PipeChat Digest #1523 - Wednesday, July 19, 2000
 
two-octave reed organ
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Fw: Flentrops et al.
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: Fw: Flentrops et al.
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: In paradisum (attention RC organists) (X-posted)
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: "Approved"
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: Fw: Flentrops et al.
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: Two-Slice AGO Toaster wanted....
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
 


(back) Subject: two-octave reed organ From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:34:40 -0700   I graduated from one of those to an Estey "Children's Organ" ... little tiny foot-pumped thing ... at about age 4 or 5 ... my aunt had it ... have NO idea how she came by it ... from there to an Estey folding 2-stop one; thence to an 11-stop Estey reed organ of 1888; and finally to a 7-rank Estey tubular pneumatic "catalog" organ of 1907 ... the very first pipe organ I ever played ... Model "L"?   SWELL   Stopped Diapson 8' Salicional 8' Harmonic Flute 4' Tremulant   GREAT   Open Diapason 8' (facade) Dulciana 8' Octave 4' Sw/Gt 8-4   PEDAL   Bourdon 16' (formed the sides of the case) Sw/Ped 8 Gt/Ped 8   Originally hand-pumped ... the bellows signal and the tell-tale were still there. The Spencer cement mixer was activated by a large circular ceramic switch with a knob in the middle; it shook the whole Sunday School Annex when it came on.   Sadly it is no more. It was replaced by a totally inadequate 4-rank unit organ.   Cheers,   Bud    
(back) Subject: Re: Fw: Flentrops et al. From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:24:57   At 06:45 PM 7/18/2000 +0100, you wrote: >Although many would (including me, and don't start a debate the topic!) >frown upon changing registration during a BACH Prelude or Fugue (I say or >because he would have easily have been able to between the two), Cochereau >definitely does bring something else out of the music than one might >normally hear.<snip>   So did Fox, but just because it was he did VERRRRRRY strange things with Bach didn't make them artistically valid. He knew his audience, and it sure didn't consist of music scholars! Suffice it to say that his success with his audiences must be considered when discussing different "styles" of interpreting Bach. Some lean towards his piston pushing/swell flapping/c=E9l=E8ste coupling extravaganzas, others lean toward a more realistic approach. Is either 'right'? There can't be an answer.   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: Fw: Flentrops et al. From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:44:48   At 02:32 PM 7/18/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Virgil Fox' major contribution to organ music was, he made organ music=20 >enjoyable >to the average, and perhaps not so average Joe and Martha. He was so=20 >successful >Joe and Martha also made him extremely wealthy. He filled concert venues like=20 >no >other. The nay sayers are still poor! You go figure!<snip>   Commercial success doesn't always guarantee artistic merit. Witness what has passed for "popular music" since 1954. My view of Fox was that he was a gregarious technical wizard, with little in terms of tempered artistic sensibilities. I heard his in recital a couple of times; I was completely non-plussed by his "Osterizing" of Bach. He was at home on the late Romantics and Moderns. Most anything prior to that, Biggs got the nod from me. Interestingly, Biggs started out as a Romantic performer of some note.   This all changed after his European tours of the '50s, when he caught "TrackerMania". His 1962 Columbia release of French Romantic compositions on the St. George (NYC) M=F6ller was about his last effort at this type of music of any note, although he did do a so-so Saint-Seans with Bernstein, and a few other things. He probably knew, however, that Fox could outdo him in such repertoire (The '62 release exhibits Biggs' trademark "dryness" with Romantic literature), so stayed pretty much in the Baroque, where he seemed to do best. Fox, in turn, stayed out of serious recordings of Bach and contemporaries, and, for the most part, just "played the hits", running BVW 565 into the ground for all time.   DeserTBoB > >By the way, I love waffles for breakfast with plenty of syrup and butter. > >Ron Severin > >"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: In paradisum (attention RC organists) (X-posted) From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:48:18   At 04:00 PM 7/18/2000 -0700, you wrote: >Does anybody have a copy of this? I'm typesetting our funeral rites, and >I'd like to include it as an alternative.<snip>   I've got it...somewhere. It'll take me some time to go through the "old stacks", but I'm pretty sure it's still in there. The hunt commences....   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: "Approved" From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:52:43   At 06:42 PM 7/18/2000 -0500, you wrote: >I think if you want to stay a church organist, you had better play some >things pretty for the congregation once in a while. Most do not = understand >the technique required for the more difficult, "just notes" pieces, and >therefore do not appreciate what they are hearing.<snip>   ....or better yet, dispense with the church gigs altogether, and = recitalize! There's a "make it or break it" proposition for ya!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: Fw: Flentrops et al. From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:14:41   At 01:06 AM 7/19/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Although I'm an extreme purist, I consider Cochereau an innovative purist = in >his own right<snip>   BrEwSe demonstrates the definition of "oxymoron" for us. Very nicely = done, bReWsE!   ::::polite clapping::::   DeserTBoB    
(back) Subject: Re: Two-Slice AGO Toaster wanted.... From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:19:40   At 02:22 AM 7/19/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Holy cow! Do you really have one of those.<snip>   Indeed, I do, the one I originally got as a lil shaver, also!   >That's the first keyboard >instrument my little fingers touched. Unfortunately it was a victim of the >baroque revival and the little gold grille pipes came down. It sure = was >cute.<snip>   Hmmmmm...MOST interesting! I wonder how many of those Emenees started organ careers???   DeserTboB > >Bruce >. . . .in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles > Molly, Duncan, and Miles Cremona502@cs.com >HOWLING ACRES: http://ourworld.cs.com/Brucon502 > >"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 > > > >