' Tierce, 61 pipes) 2' Principal, 61 pipes I II 2' Wald Flute, 61 pipes I II 1-3/5' Tierce (draws with Sesquialtera) 8' Oboe 61 pipes I II   PEDAL 16' Subbass   Im not sure what to do for the rest of the pedal organ- Borrow the 8' Gedeckt and 4' Octave from the manuals? I am also considering the possibility of an independent 4' stop of some type and the 16' Subbass or Gedeckt play at 16' and 8' pitches. 16' Oboe would be a 73 note rank.   Some have questioned my stand concerning electric action on other lists. The organ I regularly play at church is good in the respect of the proper valves, magnets, etc. used. What I HATE (sorry theatre organ buffs- no flames) is the way stops are unified to play at 3 or more pitches. For example, the specs. of the organ I play at church: GREAT 1. 8' Principal 85 pipes 2. 8' Bourdon 73 pipes 3. 8' Viola 61 notes SW 4. 8' Vox Celeste 49 notes SW 5. 8' Dulciana 61pipes enclosed in SW 6. 8' Unda Maris 49 pipes enclosed in SW 7. 4' Octave from #1 8. 4' Flute #2 9. 4' Quintadena 73 pipes 10. 2' Super Octave #1 11. 2' Quint Flute #9 12. 1-1/3' Mixture III 183 pipes 13. 8' Trumpet 61 notes SW Great to Great 4' Swell to Great 8' Swell to Great 4'   SWELL 8' Gedeckt 61 pipes 8' Viola 61 pipes 8' Vox Celeste 61 pipes 4' Gemshorn 61 pipes 4' Rohrflute 61 pipes 2-2/3' Nazard 61 pipes 2' Flautina 61pipes 8' Trumpet 73 pipes 4' Clarion 61 notes fr. Trumpet 8' Krumhorn 61 pipes Tremolo Swell to Swell 4'   Pedal 16' Subbass 32 pipes 16' Leiblich Gedeckt 32 pipes 8' Principal (GT) 8' Gedeckt (SW) 8' Bourdon (GT) 8' Dulciana (GT) 8' Viola (GT) 5-1/3' Viola (SW) 4' Octave (GT) 4' Quintadena (GT) 4' Gemshorn (SW) 4' Rohr Flute (SW) 8' Trumpet (SW) Swell to Pedal 8' Great to Pedal 8' Now on the other hand, If I were designing this organ (which was built brand new at the same time as the church) I would have taken the following into consideration: 1. The acoustics are so bad, the Dulciana and Unda Maris cannot even be heard in the back of the church (seats around 400). Since these were placed in the Swell, I would have placed the 8' Bourdon and the 4' Quintadena in the Swell box and eliminated the Dulciana and Unda Maris. 2. The primary purpose of this organ is for leading congregational singing. Accompanying choirs or soloists is hardly ever done. The specification would then result to be: 1. 8' Principal 61 pipes 2. 8' Bourdon 61 pipes enclosed in SW 3. 8' Viola 61 notes SW 4. 8' Vox Celeste 49 notes SW 5. 4' Octave 61 pipes 6. 4' Quintadena 61 pipes enclosed in SW 7. 2-2/3' Octave Quint 61 pipes 8. 2' Super Octave 61 pipes 9. 1-1/3' Mixture III 183 pipes 10. 8' Trumpet 61 notes SW   I would also have inserted a unit Principal in the Pedal as well as extending the 16' Subbass and Leiblich Gedeckt. Unificaiton in the pedal in my opinion is fine- only one note is usually played at a time. it would be senseless in my opinion to have a straight ranked pedal division. Notice that I have no problem at all with Duplexing- to me it creates something very useful in registration purposes as well as added flexibility to the organist. Placing the Swell strings- the Viola and Vox Celeste in the Great make it possible for the organist to solo any swell stops against them. Hope this information is to some use.  
