PipeChat Digest #668 - Saturday, January 23, 1999
 
Re: Growing church question....
  by "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com>
Re: Nyquil
  by <ROBIN88866@aol.com>
Re: Haskellizing bass pipes
  by "Jim H" <BALD1@prodigy.net>
Re: Growing church question....
  by <RSiegel920@aol.com>
Re: Growing church question....
  by "bruce cornely" <cremona84000@webtv.net>
Re: Haskellizing bass pipes
  by "bruce cornely" <cremona84000@webtv.net>
rebuild? replace?
  by "Bud/burgie" <budchris@earthlink.net>
Re: Growing church question....
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@stlnet.com>
Re: Nyquil
  by "Nicholas A Hall, Jr." <tremulants@juno.com>
Re: Haskellizing Pipes
  by "Jason D. Comet" <bombarde8@juno.com>
Re: Nyquil
  by <ROBIN88866@aol.com>
Re: Nyquil
  by "Ron Yost" <musik@tcsn.net>
Pipe organs and Log Cabins
  by "Jason D. Comet" <bombarde8@juno.com>
New Church-Old Organ
  by "Jason D. Comet" <bombarde8@juno.com>
Re: Haskell basses
  by "Jeff Stanway" <jstanway@mail.island.net>
Re: Haskell basses
  by "Antoni Scott" <ascott@epix.net>
 


(back) Subject: Re: Growing church question.... From: David Scribner <david@blackiris.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 06:59:28 -0600   Mark   Since you say that the builder, who is well respected, still services the instrument, he would be the first one I would talk to about it. The organ most liked could be revoiced to fill the new sancutary and after 25 years the builder might love to have the chance to give it an overhaul in the process of moving it. He also might make some suggestions on some tonal revisions and/or additions to bring the specification more in line with today's tonal ideas.   As far as your second idea, of converting it to E-P action to be able to enlarge it goes, all the pipework would have to be revoiced for new E-P chests and really in the process you would be getting a completely new organ. There are builders that do used electric slider chests that would be more compatable with the current voicing.   Your third idea to amplify it electronically in not a viable option.   I gather that you, based on what you have written, are finding limitations with the current organ. In talking with the builder of it you should bring these to his attention to see if some changes can be made to over come these limitations. If the builder isn't willing to work with you on this point then I, if I were in your shoes, would then consult with some other builders. But I would give the builder the first chance at this project.   Good Luck with this project and keep us informed on its progress.   David  
(back) Subject: Re: Nyquil From: ROBIN88866@aol.com Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:02:31 EST   In a message dated 99-01-22 23:11:52 EST, you write:   << Break a Hammond? Break a Hammond?? BREAK A HAMMOND??? >>   Impossible!   Robin  
(back) Subject: Re: Haskellizing bass pipes From: Jim H <BALD1@prodigy.net> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 08:28:04 -0600   bruce cornely wrote: > > >Greetings from snow covered Wisconsin: > Oh! Yea! rub it in... tub it in.... ;-) > > >There is a beautiful example of a 32' > > haskellized principal in the Aeolian Skinner > > organ in the Marcus Center of the Performing > > hey Bruce,   Do yuou think we could haskellize my Allen digital   Jim H > > "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: Growing church question.... From: RSiegel920@aol.com Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 10:12:07 EST   In a message dated 1/23/99 7:01:06 AM Central Standard Time, david@blackiris.com writes:   << There are builders that do used electric slider chests that would be more compatable with the current voicing. >> Is there a written/website source that explains the mechanism in this type of action? thanks R. J. Siegel  
(back) Subject: Re: Growing church question.... From: cremona84000@webtv.net (bruce cornely) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:38:15 -0500 (EST)   First of all. Twenty-five years is not old for a pipe organ. A quality built pipe organ, if cared for, will last for hundreds of years, EP, E or M.   Your best source of advice, I think, IS Roy Redman. He is honest and practical, creative and helpful.   You did not mention the size of the new building, but I play a 2/21 '82 Moller in a room that seats 750, and it's too loud, even when the room is full. And, for starters the instrument you have is more versatile that the one I play. I took the liberty of posting your specs from your website so everyone can see for reference. Granted, there are always other stops that would be nice to have. Part of being a creative musician is working with the instrument at your disposal. I would love to play an instrument like this regularly. =A0 Organ Specifications Roy Redman 1975=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Opus 10 Great:=A0 2 1/4"=A0 wind pressure 8' Principal (in facade) 8' Rohrflote 4' Octave 4' Koppelflote 2 2/3' Nasard 2' BlockFlote 1 3/5' Terz 1 1/3' Mixtur IV Tremulant=A0=A0=A0=A0 -----Swell:=A0 2" wind pressure 8' Gedackt 8' Gemshorn 4' Holzflote 2' Principal 1 1/3' Quinte 8' Shalmey Tremulant=A0=A0=A0 =A0 -----Pedal:=A0 2 3/4" wind pressure 16' Subbass 8' Bleigedackt 4' Choralbass 16' Fagotto   The basic difference between the organ above and the one I play is that you have a useful cornet on the Great, and I have a Trompette en Chamade which everyone hates because it's so loud. Our Swells are basically the same except that I have a Viole de Gambe and a Celeste, and you have a Gemshorn -- some days I'd rather have a Gemshorn, some days I wouldn't. I can always live without a celeste, and would trade it gladly for a cornet AND a Peterbilt-en-back!   