PipeChat Digest #1552 - Wednesday, August 9, 2000
 
Re: music binding (X-posted)
  by <p.wilson2@juno.com>
Free 3m Allen in NC
  by "Adrianne Schutt" <maybe@pipcom.com>
Re: old anthems from Australia (X-posted)
  by "Ed Brown" <edbroorg@webtv.net>
FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?!
  by <MUSCUR@aol.com>
Re: old anthems from Australia (X-posted)
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?!
  by "Alan Freed" <afreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Free 3m Allen in NC
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?!
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: Hammond and the FTC, was organs ? Piano ?
  by <JKVDP@aol.com>
ElectroVoice and e-org books
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
tempo for Sinfonia #29
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <concert_organist@hotmail.com>
Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?!
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: tempo for Sinfonia #29
  by <RMaryman@aol.com>
Re: tempo for Sinfonia #29
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <concert_organist@hotmail.com>
Re: tempo for Sinfonia #29
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?!
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Seeking statistics on the number of pipe organs build yearly world wide.
  by <Gamelpt@aol.com>
Re: Free 3m Allen in NC
  by "j nathan" <jnatpat@sunsix.infi.net>
Re: Free 3m Allen in NC
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: tempos and early organ substitutes!
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
 


(back) Subject: Re: music binding (X-posted) From: <p.wilson2@juno.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 01:25:19 -0700       On Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:25:37 -0700 quilisma@socal.rr.com writes: > At one time, I used to send all my new organ and choir music directly > to > Gamble Hinged Music in Chicago to be sewn and bound ... those cloth > tapes were INDESTRUCTIBLE. Sadly, they've stopped doing it, though I > think you can still buy the tape.   **snip** > Any ideas, suggestions, etc. would be MOST appreciated ... we've got > TONS of stuff now that needs to be put in covers and protected, and > I don't know the best way to tackle it. > > I have three requirements: > > It MUST lie flat, it MUST be durable, and it needs to be something > volunteers can do. > > Cheers, > Bud,   You can purchase binders with tape already sewn in from Bro-Dart Library Supplies, and Gaylord Bros. Library Supplies, to name but two. Haven't checked to see if a) either are on the WWW or b) if these items are listed in an on-line catalog. I'm pretty sure they're in the print catalogs, though.   I used to use these binders when I worked in a library, oh, a lifetime or two ago.   Shalom, Preston p.wilson2@juno.com    
(back) Subject: Free 3m Allen in NC From: "Adrianne Schutt" <maybe@pipcom.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 08:18:51 -0400   Hot off the presses at http://barton.theatreorgans.com/selectedad.asp?ID=3D3898 by way of EORG-L, = a respectable way for anyone's spouse to qualify for sainthood. ;)   Have fun! Ad ;->    
(back) Subject: Re: old anthems from Australia (X-posted) From: "Ed Brown" <edbroorg@webtv.net> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:12:56 -0400 (EDT)   How much $$ should I send you to send me about 10 anthem copies. I grew up with Simper anthems ( in Jamaica) and several of the others I am familiar with Ed    
(back) Subject: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?! From: <MUSCUR@aol.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 12:07:24 EDT   > an electronic organ was developed in 1897?????   Well, maybe even earlier . . .   In 1730 a preacher at Znain in Moravia, named Procopius Diviss (or = Divisch, constructed a keyboard instrument in which there were 790 strings, and 130 =   changes of registration. He also added a means for giving the performer = an electric shock. No doubt he thought that some stimulus was necessary to enable the player to control this Denis D'or, as he names it!   Note: from The Piano Forte, Cambridge U. Press, 1933, Rosamond E. M. Harding, Original copy in Oberlin library, Da Capo Press ed., ISBN 0 306 71084 6   ---- The flippant reference here to the electrical component obscures the fact there are some researchers, including instrument collector friends in = Prague and Vienna, who claim this instrument involved electrical tone production. = It may have been even more interesting for incorporating some sort of an early form of electrical storage. The inventor brought it to Vienna where = it was played in public and written about in the local press - the surviving articles provide most of the information used by subsequent researchers. Alas, all that remains are poster-like announcements from the exhibition - =   for the instrument has disappeared.   Dennis James Musica Curiosa   "There is still some demand for novelties in the world of classical music, =   but the emphasis is less on new works than on forgotten tidbits from the past. For the curious or press-conscious performing organization, there = is nothing so appealing as a modern premiere of an unknown work attached to a =   well-known name." The New Yorker  
