PipeChat Digest #1433 - Friday, June 2, 2000
 
Re: Needing advice
  by "Cheryl C Hart" <info@copemanhart.co.uk>
Re: Needing advice
  by "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com>
RE: Needing advice
  by "Grandstaff, Larry P." <grandslp@smxcorp.com>
Re: Suggestions, please . . .
  by "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu>
Re: Needing advice
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: Suggestions, please . . .
  by "VINCENT S PARKS, III" <legacyhouston@pdq.net>
"Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks.
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: Suggestions, please . . .
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks.
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca>
The Next Few Weeks.
  by "Richard Pinel" <rpinelchat@musicman123.freeserve.co.uk>
Re: The Next Few Weeks.
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca>
Re: The Next Few Weeks.
  by <GRSCoLVR@aol.com>
Re: Needing advice
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks.
  by "Harvey DeGering" <chd@mcsi.net>
PipeChat on Internet Relay Chat tonight
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca>
Re: Suggestions, please . . .
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks.
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Fw: Suggestions, please . . .
  by "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net>
 


(back) Subject: Re: Needing advice From: "Cheryl C Hart" <info@copemanhart.co.uk> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 10:09:30 +0100   Eric,   You might wish to subscribe to eorg-l, where there is a terrifically knowledgeable group of electronic organ enthusiasts and technicians.   The website address is http://www.gulfcst.com/eorg-l   Kind regards,   Cheryl     Copeman Hart & Company Ltd England http://www.copemanhart.co.uk    
(back) Subject: Re: Needing advice From: "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 06:17:57 -0500   Eric   If I am not mistaken there is a web site and maybe even a "club" of sorts for owners of the Schrober organs. I noticed that Cheryl hart passed along the info for the EORG-L list, I am sure if you asked the question on that list someone could direct you to the web site. I seem to remember having seen the site but have no idea of what the address is.   Good Luck with it!   David  
(back) Subject: RE: Needing advice From: "Grandstaff, Larry P." <grandslp@smxcorp.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 08:21:58 -0400   Hi Eric,   Try Sonic Creations for electronic kit parts for your organ at http://www.primenet.com/~soniccr/index.html   And try Syndyne Corporation for the stops at http://www.syndyne.com/   Hope this helps. I have a number of kit organs manufactured by Artisan = and have had the same problem finding parts.   Regards, Larry Grandstaff     > I just subscribed to this list today and I am hoping someone will be > able to give me a little advice. A friend of mine at the church I play > for offered me their partially completed Schober organ. It was > apparently a "do it yourself kit" for an electronic organ. > Unfortunately, the company went out of business before they > could order > the stops and I am not sure how complete the instrument is in other > respects. I am not an expert in electronics and the instruction manual > had me baffled on page 1. What I am wondering is if anyone knows of > another company that makes parts that could work for this and how > expensive would it be to get it working. I would really make > use of this > organ if at all possible.  
(back) Subject: Re: Suggestions, please . . . From: "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 08:18:09 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: Dr. Darryl Miller <organdok@safari.net> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Cc: <PIPORG-L@listserv.albany.edu> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:27 PM Subject: Suggestions, please . . .     > Hi, Y'all! > > A non-list member friend e-mailed me today and asked the following question: > "If you were to commission an anthem, hymn arrangement, or psalm setting > for organ/brass/choir (possibly including treble choir), who would you ask?"   Dan Locklair.      