I think you will find that when the organ is moved into a better acoustical environment this it's quality and volume will improve. Remember, it has nothing to do with being tracker or not. But it does have alot to do with whether it is installed in chambers.... BAD!!! I really see no reason to totally redesign the organ. Again, it may not be exactly what you want, but it is unique and unless it has serious problems should be left intact as designed. You may find in discussion with Roy Redman that while the organ is dismantled it would be possible to add a few desired stops -- another reed maybe, or (heaven forbit) a celeste ;-), without a huge additional expense. While the organ is dismantled, this is the perfect time to prepare for later additions. But, again, I see no reason to do anything drastic.   In many ways, changing to EP would be a waste of money that you could better use for additions to the present organ; not to mention you are creating an entirely new set of problems for the future: releathering EP chests down the road, combination action which will need work down the road, a detached console which brings it's own set of problems, where should it go, should it face the congration, have it's back to the congregation, side to the congregation, left side, right side, wheels...... believe me, you are much better off with the console attached to the case. Any problem you have can be solved with a couple of mirrors, and a person in the NAVE listening for balance (you can only be in one place at a time). My console is removed from the organ and is between the choir and the organ: balance is difficult, the organ is sluggish, vision is difficult and because of the location not easily remedied with mirrors. I believe you are far better off with your present instrument, even without additions. >providing plenty of room to add ranks as > needed and as money allows. remember.... all those new ranks and chests must be maintained and tuned down the road; perhaps funds would be better utilized to establish a "trust" of some sort to assure perpetual maintenance. Bigger is not always better, but it is always more expensive -- forever.   Never, never amply anything! It's horrible!! The beauty of a pipe organ is its acoustic speech. The beauty of the human voice is its acoustic speech. Both suffer greatly from amplification. It is simply a cheap fix and usually used to cover ineptness, whether human or architectural. > Many tears and hardships went into the > building of this instrument, and because of > that, I'm hesitant to do anything at all. This is a very, very important consideration and not only is important now, but if people's gifts are constantly discarded or redone, it causes others to wonder "why bother?" Redesigning of churches for liturgical renewal has taught this unfortunate lesson to many parishes.   In a nutshell, I would recommend simply removing and re-installing the instrument as is, unless you and Roy Redman and your committee can reasonably make preparations for future additions to the present organ. At least live with it for a few years before you decide to make changes. I think you will be very pleasantly surprsed.   Best of luck.   bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net    
(back) Subject: Re: Haskellizing bass pipes From: cremona84000@webtv.net (bruce cornely) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:42:06 -0500 (EST)   "Haskelize your Allen digital..."   well, that ONE way to put it! hehehee   bruce cornely cremona84000@webtv.net    
(back) Subject: rebuild? replace? From: Bud/burgie <budchris@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:19:48 -0800   (snip) > > My question is for those of you whom have gone through church growth, and > were employed there during building of new sanctuaries or expanding > existing ones. What do you recommend, regarding our situation. > > We are an old church, with a 2 manual, 21-rank, tracker pipe organ. The > organ is 25 years old and produces adequate volume for our present > Sanctuary. > > We are planning the building of a new Sanctuary. One of my current tasks is > to get a quote of the cost of dismantling the organ, moving it to the new > Sanctuary, and then re-assembling it. > > My concern is that the Tracker, as it is, will not produce ample volume for > the size of the new Sanctuary, even though, the new Sanctuary will have > livelier acoustics   > I have toyed with the idea of totally redesigning the organ, instead of > reassembling the organ as it is, to install the pipes into the architecture > (in Chambers) and going the Electro-pneumatic route, with a centralized > console. Thus, providing plenty of room to add ranks as needed and as > money allows. This would, in my heart, be disappointing to the organ > builder, who still services the instrument. But, is this an affordable > option?   