(back) Subject: Re: old anthems from Australia (X-posted) From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 10:04:22 -0700   It was the next message ... grin ... I have to get to the Post Office and see what the cheapest way is.   Cheers,   Bud   Ed Brown wrote:   > How much $$ should I send you to send me about 10 anthem copies. I > grew up with Simper anthems ( in Jamaica) and several of the others I > am familiar with > Ed > > "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: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?! From: "Alan Freed" <afreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:26:35 -0400   That's even more than the Wanamaker's instrument, isn't it?   Alan   > From: MUSCUR@aol.com > Subject: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?! > > In 1730 a preacher at Znain in Moravia, named Procopius Diviss (or = Divisch, > constructed a keyboard instrument in which there were 790 strings    
(back) Subject: Re: Free 3m Allen in NC From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 12:09:54   At 08:18 AM 8/8/2000 -0400, you wrote: > Hot off the presses at=20 >http://barton.theatreorgans.com/selectedad.asp?ID=3D3898 by way of EORG-L,= a=20 >respectable way for anyone's spouse to qualify for sainthood. ;)<snip>   Already on it! My favorite type of console (tongue tabs on side jambs, =E1 la John Hays Hammond Museum, but, alas, tube generators. Lotsa space above the Swell for your basic rocker tabs for couplers galore. A PURRRRFECT candidate for digitization!   dB  
(back) Subject: Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?! From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:12:37   At 01:26 PM 8/8/2000 -0400, you wrote: >That's even more than the Wanamaker's instrument, isn't it?<snip>   BARELY! Wanamaker's not only has the distinction of being the world's second largest, but also the "stringiest", bar none!   dB  
(back) Subject: Re: Hammond and the FTC, was organs ? Piano ? From: <JKVDP@aol.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:36:04 EDT   In a message dated 00-08-07 13:58:49 EDT, Bob writes   > "electrostatic" (Compton, Everett and Wurlitzer Orgatron, Trautrium, Electro-Voice),   Can anyone relate the Electrovoice story? I remember them coming out with =   big ads in organ magazines in the 1960s...then they were gone.   Bob - Have you ever considered writing a book on the history of pipeless organs? It seems there is a need for a well researched volume which could also memorialize those whose work contributed to where technology has = brought us today. Jerry in Seattle  
(back) Subject: ElectroVoice and e-org books From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:20:18   At 04:36 PM 8/8/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Can anyone relate the Electrovoice story? I remember them coming out = with >big ads in organ magazines in the 1960s...then they were gone.<snip>   The E-V electrostatics were a flash in the pan, indeed. I'm sure there = are still folks around who were at E-V at the time who could tell some of what happened, but no one has tapped their memories...yet. E-V, owned by = Gulton Industries at the time, seldem made forays out of their core business of loudspeaker components and microphones, and this was certainly a diverging track for them! The E-Vs themselves are as rare as any knowledge about them, although supposedly a 3 manual D-30 showed up at the Hedman auction in Indiana last year, and got no takers. I assume it went to become landfill food.   From what little I've been able to gather on these, they used a rotating disk electrostatic system similar to what the Compton Melotone used. I have only talked at length with one other organist that ever played one, and, although steady-state tonal fidelity was good, it suffered from the same intonation problems that the original Hammond and other = "free-running" e-orgs had. The few that have worked on them said they were loaded with reliability problems. I'm quite sure, however, that thier audio systems were quite good, however, probably containing the best that E-V had to offer at the time, including their famous 30" woofer, used in the Rodgers pedal cabinets for years.   Whither Electro-Voice? Corporate politics and "vision", I'm sure. The core business at E-V in loudspeaker components was pretty competitive, = with Jensen competing on price on the lower end and lofty names such as Altec and James B. Lansing competing for technical merit on the high. E-V was also never able to catch up in sales with dynamic microphone leader Shure, either, whose designs are still the industry standard. There's no doubt that the R&D costs for the organ project were high. Some non-musical executive probably saw the red ink dripping from the project's balance sheets, and unceremoniously axed it. One must remember that, in these times, companies were "vertically integrated", sticking pretty close to their core businesses without much diversification. This, of course, was changing rapidly, with sewing machine maker Singer getting into military electronics and test equipment, but by and large, companies stuck to what they did best...a philosophy that's now been proven right after the disasterous "comglomeration" era of the late '60s lasting into the '90s. The E-V organ does indeed make an attractive case for study!   >Bob - Have you ever considered writing a book on the history of pipeless >organs? It seems there is a need for a well researched volume which could =   >also memorialize those whose work contributed to where technology has brought >us today.<snip>   It has been done by various authors in the past, but nothing recently, and certainly nothing that is technically up-to-date. Back in the early days of e-orgs, companies were fairly happy to share limited amounts of their technological knowledge to authors and the like, and some technologies = were indeed shared by many builders. For example, Bob Eby's Artisan line of = kit organs were basically Conns in a different physical form (and quite good = in their day, I might add!) However, in this day of digitorgs, technical knowledge seems to be jealously guarded against electronic hobbyists and "tinkerers", and I don't think much of what is out there would be freely handed over as fodder for a "what it is, how it works" book. Also, the average layman's interest in matter electronic has waned considerably, due mostly to the etherial engineering of VLSI and later technologies. The days are well over when a guy could go down to his local ham shack, buy some tubes, sockets, caps and resistors, design and build something, and have a good understanding of how it worked. Also, increasingly, the physical topography of modern digital devices defies human intervention...ever try to replace surface mounted components on a PC's motherboard? Forget it. But, I digress....   There are signs that the digitorg technology front is being publicized to an ever-greater degree, and that's a possible source for an interesting, = if not "best selling", technical book. Numerous "'puter geeks" are building home organs out of sequencers, sythesizers and MIDI hardware. Getting the right samples is also getting easier. Who knows? Maybe the time has come for a "You, too, can build a 4 manual, 150 rank organ for YOUR house!" = book!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: tempo for Sinfonia #29 From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <concert_organist@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:42:17 -0400   I'm cross-posting because I want feedback from as many organists as = possible who play this piece. If you've read this on one list already, hit "delete" now. I use the Dupr=E9 version of this (Volume XII, Bornemann ed.). The = tempo says 92, but I play it at 98 to 100, which is the same speed Diane Bish plays it. I'm interested in knowing how fast (or slow) the rest of you = play it at.   Carlo  
(back) Subject: Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?! From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:42:21 +0800   This discussion and the claims being made by some of you gentlemen are = reaching the point of absurdity. We had DB giving us 1879 as the date that some = crank made an electronic organ which occupied two floors of a building and = generated tone with an whole heap of alternators. and now we are given a date of = 1730.   This is impossible since the alternator was not developed until 1885 by = Gibbs in the UK and Stanley in the USA. As for audio amplifiers, a necessary part = of an electronic instrument, they did not come until well into the 20th Century. = O yes of course it was played through the telephone? That made it an organ??   Is this a big leg-pull? Or are you guys rewriting history? I am not = surprised this instrumenmt could not be found later. Bob Elms.   PS in 1730 that electric shock would have had to come from some fiendish = device using static electricity since no other form had been generated at that = time. As for the reference that it could be an early form of electronic organ, that = is absurd. The means for generation of tones by alternating electrical = current did not exist and neither did any form of audio amplifier.     MUSCUR@aol.com wrote:   > > an electronic organ was developed in 1897????? > > Well, maybe even earlier . . . > > In 1730 a preacher at Znain in Moravia, named Procopius Diviss (or = Divisch, > constructed a keyboard instrument in which there were 790 strings, and = 130 > changes of registration. He also added a means for giving the performer = an > electric shock. > ---- > The flippant reference here to the electrical component obscures the = fact > there are some researchers, including instrument collector friends in = Prague > and Vienna, who claim this instrument involved electrical tone = production. > It may have been even more interesting for incorporating some sort of an > early form of electrical storage.    