(back) Subject: Re: Needing advice From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:30:44 +0800   I agree. I played one about 30 years ago and it was terrible! Bob E.   quilisma@socal.rr.com wrote:   > I'd say "burn it", but the smoke would be toxic (grin). They were junk = when > Schober was still in business; they're CERTAINLY junk now. Sorry. Go on = the > Church Organ Trader or the Theatre Organ Classifieds and you can find = every > sort of used electronic organ imaginable, often at reasonable prices. = Find > yourself a Rodgers, or an Allen, or even an old Conn that's still = working, > and you'll be much happier. Even a HAMMOND would be better than one of = those > kit monstrosities. As I recall, just ONE of their bad features was that = they > wouldn't stay in tune. And the technology is SO out of date that I think > you'd be hard-pressed to round up even generic parts that would work. > > Cheers, > > Bud > > Eric Chaffey wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I just subscribed to this list today and I am hoping someone will be > > able to give me a little advice. A friend of mine at the church I play > > for offered me their partially completed Schober organ. It was > > apparently a "do it yourself kit" for an electronic organ. > > Unfortunately, the company went out of business before they could = order > > the stops and I am not sure how complete the instrument is in other > > respects. I am not an expert in electronics and the instruction manual > > had me baffled on page 1. What I am wondering is if anyone knows of > > another company that makes parts that could work for this and how > > expensive would it be to get it working. I would really make use of = this > > organ if at all possible. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Eric Chaffey > > > > "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 > > "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   -- ----------------------------------------------------- Click here for Free Video!! http://www.gohip.com/freevideo/      
(back) Subject: Re: Suggestions, please . . . From: "VINCENT S PARKS, III" <legacyhouston@pdq.net> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 11:04:45 -0500   Daryl,   3 years ago we commissioned an original hymn tune from K. Lee Scott for = the dedication of our new Worship Center. "Declare God's Glory" will be published (relatively soon I think) by Concordia. We are very happy with it. It has an optional brass quintet, percussion, organ fanfare at the beginning, then 5 stanzas (1 in 4 part for choir), soprano decant on the last stanza. Throughout it is for organ, brass, percussion, and optional handbells.   We invited Lee to conduct the premiere, which definitely added some excitement for both choir and congregation. He came in Friday, did a = choir clinic and polished up the piece on Saturday, and then conducted Sunday. = We also used his Joy to the Heart and Holy God We Praise Thy Name. They're also very good, and the Holy God is a bit more accessible for smaller choirs.   Vince Parks vparks@gdlc.org      
(back) Subject: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks. From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:13:23   At 10:07 PM 6/1/2000 CDT, Ray Ahrens wrote: >Perhaps there is a reason he remains unknown.<snip>   ....probably because he was around before your time...he wrote his seminal "Piano Tuning and Allied Arts" in 1917, of which there have been many reprintings. Most "working" tuners and technicians know this book well, and it is still in print, to my knowledge.   >In the section on Inharmonicity _he_ explains why tuners >don't necessarily tune pure octaves, something to do with how a piano is >strung.<snip>   There's a lot of this going on, most of it "junk science". Jorgensen, along with other "academics", has been trying for years to advance the theory that the harmonics of a piano string are "out of tune", due to the fact that the steel of the piano wire is under extreme tension, which somehow magically changes the nodal phenomena (after H.L.F. von Helmholtz) from which the string's harmonics are produced. Thus, they conclude, harmonics aren't true harmonics at all. I've done some cursory research = on their findings, and find them to be missing the point entirely, as do many academic hacks these days. As White and other classicists in the field of piano tuning have said, the pitch of the string, at the exact moment of being struck, is incrementally *higher* than it is while the string is simply vibrating with the damper released, due to the force of concussion of the hammer. The force of impact of the hammer's mass effectively tightens the string for the briefest of intervals, releasing it again as soon as it has imparted its kinetic energy to the string and retreats. There is a brief period of hysteresis between this inital tightening after the impact and an actual loosening of the string due to the elasticity of the steel. This settles down quickly as the transmitted kinetic energy of the hammer's blow is dissapated into the harp, leaving the resonating string with its train of true tempered harmonics.   Of course, during that almost instantaneous interval, the harmonic series issued by the string will match that of its struck frequency, not its normal resonating frequency. Again, when the string momentarily stretchs after being relieved of the hammer's blow, pitch actually drops, along = with all the harmonics, before finally settling down into equilibrium. This is heard as the "clang" of the string being struck, which is discordant a minute amount from the string's natural resonances and harmonics given thereof. The proof is had simply by use of the educated ear, or by use of test gear. Even the simple oscilloscope, fed from a low distortion microphonic transducer, will suffice, as will, most certainly, a Fast Fourier analyzer with critical bandwidth down to .01 Hz or so.   