Hi, Mark!   Congratulations! I'm going through a similar expansion right now, except our battle is whether to take our totally inadequate electronic with us to the new building, or allow space for a pipe organ. In fairness, we're going into an interim all-purpose building (worship space / parish hall), but I think we're gonna be there long enough that we're gonna want to do something about the organ.   Anyway, I've been an organ consultant since dinosaurs roamed the fertile plains, so here goes:   FIRST RULE OF ORGAN-BUILDING: the pipes stand within the four walls of the room in which they are to be heard, whether the action is tracker or electric, preferably elevated on the central axis of the church, front or back.   The ONLY possible exception is the Swell organ, which in some situations may tolerate a shallow chamber. If you look at the pictures of St. Sulpice in Paris, the Recit is recessed into the stone tower behind the existing 18th century organ case below ... there wasn't room for it in the case.   In other words, you should be allowing space for a free-standing, encased organ in the new church, no matter what the action.   On a practical level, electrocuting a tracker that was voiced to speak from a case and putting it into chambers is going to REDUCE the amount of sound, not increase it.   Electro-pneumatic pulldowns on slider chests are a makeshift, unless they're built that way originally, and usually fail within 25-50 years. I could show you countless organs that played reliably as trackers for over a hundred years, and then failed after a much shorter period of time, once they were electrocuted.   > Another option, is to redesign the tracker to where we can add a few more > ranks.   I'd have to see the stoplist, and know where you're planning on putting the organ in the new building ... sometimes it's possible to add a third manual (Swell or Positive) and move a few ranks around. Probably the biggest problem would be enlarging the Pedal. Your major expense (comparatively) comes when you start re-engineering existing work, as opposed to adding a completely new division.   > Thirdly, to reassemble it as is, and amplify it electronically (mics, etc.).   That was Barnes' fantasy in "The Contemporary American Organ" ... it has NEVER, I repeat NEVER been done successfully. They tried it on the big Skinner at Severance Hall in Cleveland when the new stage shell blocked the organ case across the back of the original stage ... the organ immediately fell into disuse; now, after fifty years, they're tearing the shell down, removing the mikes and amps, and allowing the organ to play as it was originally intended.   > What I definitely do not want to do, is lose the inherent value of the   > organ, it's meaning and significance to our congregation. Many tears and > hardships went into the building of this instrument, and because of that, > I'm hesitant to do anything at all.   Then by all means pursue rebuilding and adding to it. Roy Redman is an extremely competent organ-builder. Trust his judgment.   Here's an old rule of thumb: 200 seats, 20 ranks; 300 seats, 30 ranks, and so forth. That's pretty generous, and as the seating goes up further, you don't have to add as many ranks, since there's an upward limit as to what's needed in the basic choruses.   > I've built a site on the History of our organs. If you're interested in the > complete history, go here > http://www.angelfire.com/tx/FUMCMusicOrgan/index.html > If you're just interested in our current Redman organ, go here > http://www.angelfire.com/tx/FUMCMusicOrgan/organ1.html > > Respectfully, and really needing some friendly advice.... > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Mark Reeves, Director of Music, Organist > First United Methodist Church > Canton, Texas > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > http://netministries.org/see/churches/ch02328 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > OK, I went and looked at the spec ... DUH! Haven't had my second pot of coffee > this morning. As I see it, the organ needs the following:   Great: 16' Bourdon or 16' Principal, 8' Trumpet   Swell (if left as a Brustwerk division): Sharp Mixture (it would be nice to have a celeste rank to go with the Gemshorn, but I doubt if there's room, even on a jump-slider) or, you might want to swap the Gemshorn for a 4' Principal to give the Swell more weight.   Pedal: 16' Principal, 8' Principal, Mixture, 8' Trumpet ... I would change the 8' Pedal Gedeckt to a stopped 10 2/3 rank ... as long as you have the 8' Principal, you can couple from the manuals if you need a softer 8' stop, and a 10 2/3' goes a LONG way toward giving the weight of sound you'd need in a larger building.   It IS possible to duplex stops in tracker organs ... it might be possible, by adding a duplex chest, to have a 16' Principal and an 8' Trumpet play on both the Great and the Pedal.   