(back) Subject: Re: tempo for Sinfonia #29 From: <RMaryman@aol.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 21:09:16 EDT   In a message dated 00-08-08 19:44:39 EDT, you write:   << I use the Dupr=E9 version of this (Volume XII, Bornemann ed.). The = tempo says 92, but I play it at 98 to 100, which is the same speed Diane Bish plays it. I'm interested in knowing how fast (or slow) the rest of you = play it at. Carlo >>   I play this piece frequently and the tempo varies depending on the place = in which it is played. At my church which is long and narrow and almost = totally non-reverberant, My tempo tends to push around 98 (quarter-note) beats to = the minute, which is pretty brisk pace even in a dry room...when I am in a big =   reverberant space, the tempo comes down (sometimes waaay down) so that = there is always a good feel of the rhythmic "pulse". maybe around 85 beats to = the minute. but this is only in a BIG reverberant acoustic (say 4 seconds or = more of reverberation). Musicality is ALWAYS the determiner for tempo and registration (and note that I am very orchestraly oriented in my registration of most pieces ala VIrgil Fox.)   hope this helps   Rick Maryman Staunton VA  
(back) Subject: Re: tempo for Sinfonia #29 From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <concert_organist@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 21:21:34 -0400   thanks Rick. I too slow down pieces in churches with lots of reverb, if = not, it tends to sound like pots and pans being tossed around.   Carlo (long live Virgil!!!) hehe!!!  
(back) Subject: Re: tempo for Sinfonia #29 From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:06:27   At 07:42 PM 8/8/2000 -0400, you wrote: >I use the Dupr=E9 version of this (Volume XII, Bornemann ed.). The tempo >says 92, but I play it at 98 to 100, which is the same speed Diane Bish >plays it.<snip>   She does tend to be a speed demon at times. I play this around 90; any faster and the piece seems to lose a little dignity. The same can be said for the high-mileage Widor Fifth Toccata, which the composer penned at 120, but which many take at 240,000 or better! One fault I had was that once I'd technically master fingering, pedalling and memorization of anything, the old "familiarity breed contempt" fault would appear...and tempii would invariably creep upward. After hearing a number of recitalists of note in my time (including Her Bishness), I've come to the conclusion that I'm not the only one with this habit! Now that I'm no longer a kid, and realize that one doesn't have to play faster than the organ's action can handle to impress, I like to enjoy listening to what I play more, and this generally puts the tempo back where it belonged in the first place.   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: FIrst electric organ - how about . . . 1730?! From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 19:52:11   At 08:42 AM 8/9/2000 +0800, Bob Elms wrote in incredulity: >This discussion and the claims being made by some of you gentlemen are reaching >the point of absurdity. We had DB giving us 1879<snip>   Wrong...first patented in 1897, further patents on improvements as late as 1919. I'm NOT joking!   >This is impossible since the alternator was not developed until 1885 by Gibbs in >the UK and Stanley in the USA.<snip>   So? 1897 comes after 1885, as far as I know. Also, there was work on permanent magnet generators far earlier than 1885. Also, I believe you mean Stanford, not Stanley. A self-exiting AC alternator is many times referred to as a "Stanford Alternator", in his honor.   >As for audio amplifiers, a necessary part of an >electronic instrument, they did not come until well into the 20th = Century. O yes >of course it was played through the telephone? That made it an = organ??<snip>   I'm just relating the history of what became the Hammond Organ, no doubt the most successful "pipeless" organ built to date. Contemporaries of Cahill indeed called the tone his monstrous instrument as "organ-like", what with its sostenuto tonality and steady-state harmonic content. Subscibers had the choice of "listening in" via a telephone receiver or = one rigged with that all-purpose acoustical "amplifier", the horn. Don't = think for a second that "amplifiers" need vacuum tubes to work. Several electromechanical and electroacoustic "amplifiers", known then as "repeaters" after telegraph terminology, were patented by A.G. Bell = himself and others, including Robert Hope-Jones, long before the DeForest Audion became a "valve", or "tube", or whathaveyou. Interestingly, the Bell System and AT&T continued to call line amplifiers "repeaters" right up until the end of analog carrier technology in around 1990.   >Is this a big leg-pull? Or are you guys rewriting history? I am not = surprised >this instrumenmt could not be found later.