When a note on a triple-strung note is struck *una corda*, you can hear = the "clang" caused by the pitch rise of the hammer blow actually beat with the tone produced by the string after the force of the blow has been released. Sympathetic resonance of various parts of the piano, including adjacent strings, will reverberate this "clang" for a brief period. However, once things have settled down for awhile, one hears the string's true fundamental and its harmonic series, all harmonics being in tune with said fundamental. If such were not the case, one would surely witness a constantly changing waveform on the oscilloscope display, as the harmonics beat with the fundamental and each other. This is indeed the case early = on in the sounding of the note, due to the phenomena mentioned above, but it attenuates with time, leaving pure tone of fundamental and physically locked harmonics.   Thus, an inexperienced tuner, tuning to the initial "clang" the string produces rather than its sustained tone, will always tune "wide" octaves. Such has been the fruits of my research, anyway. Once a tuner is trained to listen to the sostenuto of the string, the mistuning problem goes away for the most part.   >Seems to be a rather well-known book too, no?<snip>   Unfortunately. There's a lot of goofiness in the musical world these days, what with "retro-temperaments", "untuned harmonics", et cetera, mostly being advanced by tenured academics looking for ways to fund projects to justify their existance to the deans and boards of regents. In this case, you'll note that Jorgensen offers no rational, scientific explanation that can be documented, even with the fine automated test gear available today, as to why von Helmholtz' original theories would not hold true in the piano, as they do for all other things resonant. My theory, backed with the most tenuous of electrical measurement and diagnoses, shows otherwise. Another proof of my theory is that White's original system of tuning to dissonant harmonics, such as the flatted twenty-first of the seventh harmonic, eliminates spread tuning. This wouldn't work if "harmonics were out of tune"....NO? Next, we'll probably hear from some academic hack = that harmonics from organ pipes are "out of tune", owing to the non linearity = of air! If that's true, then the Hammond Organ really IS the true pipe imitator, and our ears have been deceiving us since 1935!   Of course, as always, this is all based on my experience and research...I COULD be wrong! The Secretary will disawov any knowledge of my actions should I be captured.   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: Suggestions, please . . . From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:26:57 EDT   Darryl, I don't know where your friend is who want to commission music, but Sharon =   Scholl is in Jacksonville, Fl. I have some samples of her music if you = (or anyone) are interested.   Bruce .. . . .in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles Molly, Duncan, and Miles Cremona502@cs.com HOWLING ACRES: http://ourworld.cs.com/Brucon502  
(back) Subject: Re: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks. From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:39:29 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Scarborough <desertbob@rglobal.net> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 9:13 AM Subject: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks.>   > Unfortunately. There's a lot of goofiness in the musical world these days, > what with "retro-temperaments", "untuned harmonics", et cetera, mostly > being advanced by tenured academics looking for ways to fund projects to > justify their existance to the deans and boards of regents. In this = case, > you'll note that Jorgensen offers no rational, scientific explanation = that > can be documented, even with the fine automated test gear available = today, > as to why von Helmholtz' original theories would not hold true in the > piano, as they do for all other things resonant. My theory, backed with > the most tenuous of electrical measurement and diagnoses, shows = otherwise. > Another proof of my theory is that White's original system of tuning to > dissonant harmonics, such as the flatted twenty-first of the seventh > harmonic, eliminates spread tuning. This wouldn't work if "harmonics = were > out of tune"....NO? Next, we'll probably hear from some academic hack that > harmonics from organ pipes are "out of tune", owing to the non linearity of > air! If that's true, then the Hammond Organ really IS the true pipe > imitator, and our ears have been deceiving us since 1935!   I love it!   As a retired "academic hack" - who never published anything worthwhile in his life, - simply taught my classes and got away with it for fairly = lengthy career.   I know of what Desert Bob speaketh, - in that I have always found that the most published members of the academic fraternity, only manage to re-hash time after time their own uninformed thoughts, rather than the thoughts of the real world.   Research Grants, Deans, Boards of Regents not-withstanding, very little, = if anything at all, comes out of the tenet "Publish or be Damned", - and I support Desert Bob all the way, - even though I have never tuned a piano = in my life, and as far as organs are concerned. it they don't sound right, = then call in the guy that knows what he is doing, - I certainly would never retain the services of an academic!   I too can read a book, but that doesn't make me much of an expert!   Stay Tuned!   Bob ...    
