PipeChat Digest #827 - Tuesday, May 4, 1999
 
Re: anyone out there???
  by "Jason McGuire" <jason@johannus-norcal.com>
Re: The organ: King of Instruments...
  by "N Brown" <Innkawgneeto@webtv.net>
64' in Washington
  by <KurtvonS@aol.com>
Re: when is a pipe organ not a pipe organ
  by "Jason McGuire" <jason@johannus-norcal.com>
Re: Edward Elgar...
  by "domenico severin" <dseverin@club-internet.fr>
Re: Thalben-Ball's Pagan. Vrtns.
  by "Richard Scott-Copeland" <organist@hantslife.co.uk>
Re: trompettes en chamade....
  by "domenico severin" <dseverin@club-internet.fr>
Re: Fw: Thalben-Ball's Pagan. Vrtns.
  by "Richard Scott-Copeland" <organist@hantslife.co.uk>
32's
  by "Bud/burgie" <budchris@earthlink.net>
my point, for those who missed it (grin)
  by "Bud/burgie" <budchris@earthlink.net>
Re: Edward Elgar...
  by "Tom Baldwin" <tomba@pobox.com>
 


(back) Subject: Re: anyone out there??? From: "Jason McGuire" <jason@johannus-norcal.com> Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 22:21:59 -0700   If you mean the the Episcopal National Cathedral, I don't believe it had one when I played it a few years ago, but ... it could have been added I suppose.   Jason ----------------------------------------------------- Pray for peace, brotherly love and good will towards all!   JOHANNUS of Northern California http://www.johannus-norcal.com   > I feel that I'm the only one here tonight. Has everyone >gone to bed early? Anyway, I heard (from a semi-reliable source) that the >National Cathedral in Washington has a 64' pedal stop. Does anyone know if >this is true? If it is true.....oh man! >  
(back) Subject: Re: The organ: King of Instruments... From: Innkawgneeto@webtv.net (N Brown) Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 01:30:44 -0400 (EDT)   Dear Mr. Winchester, thank you for this tidibit of info on Hope Jones diaphones. Which affirms my long held opinion that, everything in life should have a dual purpose.    
(back) Subject: 64' in Washington From: KurtvonS@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 01:35:15 EDT   Yes; the Cathedral Church of Sts. Peter and Paul had a partial 64 at the time the Sowerby Swell was installed. There was a thread about this a while back; maybe someone can reiterate what the situation is now.  
(back) Subject: Re: when is a pipe organ not a pipe organ From: "Jason McGuire" <jason@johannus-norcal.com> Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 22:34:33 -0700     <snip> one organ-builder said that a pipe organ with ANY digital augmentation (even >12 notes of a 32') was no pipe organ at all, and most of his peers >seemed to agree with him. > >My argument against such things is practical, rather than >esthetic/theoretical ... NO digital component whatsoever that is now or >will be on the face of this planet in the foreseeable future will last >as long as a well-made, simple tracker pipe organ. There's no point in >building an organ that will last for a couple of hundred years if the >stop action (or the 32' stop) is gonna fail in 25 (or even 50) years. >   For one, a simple tracker pipe organ would probably NOT have a real 32' stop on it anyway and, unless it was a fairly large specification, the money would be better spent on something else. I don't think most organs being built today are trackers and there are plenty of builders who don't build them or even like them. I know there are builders who feel every stop must be pipe or nothing at all. I agree with you, Bud, on the practical side of it. If a digital 32' stop only lasts 25-50 years and it has to be replaced (and I don't know myself how long it will last) it will still cost a whole only a fraction of what that 32' stop would have cost when the organ was new. To give the organ a very useful stop (a 32' flue or even reed) that it might not otherwise have is not some terrible thing and can be very effective. No, I don't sell digital augmentation so this is NOT an ad.   Jason ----------------------------------------------------- Pray for peace, brotherly love and good will towards all!   JOHANNUS of Northern California http://www.johannus-norcal.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Edward Elgar... From: domenico severin <dseverin@club-internet.fr> Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 08:37:55 +0200   I have a copy of Nimrod arranged for the organ by W.H. Harris Novello Editions Domenico  
(back) Subject: Re: Thalben-Ball's Pagan. Vrtns. From: "Richard Scott-Copeland" <organist@hantslife.co.uk> Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 08:45:38 +0100   >I see how handy this could be, but I like a big bang when "General Cancel" >is pressed, and when all of the couplers are drawn together at once!! > >Richard. >=========================================================     Agreed, in fact I remember an organ which had wind in the console to move the stops and the whole darn thing nearly fell over backwards when the GC was pressed - what a thump!!   Richard Scott-Copeland Southampton England    
(back) Subject: Re: trompettes en chamade.... From: domenico severin <dseverin@club-internet.fr> Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 08:41:16 +0200   There are examples of trompettes en chamade in Spain at the end of 1600. First in "chamade" is a short reed stop "Dulzainas" family. Domenico  