(back) Subject: Re: Walcker From: WiegandCJ@aol.com Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 10:30:52 EST   In einer eMail vom 21.01.99 13:50:30 MEZ, schreiben Sie:   << For a research project, I need to contact the Walcker company in Germany, and have not found any addresses, electronic or otherwise. Can anyone provide a fax number, etc? >> E.F. Walcker Orgelbau GmbH & Co Dr. h.c. Werner Walcker-Mayer Postfach 1228 D-66267 Kleinblittersdorf Fon 0049-6805-940620 Fax 0049-6805-940616   Carl  
(back) Subject: Re: Walcker From: Judith Coates <jdcoates@thezone.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 03:48:40 -0300   Dear Donald Pole, Here is an e-mail address for Boosey&Hawkes in Germany. Perhaps they can help: Beyermann, Luzi <Luzi.Beyermann@boosey.com   Also, try searching for "bote & bock" on the Internet. Judy Coates         At 08:40 AM 21/01/1999, you wrote: >For a research project, I need to contact the Walcker company in Germany, >and have not found any addresses, electronic or otherwise. Can anyone >provide a >fax number, etc? > >Thanks! >Don >======================================================== > Donald Pole > Pole and Kingham http://www.pandk.com > 519-354-8787 >======================================================== > >"Pipe Up and Be Heard!" >PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics >HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org >List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org >Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Haskellizing Pipes From: "Douglas A. Campbell" <dougcampbell@juno.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 14:42:52 EST     On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 00:09:21 -0500 (EST) cremona84000@webtv.net (bruce cornely) writes: >   >If you have a pipe organ at your church it would be very easy to do (I >think). I haven't tried this myself, but don't see why it wouldn't >work. >Select a pipe such as low C of the Principal 4, and get a cylinder >roughly 2/3 the diameter of the Principal and about 3' long (you may >have to experiment with the length). Seal off the end of the cylinder >so that it's airtight (come to think of it, PVC probably would work >quite well and the end cap is probably air-tight enough and could be >easily made air-tight... anyway). >While the pipe is playing (a carefully placed pencil at the console >will >do it!!) very carefully lower the cylinder into the pipe and notice >the >change of pitch. If the pipe quits speaking, carefully place your >finger in front of the pipe mouth and move the cylinder gently up and >down, being careful not to touch the pipe, AND DON'T DROP IT, THAT >WOULD >BE VERY VERY BAD!!! Good luck and let me know if it works. Organ >builders types please opine on this from an experimental point of >view; >don't both sending "you're full of @^#$&# messages, as I have quite an >adequate collection already!) >;-) > >bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net Dear Bruce (and List)   While you MAY not be filled will @#$&%^@%!@#% - you seem to be getting very close !   Haskelling Pipes is as precise an operation as building a new pipe - to advise someone to use "About 2/3 the diameter" and "Approximately 3' long" only shows your lack on knowledge of the subject.   As has been stated on this list previously, the INSIDE diameter of the Haskell tube MUST be .707 of the inside diameter of the pipe !   Also, the length of the Haskell tube is critical to the fianl pitch of the "Haskelled pipe".   Please do not continue to offer bad advise to people on these lists who are seeking REAL facts.     Douglas A. Campbell Skaneateles, NY   ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]  
(back) Subject: Re: Frantic stories From: cremona84000@webtv.net (bruce cornely) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 14:55:55 -0500 (EST)     >ok,ok,ok, I am a trouble maker. I was having > so much fun reading the frantic stories on the > other list until I got scolded. I hope this list > doesn't mind. Well, whatever you have done is worth it after those two stories from Charlie Lester. Hope to see you on Organchat www.onelist.com   We're all trouble-makers over there (what organist isn't???)   bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net    
(back) Subject: Re: Haskellizing Pipes From: cremona84000@webtv.net (bruce cornely) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:13:10 -0500 (EST)   >Haskelling Pipes is as precise an operation as > building a new pipe - to advise someone to > use "About 2/3 the diameter" and > "Approximately 3' long" only shows your lack > on knowledge of the subject. I know organ building is precise and complex, but the suggestion was offered as a simple experiment to demonstrate a principle. Did you try it to see if it would work??   >Please do not continue to offer bad advise to > people on these lists who are seeking REAL > facts. The writer, I believe was looking for an easy way to demonstrate a principle and I offered a suggestion for that. I did not even pretend to be offering expert advise, and EVEN invited correction etc from professionals....   so pull your head out, Duggie, you're Haskelling yourself!! ;-)     bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net    