(back) Subject: The Next Few Weeks. From: "Richard Pinel" <rpinelchat@musicman123.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 18:22:03 +0100   Dear List,   For the next few weeks, I will be taking my GCSE exams, which for those of you who don't know are national qualifications that all people my age (16) have to take and are the result of 2 years of supposed work. Therefore I = am signing off for the next few weeks, and I will see you then!!!   Richard.    
(back) Subject: Re: The Next Few Weeks. From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 13:30:35 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Pinel <rpinelchat@musicman123.freeserve.co.uk>       > Dear List, > > For the next few weeks, I will be taking my GCSE exams, which for those = of > you who don't know are national qualifications that all people my age = (16) > have to take and are the result of 2 years of supposed work. Therefore I am > signing off for the next few weeks, and I will see you then!!! > > Richard.   I wish you the very best of luck, and hope to see you back triumphant!   Bob Conway    
(back) Subject: Re: The Next Few Weeks. From: <GRSCoLVR@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 13:37:39 EDT   Hi Richard--- Best of luck to you on your exams.... ---Roc  
(back) Subject: Re: Needing advice From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 10:36:15   At 09:20 PM 6/1/2000 -0700, you wrote: >I just subscribed to this list today and I am hoping someone will be >able to give me a little advice. A friend of mine at the church I play >for offered me their partially completed Schober organ. It was >apparently a "do it yourself kit" for an electronic organ. >Unfortunately, the company went out of business before they could order >the stops and I am not sure how complete the instrument is in other >respects. I am not an expert in electronics and the instruction manual >had me baffled on page 1. What I am wondering is if anyone knows of >another company that makes parts that could work for this and how >expensive would it be to get it working. I would really make use of this >organ if at all possible.<snip>   Firstly, you're on the wrong list for this one...e-org-l is the place to = be for the Schober, as there are some Schober veterans on there. All is not lost! There is a Schober "orphan group" on the 'Net, with Schober owners and tweakers sharing tips and parts about these interesting and cost effective kit organs.   SCHOBER ORGAN (Schober organ parts, manuals and tech info) Schober Organ Notes Organ Notes Editor: Alex Kruedener, email: Kruedener@juno.com Organ Notes Printing: Bill Kohrumel, email: bk3@usmo.com Organ Notes via Email Jack D. Gildar, email: jdgildar@juno.com Schober Organ Orphans Email List click: http://www.mitatechs.com/schoberemail.html Schober Organ Orphans' Website Website: http://www.cloud9.net/~pastark/schober.html   The Schober, developed by Richard Dorf, was the cheaper alternative to the Artisan line of kit organs developed by Bob Eby in the 1950's. It used discrete transistor divider tone generators, somewhat similar to what Baldwin and others used. Artisan used individual oscillators, more like the earlier Conns, and was much more successful in terms of tonality. Dorf's "keyed sawtooth" system, thought by him to eliminate the "keyclick" problem with direct-keyed audio, was less successful than he thought...the problem still exists, but in a different form. The use of single top octave oscillators and dividers, locked in phase, also limits "ensemble" effect. Still, if you're an electronics tech, or at least handy with a soldering iron, the Schober can be a workable practice organ for the home and a fun experience...just don't expect too much from it! The "Recital" model was their top-of-the-line, a two manual with AGO pedalboard. I = built two for folks years ago, and as you'll see in the Schober homepage, they had their particular problems, which can be cured with patience and = ingenuity.   Good luck!