PipeChat Digest #1621 - Tuesday, October 17, 2000
 
Pipes Spectacular Plea!
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: TEST
  by "George Lawn" <sandlawn@bayou.com>
Useful info for the PC Organ Project.
  by <MickBerg@aol.com>
Re: Service Playing
  by <stalan@ix.netcom.com>
Re: Service Playing
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
 


(back) Subject: Pipes Spectacular Plea! From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:34:59 EDT   Please, folks! This was such an important event, and an opportunity for all of us to = learn from shared experiences, PLEASE share the entire experience and POST THE = FULL PROGRAM!!!!   Thanks.   Bruce Cremona502@cs.com in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles visit the Cornely pack at Howling Acres: Ourworld.cs.com/Brucon502  
(back) Subject: Re: TEST From: "George Lawn" <sandlawn@bayou.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:16:55 -0700   jon... it worked...   Sand   "Jon C. Habermaas" wrote:   > Please excuse this posting....I checking to see if this will post this = way > > thanks, > > Jon > > "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: Useful info for the PC Organ Project. From: <MickBerg@aol.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:02:05 EDT   For those interested in the PC Organ Project.   Hello folks.   If you look at my homepage, you will find a link to a website that has software and instructions on how to use APS drivers and software with a SBLive card. You can then have two SBLive cards in your computer, one with =   SBLive software and one with APS software. Very useful for the PC Organ project. Add an AWE64 and you have eighty channels!!   http://hometown.aol.com/mickberg/myhomepage/profile.html   Mick Berg.  
(back) Subject: Re: Service Playing From: <stalan@ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 03:24:45 -0500   It is late, and I read via digest, but this I couldn't escape ---   > In the hopes of helping new organists, I will post a series > containing my observations and suggestions for liturgical > service playing. These observations are not intended to be > the "last word"; rather, they are my own opinion based on my > experiences. There are certainly other philosophies of organ > playing,   YES, there are! Note: "observations and suggestions"... Regardless of the monikers - service playing, concert playing - <one>, as a "new organist", is a musician (amateur or professional) who has come to discover the glory of the organ. One of these "glories" is the diversity of "opinion" regarding the instrument and <its> many uses.   The "observations and suggestions" of other musicians and use of their instruments <are> just as diverse, and speak of our "human" condition. String players, wind players, brass players, pianists, harpsichordists, percussionists, conductors, singers, guitar players (I think), kazoo players (not in order of importance, of course)... uh... get the idea?.. will forever debate the what <is> and <is not> regarding their "observations and suggestions". Myself, guilty as charged! What we all have is, passion, dedication, love and a "calling"... of sorts...   > but maybe someone can glean something of value from mine.   Our opinions and observations make up who WE are. I don't expect that everyone will share my views. Vive la difference! Yet, I'm having some trouble with this <service playing> lecture that seems, to me, very one sided. If <one> were to address new organists, be they "liturgical", "evangelical", "concert", self-serving, whatever; would it not be to the advantage of the organ and its many uses to not condemn those congregations who indeed do require an organist to "show off" not only their skills, but also the organ <they> as a congregation highly value?   > it is not a time to show-off   It would be, at an appropriate time. Consider that musicians such as Dupre, Vierne, Franck, Widor, Guilmant, Durufle (he and she), Messian, Cochereau, Latry (o.k. -- all of France)... Hancock, Neswick, Papadokos, Weaver, Swann, (amongst the many Americans), then the Germans, not to forget the British (again, not in any order of importance) perform and/or improvise various "gaudy flash" albeit music, either outside the "liturgy" or even within. For that matter, Sebastian Bach, who according to the criteria of the author of the post "service playing" certainly would not fit into the mold of their "observations and suggestions" and, one would assume, require <chastisement> for "playing too many notes" and doing all sorts of "strange" things to the chorales to be sung by the congregation. Then consider how DULL the ecclesiastical and concert repertoire of the organ would be if organists relegated themselves to "very quiet, meditative piece[s]" and composing such.   Such "organ" playing is defined as -   > "gaudy flash."   and musicians who practice same are lumped together and classified as -   > playing is not intended to serve as an aid to worship so much > as it is intended to showcase their technical dexterity at the > organ   Well, of course, there are organists playing in churches who would care less about worship, the congregation, or anything other than their own needs, there are also priests, ministers, pastors, et al, that fall into that same pit. Yet, there have been, are, and will be musicians who play the organ, "in church", possessing prodigious musical skills whose "gaudy flash" is in reality nothing more than a <simple> offering to God of the best they can give. One person's "proper" unadorned service playing is another's "boring" service playing. But then, "service playing" has everything to do with the congregation one is "service playing" for. Forgive my redundancy... but that is what "new organists" will encounter, aside from acquiring the necessary skills of organ playing, clergy maintenance, and... ;-)   > The purpose of music in the church is to serve as an aid to the > people in their worship of God.   So is the <sermon> by definition... yet, in my former life I served a congregation of 14,000 United Methodists, and Dr. Minister required that every element of "worship" revolve around "his" 35 minute megalomaniac presentation of the word. Service had to be an hour, t.v., radio and all those thrills. Didn't leave for much else, and the "Sacrament" when given lip service, was viewed as (and I quote) "serving refreshments." I always felt sorry for Wesley.   > What is done musically in the church is an offering to aid the > people in worship. The focus of the worship service is the Word > and Sacrament--not the organ. Those sentences pretty well sum up > my philosophy of music in the church.   Is not what comes from the organ music? If indeed the focus of worship is "Word and Sacrament" then <no> music is really required. No congregational singing, no choir, no organ, just the Word and Sacrament. So why the treatise on service playing? By the above definition, music need not be a part of "worship".   > I presently have the most prominent organist position > in this town.   I'm trying to understand this in light of the "servant" attitude presumed by the author of "service playing"...   > This was a very competitive position, and all the local > "performers" wanted it. Each applicant had an interview and > audition, at which you were asked to play an example of a prelude. > Then you would be given hymns to play and some choral music to > sight read. For my "prelude" I chose a very quiet, meditative > piece. Every other applicant had chosen a loud, flashy piece. > I was offered the position immediately.   Is this to say that the author was chosen for said position, by the congregation, by choice of literature? Seems so, and if that is what that congregation wanted, so be it; but the author should not use this to support personal opinion regarding "service playing" throughout Christendom. As to the "interview", some will go in to hit a home run, some will go in to bunt... and the "audience" will decide which is to their liking.   > Service playing is not a performance--   Yes, IMHO it is, in the most humble sense. And I'll not drag out the pontifical history book, the bible, to support same, yet it does reference performance being worship.   And then there's the tremulant... As the author picks over other bones, and I've done picked mine...   > In further installments, I will give more detailed > suggestions that the beginning organist may find helpful. > Next installment--Hymn Playing.   I would hope that this next "installment" would address and acknowledge the many and varied techniques in detail, without personal bias, and allow the "beginning organist" to explore and learn each, thus providing same with a complete toolbox, not just a hammer... or what have you.   Cheers!   Scott FUMC - Austin, Texas    
(back) Subject: Re: Service Playing From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:31:36   At 03:24 AM 10/17/2000 -0500, you wrote: >It is late, and I read via digest, but this I couldn't escape ---<snip> >Scott >FUMC - Austin, Texas<snip>   LOL! Glad you stayed up! I like it...I like it a lot!   DeserTBoB