(back) Subject: Re: Fw: Thalben-Ball's Pagan. Vrtns. From: "Richard Scott-Copeland" <organist@hantslife.co.uk> Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 09:26:14 +0100   Good point Rick, about visually impaired organists. I say, on fear of being attacked by cyber tomatos, that I enjoyed playing on Rodgers consoles with their lighted stops. My only wish was that you could push the stop both for on and off, but that was just my opinion. --Neil   Yes, Neil, that is how the Compton system works - you push the stop for on and you push it again for off.   The electronic companies who build today have a sort of sprung loaded drawstop which you have to pull for on and push for off. They are rather clumsy, especially if you want to pull a group of stops by hand. I prefer the Compton system - it is very quick indeed.   Richard Scott-Copeland Southampton England         "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: 32's From: Bud/burgie <budchris@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 23:48:20 -0700       Jason McGuire wrote:   > (snip) > > > > For one, a simple tracker pipe organ would probably NOT have a real 32' stop > on it anyway and, unless it was a fairly large specification, the money > would be better spent on something else.   I wasn't speaking of the size of the spec, but rather the simplicity of the ACTION. The Beckerath in Cleveland has 60 stops across four manuals and pedals .... straightforward tracker action, no combination action.   > I don't think most organs being > built today are trackers   If you look at the yearly index of specs in the back of the December Diapason, I have the opposite impression. I suppose small electro-pneumatic builders might not bother to send in their specs.   > and there are plenty of builders who don't build > them or even like them.   Actually, of the major builders, I think EVERYBODY has at least experimented with them. There's even a Moller/Flentrop out there somewhere. As to liking them, well, retooling costs money, and I imagine the surviving old factory builders (Schantz, Wicks, Austin) aren't too interested in THAT.   > I know there are builders who feel every stop must > be pipe or nothing at all. I agree with you, Bud, on the practical side of > it. If a digital 32' stop only lasts 25-50 years and it has to be replaced > (and I don't know myself how long it will last) it will still cost a whole > only a fraction of what that 32' stop would have cost when the organ was > new.   The relative cost of the electronics aside, those big bass speakers last 10-15 years at MOST, depending on the climate and how much they're used.Cost ... hmmm .... maybe. There are some HUMONGOUS scale old 16' Open Woods out there that can be recycled as 32' Bourdons, at least down to G or F ... I've heard a few that had INDEPENDENT 16 and 10 2/3 Resultant pipes from G or F down to low C ... IF they're independent and properly voiced, they can be just as convincing as the real thing. The reason MOST Resultants don't work is that they're always borrowed from something else, rather than voiced and scaled to do the job of a Resultant.   > To give the organ a very useful stop (a 32' flue or even reed) that it > might not otherwise have is not some terrible thing and can be very > effective. No, I don't sell digital augmentation so this is NOT an ad.   And I don't sell pipe organs (grin). But the point is, a well-voiced independent 10 2/3' Quint Bass rank can do the same thing, speak faster, be more light on its feet, and doesn't cost any more than a 16' Bourdon (or a 16' Principal, if you're using an open 10 2/3 rank to make a resultant 32' Principal). And it's a real rank of pipes. I've even specified a stopped Quint Bass on a small one-manual organ in a room where the bass lacked "bloom" and adequate space to develop, something I learned from playing old Hook & Hastings organs that had a 10 2/3 PEDAL TO PEDAL (!) coupler.   Cheers,   Bud    
(back) Subject: my point, for those who missed it (grin) From: Bud/burgie <budchris@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 00:02:52 -0700   My original point, both with the post about console standardization and digital augmentation was to provoke a serious discussion of what does and doesn't make sense.   The BUILDERS, for the most part, are making the decisions about compass .... SHOULD they be?   I QUOTED what I thought was a rather dogmatic and provocative statement from a group of VERY highly respected organ-building houses ... among the participants were representatives of Brombaugh, Rosales, Fisk, Taylor and Boody, etc. I think the article was in the last Diapason.   Digital "housekeeping" hardware and software is a separate issue. I'm "agin" it, at least in small to moderate sized instruments, for the reasons I've stated several times. I am thinking of one builder who enjoyed a period of popularity a few years ago ... his electronic components were customized ... as they fail, the entire system has to be replaced, which amounts to replacing the stop and combination action, and, in the case of electric-action organs, the KEY action as well.   I have no particular axe to grind in either direction ... if I end up with a digital organ at St. Matthew's, it will be installed and voiced with the same care and attention to detail as a pipe organ. But if it's a pipe organ, it will be built on some kind of historical model (probably English romantic), and I'll accept the "limitations" that will impose.   Cheers,   Bud    
(back) Subject: Re: Edward Elgar... From: Tom Baldwin <tomba@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 09:08:09 +0200   Carlo Pietroniro asks: >who originally transcribed "Nimrod" from the "Enigma >Variations" for the organ? I play Diane's transcription, but are there >others? I'd like to know.   Don't know if it's the original transcription, but I play W.H.Harris's arrangement, pubished by Novello, copyright 1932, reference 15746. I paid two shillings and sixpence for it in 1952; 20 cents at today's exchange rate!!   Tom Baldwin