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks. From: "Harvey DeGering" <chd@mcsi.net> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:52:10 -0700   Further ideas from the tech type: Why not use a "gated" amplifier and earphones to tune. By this I mean using an amp that has a circuit that is triggered by the initial sound but does not turn on the amplifier until a few milli-seconds later, after the initial blow, and when the string has settled down. A tunable band pass filter could also accent the fundamental. What one would hear, then, would be the "true" tone. One step further: use a Phase locked loop, (PLL), oscillator to lock to the fundamental and then continue to oscillate at the fundamental. Would seem to this musical neophyte tuning could be made a lot easier. (As a non-talented guy I sure enjoy learning on this list).   > As White and other classicists in the field of > piano tuning have said, the pitch of the string, at the exact moment of > being struck, is incrementally *higher* than it is while the string is > simply vibrating with the damper released, due to the force of concussion > of the hammer. The force of impact of the hammer's mass effectively > tightens the string for the briefest of intervals, releasing it again as > soon as it has imparted its kinetic energy to the string and retreats. > There is a brief period of hysteresis between this inital tightening after > the impact and an actual loosening of the string due to the elasticity of > the steel. This settles down quickly as the transmitted kinetic energy of > the hammer's blow is dissapated into the harp, leaving the resonating > string with its train of true tempered harmonics.      
(back) Subject: PipeChat on Internet Relay Chat tonight From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:17:48 -0400   A reminder to all PipeChatters:   We shall be open for business as usual tonight at 9.00 PM Eastern Time, = and we invite you all to join us there.   If you haven't joined us before, and would like an introduction as to how = to get on line with us go to the PipeChat-l Web site at:   http://www.pipechat.org   where you will find how to get on, - whatever flavour of computer you are using!   We welcome all newcomers, and hope that our regulars will be there as = well!   See you there,   Bob Conway Self-designated publicist for PipeChat IRC.    
(back) Subject: Re: Suggestions, please . . . From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 11:55:22   At 02:32 AM 6/2/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Charles Callahan, Robert Hobby, Doug Major, Peter Mathews, Peter Pendar=20 >Stearnes (I think I got that right), David Hurd, Michael Willcox, Deon=20 >Irish, David Ashley White, Sharon Scholl, and etc.<schniip>   ....or a rousing theater organesque, =E1 la Purvis, setting of "Old 100th" by DeserTBob...complete with registrational hints for the Bawld-One schpiinetwerken!   I was rifling though my old organ recordings the other day, and found the four disk set issued by RCA for Reader's Digest of George Wright on the ill-fated (barbequed) Pasadena studio Wurlitzer, right after it was completed. It was still sealed, and sounded as good as any CD re-release using my top flight MicroAcoustics cartridge. Lo and behold, much to my surprise, Wright does Purvis' ubiquitous "Greensleeves", almost as Purvie wrote it...along with the usual percs and decor items here and there. It worked perfectly...again, reinforcing the fact that Purvis, although denying it in his glory years, started off as a theater organ grinder in the Bay Area in his youth. This, of course, infused all of his compositions with the sound of the Mighty Wurlitzer.   Try his "Ton-Y-Botel" from the 7 Choral Preludes, 1944, on a Wurlitzer some time, posthorns blatting away on the "triumphal march" recapitulation...THAT works, too! Be sure to "gliss up" to the final chord, and fan the swell during it, for that good "SF Fox" effect....LMAO!   People have called Purvis' stuff all kinds of names since the '40s..."gaudy", "clich=E9d", "irreverent"...I call it "serious WurliTzer"...but one thing I've noted over the years...the audience LURRRRRRRRVS it!...even the "Frozen Chosen", for which he played for many years!