(back) Subject: Haskellizing Pipes From: Richard Schneider <arpncorn@davesworld.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:29:49 -0800   On Wed, 20 Jan 1999 19:57:34 -0700 Nicholas A Hall, Jr. <tremulants@juno.com> inquires about Haskell pipes.   > Quite some time ago on PipeChat, I was learning quite a bit about using > the Haskell priciple to shift the frequency of a pipe down.   > I was wondering if any of you have done this OR if you can point me in > the direction of some kind of reference. OUr head of music at the > church is interested in learning about this and I can't discuss it with > him with my limited knowlege.   Question: Are you trying to get some Haskell pipes to replace some which are too long, or are you merely interested in information?   If you're wanting to Haskellize pipes, our shop is able to do that work for you.   If you are simply interested in information, there are references to this in U.S. Patents specifications, which I can provide, as well as a description of the procedure in the Charles Callahan book regarding AEolian-Skinner, written by J.B. Jameson; who, at the time, was involved with the Estey Company -the successors to William Haskell, the inventor.   You might serach the archives of PIPEORG-L, which are carefully cataloged, as there was an extensive discussion about Haskell pipes, and the trading of pertanent information at that time. this should tell you just about everything you ever wanted to know.   Faithfully, / ^ ^ \ { (O) (O) } --------oOOOo--------U-------oOOOo------------   "Arp" in the "Corn Patch"   Richard Schneider, President SCHNEIDER PIPE ORGANS, Inc. Organbuilders 41-43 Johnston Street Post Office Box 137 Kenney, IL 61749-0137 (217) 944-2454 VOX (217) 944-2527 FAX mailto:arpncorn@davesworld.net EMAIL (Note change in ISP's Domain-Name!)      
(back) Subject: Haskell basses From: Bud/burgie <budchris@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:02:44 -0800   I have some general questions about the use of Haskell basses: since they are great height (if not width) savers, why aren't they generally built today? Is it a matter of cost, or is building Haskell basses becoming a lost art?   It would seem that Haskell basses in small organs would be preferable to having the bottom octave of an 8' Principal break to stopped flute pipes, or an 8' string break to stopped quintadena pipes, etc.. They would also allow for a 16' Principal where one might not otherwise be possible.   The standard texts say that a Haskell bass pipe on a Principal rank produces a sound akin to a Violone ... is that really so far from the Principal sound (or, voiced more quietly, a String sound) as to be undesirable?   The one Haskell rank I recall seeing (a 16' Choir Gamba on a non-playing Hillgreen-Lane) had the Haskell tube on the OUTSIDE of the pipe, and was held in place by heavy-duty spring clamps and hooks that hung the Haskell tube from the upper rim of the inner pipe. It's been a long time ago, but I seem to recall that there were felt (?) spacers to keep the outside tube lined up. I remember wondering at the time how one would tune the pipes ... they seemed to be pretty much set in place for time and eternity.   Cheers,   Bud        
(back) Subject: Fw: Haskell basses From: "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 16:25:15 -0500   Hey, Bud... I too have seen Haskells in Estey's. I am told that they are much softer than full-length 16's. The instrument I saw was not playing at the time, so I couldn't verify their quality at the time. Rick dutchorgan@svs.net -----Original Message----- From: Bud/burgie <budchris@earthlink.net> To: pipechat <pipechat@pipechat.org>; organchat <organchat@onelist.com> Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 3:03 PM Subject: Haskell basses     >I have some general questions about the use of Haskell basses: since >they are great height (if not width) savers, why aren't they generally >built today? Is it a matter of cost, or is building Haskell basses >becoming a lost art? > >It would seem that Haskell basses in small organs would be preferable to >having the bottom octave of an 8' Principal break to stopped flute >pipes, or an 8' string break to stopped quintadena pipes, etc.. They >would also allow for a 16' Principal where one might not otherwise be >possible. > >The standard texts say that a Haskell bass pipe on a Principal rank >produces a sound akin to a Violone ... is that really so far from the >Principal sound (or, voiced more quietly, a String sound) as to be >undesirable? > >The one Haskell rank I recall seeing (a 16' Choir Gamba on a non-playing >Hillgreen-Lane) had the Haskell tube on the OUTSIDE of the pipe, and was >held in place by heavy-duty spring clamps and hooks that hung the >Haskell tube from the upper rim of the inner pipe. It's been a long time >ago, but I seem to recall that there were felt (?) spacers to keep the >outside tube lined up. I remember wondering at the time how one would >tune the pipes ... they seemed to be pretty much set in place for time >and eternity. > >Cheers, > >Bud > > > > >"Pipe Up and Be Heard!" >PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics >HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org >List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org >Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Haskell basses From: "Douglas A. Campbell" <dougcampbell@juno.