It looks to me as if the organ was almost designed for the addition of a   Positive (Great pitched at 8', Swell at 2'). Even if you're not going to have a balcony installation, it IS possible to set the Positive on the same level as the main case ... less desirable, but the Beckerath at Yale stands on the main floor with the Positive behind the organist. Minimum spec would be:   8' Gedeckt 4' Principal (or 4' Flute, if you exchange the Swell Gemshorn for a 4' Principal) 2 2/3' Sesquialtera (narrow-scale ... you've already got the wide-scale Cornet on the Great) 2' Octave Mixture Reed (I'd be tempted to make it a 16' Dulcian to add "gravitas" to the ensemble ... you can always play it up an octave as a solo stop; otherwise an 8' Krumhorn, or maybe something more esoteric, like a Schnitger Vox Humana) Tremulant   Remember, too, that Roy may be able to do some revoicing or rescaling of   existing pipework. You've got a good organ ... work with it.   If you added the third manual, you MIGHT want to consider electrocuting the STOP action and adding a combination action ... electro-pneumatic slider motors are more reliable than electro-pneumatic pallet pull-downs. Depends on what kind of service you play ... if you have time to change stops manually between musical items, then spend your money on pipes, rather than pistons; I play an old-fashioned Anglo-Catholic High Mass where the musical items come virtually non-stop for two-thirds of the service ... I couldn't DO it without pistons.   Of course, it is always possible to offer the present organ for sale and get a larger tracker from Organ Clearing House ... there are some spectacular three-manual Hook & Hastings organs on the block right now. Check out their website:   http://www.tneorg.com/och/   Any further questions, be glad to help.   Cheers,   Bud Clark St. Matthew's-in-the-Shopping-Center (but not for long!) Newport Beach CA USA          
(back) Subject: Re: Growing church question.... From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@stlnet.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:25:35 -0600   Thank you Bruce Cornely for some very wise and clear advice. Much of the time the trouble is that people fail to recognize the virtues of the instruments they possess, and a well-meaning desire for something better often leads to something worse. With instruments like this it is often quite a simple job to clamp on additional stops to the chests. In your case it looks as if the largest stop your swellbox would accommodate would be of 4' speaking length, so if you were to add a Viola da Gamba it would probably have to be a tenor C stop with the bass grooved from the Gedeckt. In many cases, though it would be possible to add a Viola da Gamba (grooved bass) and a Voix C=E9leste (T.C.). You might also like to consider clamping on an 8' Trompete to the Great -- useable as both a solo and chorus reed, and much more generally useful than an en chamade. A Trompete might also make the organ a little beefier if you are worried about it being big enough for the new building. All these are only suggestions, and as Bruce says your best plan would be first to discuss such changes with Roy Redman since he would be the best judge of what would be practicable for your instrument.   John.  
(back) Subject: Re: Nyquil From: "Nicholas A Hall, Jr." <tremulants@juno.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 15:14:51 -0700   On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:02:31 EST ROBIN88866@aol.com writes:   > BREAK A HAMMOND??? >> > >Impossible! > >Robin   OH? As an ex-owner/player of a B3 through two Leslie 900s, I can tell you that you CAN break a Hammond. Just try laying one on its back and transporting it for 300 miles - like some doofus did with mine! It took me two weeks to clean in out and get it running again.   ....Nick   Theatre, Baroque or Cathedral... The pipe organ is God's gift to His children ----- Tremulants@juno.com -----   ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Haskellizing Pipes From: "Jason D. Comet" <bombarde8@juno.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 04:34:34 -0500   I have quite an >adequate collection already!)   Tell us more!!!!   ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Nyquil From: ROBIN88866@aol.com Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 18:27:42 EST   In a message dated 99-01-23 17:21:30 EST, you write:   << Just try laying one on its back and transporting it for 300 miles - like some doofus did with mine! >>   Well, sorry that happened to you, really! Any person who transports old Hammonds should know that you NEVER lay it on it's back, side, or end. If it had been upright, it could have made a 3000 mile trip and operated beautifully for you at the other end!     Robin  
(back) Subject: Re: Nyquil From: Ron Yost <musik@tcsn.net> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 14:35:03 -0800   Providing someone took the precaution to lock the Tone Generator down. :-)   If they put it on it's back, they sure would have no idea about the above. Sounds like a classic case of 'failure to communicate' to me.   Ron ~ come-lately Hammond Addict ~ L-103, M-103, M2 & lookin' fer a console!   At 03:27 7:24 PM 1/23/99 , you wrote: >In a message dated 99-01-23 17:21:30 EST, you write: > ><< Just try laying one on its back and > transporting it for 300 miles - like some doofus did with mine! >> > >Well, sorry that happened to you, really! Any person who transports old >Hammonds should know that you NEVER lay it on it's back, side, or end. If it >had been upright, it could have made a 3000 mile trip and operated beautifully >for you at the other end!      