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: "Out of tune" harmonics, "junk science" and academic hacks. From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:45:22   At 12:39 PM 6/2/2000 -0400, Bob Conway of Canada, eh, wrote: >As a retired "academic hack" - who never published anything worthwhile in >his life, - simply taught my classes and got away with it for fairly = lengthy >career.<snip>   Ah...an honest teacher, and an honest man...I like that! Yours is a dying breed, Mister Bob, replaced by book-learned poppinjays who become self-styled "experts" by "skimming" tomes here and there, never proving a thing in the laboratory or in the field, hiding behind the impervious, dignified mask of academia.   Such honest teachers would say to students, "Ya know, I REALLY don't know...it's somthing to research, isn't it?", making THEM do the work in finding the truth, thus creating graduates of brilliance and = accomplishment.   >I know of what Desert Bob speaketh, - in that I have always found that = the >most published members of the academic fraternity, only manage to re-hash >time after time their own uninformed thoughts, rather than the thoughts = of >the real world.<snip>   In music (and other) departments in vaunted schools nationwide, such hacks burrow and espouse "junk science" and warped historical viewpoints to = carve out their own little niches in the Candy Land of academia. They are, to quote Virgil Fox, the ones that "...just can't "DO IT"!"...so, off they go to a tenured life of job security that no union in world has yet been able to offer the hard-working blue collar worker. Please note that, by my quoting Fox, I don't condone any of HIS foolishness with Bach! Fox and Schweitzer, IMHO, were to Bach as Hope-Jones was to organ tonality.   >as far as organs are concerned. it they don't sound right, then >call in the guy that knows what he is doing<snip> >I too can read a book, but that doesn't make me much of an expert!<snip>   The true intellectual relies on the acumen of others when outside his = field of excellence. The "hacks" could learn volumes by simply understanding this tenet.   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Fw: Suggestions, please . . . From: "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:50:49 -0500   Hey Bob- Being a "Wright fan", is that platter-set still in print?   Thanks, Rick     ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Scarborough <desertbob@rglobal.net> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 11:55 AM Subject: Re: Suggestions, please . . .     At 02:32 AM 6/2/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Charles Callahan, Robert Hobby, Doug Major, Peter Mathews, Peter Pendar >Stearnes (I think I got that right), David Hurd, Michael Willcox, Deon >Irish, David Ashley White, Sharon Scholl, and etc.<schniip>   ....or a rousing theater organesque, =E1 la Purvis, setting of "Old 100th" = by DeserTBob...complete with registrational hints for the Bawld-One schpiinetwerken!   I was rifling though my old organ recordings the other day, and found the four disk set issued by RCA for Reader's Digest of George Wright on the ill-fated (barbequed) Pasadena studio Wurlitzer, right after it was completed. It was still sealed, and sounded as good as any CD re-release using my top flight MicroAcoustics cartridge. Lo and behold, much to my surprise, Wright does Purvis' ubiquitous "Greensleeves", almost as Purvie wrote it...along with the usual percs and decor items here and there. It worked perfectly...again, reinforcing the fact that Purvis, although denying it in his glory years, started off as a theater organ grinder in the Bay Area in his youth. This, of course, infused all of his compositions with the sound of the Mighty Wurlitzer.   Try his "Ton-Y-Botel" from the 7 Choral Preludes, 1944, on a Wurlitzer = some time, posthorns blatting away on the "triumphal march" recapitulation...THAT works, too! Be sure to "gliss up" to the final chord, and fan the swell during it, for that good "SF Fox" effect....LMAO!   People have called Purvis' stuff all kinds of names since the '40s..."gaudy", "clich=E9d", "irreverent"...I call it "serious WurliTzer"...but one thing I've noted over the years...the audience LURRRRRRRRVS it!...even the "Frozen Chosen", for which he played for many years!   DeserTBoB   "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