<snip>   I thought the Brits were the only ones that did that...such as, Montgomery's supposed contribution to defeating the Axis, where he was in reality more of a hinderance than anything else. <OOOOH! Ouch! THAT'S gonna leave a mark!>   The Cahill patents are still on file, as is everything else patents in the US were ever filed on, in Washington, DC. Several photographs of Cahill's Telharmonium are also extant, the earliest I've seen being taken in 1904. Three of these were recently included in a softback book published by Keyboard Magazine, entited "The Beauty In The "B"", by a somewhat = misguided Mark Vail. He was indeed spot on about the lineage the Hammond Organ had with the Telharmonium, however. After the Telharmonium, the next big advance that was commercially successful came in England with the Compton Melotone. Hammond cautiously waited until the original Cahill patents expired before marketing his Model A, although that delay was also caused by the difficulty in raising capital during the Great Depression. It should be noted that Hammond's first prototype was built in 1933, and was the patent and research model.   Model A production serial #1, which spent its early life from 1935 to 1938 as a demonstrator, was sold to a Methodist church in Kansas City, where it did yeoman service for many years. It still survives in the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, DC, and is still playable.   Now, then! As for this "shocking" developement of 1730, I have not a = clue! Perhaps theater organ artiste extraordinaire James would fancy forwarding a little more about this!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Seeking statistics on the number of pipe organs build yearly world wide. From: <Gamelpt@aol.com> Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 00:38:16 EDT   Dear List(s): Could someone please inform me (privately) as to how many pipe organs were =   built in 1999, 98, 97, 96 and 95 world wide? Alternatively, if there is = web site which this information is available kindly direct me to it. So far APOBA has not answered my request for this same information for U.S. made pipe organs. Thank you, J. Gamel  
(back) Subject: Re: Free 3m Allen in NC From: "j nathan" <jnatpat@sunsix.infi.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 23:48:53 -0500   Adrianne Schutt wrote: > > Hot off the presses at > http://barton.theatreorgans.com/selectedad.asp?ID=3D3898 by way of = EORG-L, a > respectable way for anyone's spouse to qualify for sainthood. ;) > > Have fun! > Ad ;-> >   Hi list...what can any of you tell me about this model? This is only 6 hours away from me, and would make the trip in a second if it is worth the time...pvt replys are fine, if not listworthy. Thanks a lot.... J Nathan Patton Paducah, Kentucky  
(back) Subject: Re: Free 3m Allen in NC From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 22:32:27   At 11:48 PM 8/8/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Hi list...what can any of you tell me about this model?<snip>   This is a custom built 1957 Allen, using the 12AU7/12AU6 tube generators, has a large separate generator rack and separate cabinets for the Reisner (urp!) combination action. This is NOT an organ for non-technical types, as it is hardly what you'd call "plug-'n-play". Having a good transconductance reading tube tester is as much necessary accessory as = good organ shoes here. A side benefit would be the ability to heat one's domecile with the tube waste heat!   I love the thing! It's one of Allen's forays into custom building that they were indeed noted for, and I'm quite sure, just from the descriptions I've gotten from the owner, it sounds nothing like the "off-the-shelf" Allen models of the period. I gotta enlarge my "organ chamber"....   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: tempos and early organ substitutes! From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 02:19:17 EDT   desertbob@rglobal.net writes:   << Now that I'm no longer a kid, and realize that one doesn't have to play faster than the organ's action can handle = to impress, I like to enjoy listening to what I play more, and this = generally puts the tempo back where it belonged in the first place. >>   Dear Desert Bob:   I couldn't agree with you more. Many play too fast to impress, and I don't =   enjoy listening to it. The musicology sufferes too. There is a point of no = return, and I like to listen to seasoned players who don't push music into insane = tempos. It is music after all and not a one upmanship contest. I guess we need to grow up to discern that. Music is pushed out of shape by making it a contest to = see how fast it can be played.   I've enjoyed your history lessons about early organ substitutes. = Technology has come a long, long way since 1920, but your analysis of it's development is =   truly fascinating. Thanks.   Sincerely,   Ron Severin