(back) Subject: Pipe organs and Log Cabins From: "Jason D. Comet" <bombarde8@juno.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 07:11:54 -0500   My dream is to own a log home with a pipe organ. The only questions I have are what type of action to use, and what should the case look like?   Action: I was thinking of an Exhaust-pneumatic key/relay action in the basement with tracker action running through a glass case with a picture of the house on it running through two stories to the case with the console on the Great Room floor. (stationary of-course)   Case Work: How about a log frame with twiigs between and woven in designs inbetween the logs?   ___________________________________________________________________ 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: New Church-Old Organ From: "Jason D. Comet" <bombarde8@juno.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 07:01:55 -0500   I have lived (and still do) with an insturment that was a beautiful, original C.E.Morey organ for Bethany UM Church in Watertown NY that has been butchered, battered, torn apart, and badly voiced, and not taken care of in a new church. The new building was abuilt 16 years ago, by a now-lost-licesned pastor instead of replacing the ceiling beam in the other building. The sanctuary had a 25' ceiling, a 75'X125' floor, and a reverb time of about 3.5 seconds, and a beautiful,oak hardwood flooring, with a smooth, solid plaster wall and a beautiful plaster ceiling with ornate plaster statuets in the chancel. This was all replaced with a santuary with a 16' ceiling, a 40'X75' floor, with carpeting up half the walls and the floor, with a sound absorbing drywall ceiling. The JERKS that decided to rebuild, thought the organ would be fine. The organ builder talked them out of it many times. The committee finally decided a rebuilt would do it. Their idea of a rebuild is taking it apart and puting it back to gather again. The organ builder is now retired, but charged the church about $12K for it to teach them a lesson. (personally know the guy) And now, the church is deciding to close for several important reasons. So, I am going to purchase the insturmetn (as soon as I get the new console from Roc--Hint,Hint!)   The organ is not at all in balance with the room. Let this be a lesson to all of you.   Jason Comet Junior in High School bombarde8@juno.com Begining Driver - Get off the streets! |\ Organist/Choir Director | | 2/13 C. E. Morey/Knapton/Raville organ O 7 member choir   ___________________________________________________________________ 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 From: jstanway@mail.island.net (Jeff Stanway) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 17:13:32 -0800     I would like to find out what Haskell basses are. So far as I have gathered, it is a way of shortening pipes. But my organ stop handbook is silent reguarding Haskell (or Haskelled) basses.   Thanks, Jeff Stanway    
(back) Subject: Re: Haskell basses From: Antoni Scott <ascott@epix.net> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 21:29:38 -0500   A Haskell Bass is a narrower pipe inside the wider pipe. They were popular with Estey Pipe organs. I had a 15 rank Estey in my home, all of the pipes on the windchest fit under my eight foot cieling. Haskell basses were usually reserved for the lower octave on the manual where they were played infrequently so the change in tone when you went from the regular pipe to the Haskell happened. My particular organ had a Dulciana and a Melodia of 8ft pitch that were Haskell Basses. The Open Diapason and the 16'Bourdon were of normal length and the bottom pipes were laid horizontally.   Although I was not thrilled with the Haskell Basses ( weak sounding) , they did work and did save space.     Antoni Scott   Jeff Stanway wrote: > > I would like to find out what Haskell basses are. So far as I have > gathered, it is a way of shortening pipes. But my organ stop handbook is > silent reguarding Haskell (or Haskelled) basses. > > Thanks, > Jeff Stanway > > "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