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 21:32:30 EST     On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:02:44 -0800 Bud/burgie <budchris@earthlink.net> writes: >I have some general questions about the use of Haskell basses: since >they are great height (if not width) savers, why aren't they generally >built today? Is it a matter of cost, or is building Haskell basses >becoming a lost art?   It was never a very popular method. Developed (or possibly "re-discovered") by Haskell, they were used quite frequently by Estey very successfully. They were patented, so other organ builders steered clear of them.   > >It would seem that Haskell basses in small organs would be preferable >to >having the bottom octave of an 8' Principal break to stopped flute >pipes, or an 8' string break to stopped quintadena pipes, etc.. They >would also allow for a 16' Principal where one might not otherwise be >possible. > This is certainly true, however, the cost of a Haskelled 16' pipe is more than the cost of a full length 16' pipe and often, the "stopped basses" were done as a cost savings as much as a compromise to height.   >The standard texts say that a Haskell bass pipe on a Principal rank >produces a sound akin to a Violone ... is that really so far from the >Principal sound (or, voiced more quietly, a String sound) as to be >undesirable? > Not at all, and this characterization may be a little more pronoiunced than the effect of the pipes ! If the pipe were built new as a Haskell = it would sound "in scale" with the octave above. If you take an EXISTING rank and simply Haskell the bottom octave - you have , in effect, reduced the scale of the lower octave by 12! Hense, a 40 Scale Principal (Diapason, if you will) extended down to 16' using a 40 scale 8' octave will result in a lower octave of 52 scale. While this is certainly much more of a Geigen Diapason than a Principal it doesn't really reach the point of being a String.   Perhaps one of the reasons that Haskelled pipe are called Stringy is because the Haskell effect also quickens the pipe speech noticeably.   One of the drawbacks to using Haskelled pipework on Residence Organs is the problem of wind pressure. While most Residence instruments tend to REDUCE pressure to accomodate the pipework in a relatively small room, the Haskell pipe actually needs a HIGHER pressure to work optimally.     Douglas A. Campbell Skaneateles, NY   ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]  
(back) Subject: Re: Haskell basses-more yet! From: GRSCoLVR@aol.com Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 23:41:06 EST   Hello Doug and list: I agree with everything that you have said Doug,,,,with this one possible exception. I wonder if the Estey company actually took into account the fact that the organ would eventually have to be worked on, meaning bottom boards dropped, and Haskelled pipes so as to get the chests up off the floor a bit further. I have worked on many that this seemed to be the case. Lots of room under, lots of head room,,,and Haskelled basses in all or almost all ranks. As I get older, I think more about these "access" situations. I participated in the removal of a player Estey organ from a large home at the tip of Long Island last year. The pipework was in the attic of the 3 story home,,,it spoke into the drawing room thru a tone chute. All pipes were Haskelled that were longer than 6 feet, cause thats just about all the head room that existed. It had all the earmarks of an original factory installation. I removed a 2/12 Estey from its original installation church this past summer. Although the chambers were plenty high to take a 16' open pipe, all the ranks, both wood and metal, were Haskelled in their low octave at least,,some even to TC. Interestingly enough neither the original specification for the organ,,or the original contract with the church and Estey makes mention of Haskelled basses. I intend to install this Estey as my residence organ,,,what a retirement project!!! Incidentally, the player Estey was on 3" and the church was on 4" I dont know whether or not that qualifies for "higher" pressure that you mentioned but surely both of those organs are a fine tribute to Mr. William E. Haskell.   Regards, --Roc