PipeChat Digest #1480 - Wednesday, June 28, 2000
 
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Ed Steltzer" <steltzer@gwi.net>
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Ed Kolcz" <kolcz@prodigy.net>
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Stanley E Yoder" <syoder+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Reducing music vs turning pages
  by "Roy Wilson" <royjaneann@hotmail.com>
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Evelyn Rowe" <efrowe@mindspring.com>
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Evelyn Rowe" <efrowe@mindspring.com>
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Evelyn Rowe" <efrowe@mindspring.com>
Re: Reducing music vs turning pages
  by "Maynard Cuppy" <cuppy.maynard@mcleodusa.net>
Re: Reducing music vs turning pages
  by "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net>
stable music in a draft (was: Delete)
  by <Innkawgneeto@webtv.net>
Re: Reducing music vs turning pages
  by <Innkawgneeto@webtv.net>
Glasses for Organists
  by "Marylyn Wright" <mwmusic@flash.net>
Re: a 19th century organ - hypothetical questions (X-posted)
  by "Paul Opel" <popel@sover.net>
Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....
  by "Cheryl C Hart" <info@copemanhart.co.uk>
Contact lense
  by "Dr. Darryl Miller" <organdok@safari.net>
 


(back) Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Ed Steltzer" <steltzer@gwi.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:29:18 -0400   Hi Chuck - I've been using special "organ" glasses for 30 years or more (age 68 now) when I play the organ.   It's the only way to go! They are "full-vision" (or "single-vision") glasses, and I have to buy new ones every two years or so as my eyes change. Your doc is wrong; they DO work over a range of focus distances. But as one's eyes age, unfortunately the range decreases as your eye lenses become less willing to change shape.   If I stand up in church to sing in a choir, or do a solo, then the = bifocals are just fine. Being a frugal sort, I keep the "old" (previous) set of glasses home by the computer for that use! (and the even older ones are kept as spares).   Best wishes - Ed S. from Kennebunk Maine   ----- Original Message ----- From: Charles E. Peery <cpeery19@idt.net> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 5:21 PM Subject: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....     > I've arrived at that bifocal age. I can see the restaurant, but not the > menu. I can see the harp music, but not the upper strings by my right = ear > when I turn my head to look at them.   Am I a freak or what? (Vision-wise, let's stick to that...) If anybody = else > has this problem, could you tell me how you deal with it? My vision = isn't > that bad, I could really play pretty well by just taking the darn things > OFF, but why can't they understand and get it right? > > Chuck Peery> Cincinnati        
(back) Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Ed Kolcz" <kolcz@prodigy.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:34:05 -0400   Reducing music ?? Is turning pages too hard ??   ----- Original Message ----- From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 9:11 PM Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses....     > Dear Bob: > > I've heard of the three blind mice, but we must be over a dozen blind church > mice. > I also reprint my music so I can see it on Sunday. I slightly reduce the size > and > mount it on hard board, as the A/C sometimes blows whole scores away. = I've > used > paper clips and book edges for years to tame the wind, now I just scotch tape > it and it doesn't blow away. > > If you wear the wrong glasses it causes neck problems, that only a > Chiropractor > could love. I've gone that route too. I'll be darned if I'm going to = give up, > even if > I have to suffer pain to do it. > > Ron > > PS Blindness in church mice has reached epidemic proportions. > > "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: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Stanley E Yoder" <syoder+@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 22:49:42 -0400 (EDT)   Excerpts from mail: 27-Jun-100 Re: Delete this if you don'.. by "Ed Kolcz"@prodigy.net > Reducing music ?? Is turning pages too hard ??   Yes, when the music has both hands busy on both pages. I often copy the following page full-size on even relatively short hymn-preludes.   I remember that, years ago, Bob Noehren played stuff like big Reger at UMich with a dozen or more pages reduced so that it was all visible at once. Whether it was also legible I can't say - it may have been a memory crutch. But with Reger and that ilk you know that both hands are busy from the get-go. Stan Yoder Pittsburgh  
(back) Subject: Reducing music vs turning pages From: "Roy Wilson" <royjaneann@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:17:11 PDT       Yes, turning pages is too hard. The counterpoint in a fugue is lost if notes are left out while turning pages.   You will note that several of us who have responded to this theme report reducing music. Reaching over three manuals takes a lot of time resulting =   in lost notes. We don't seem to have trouble seeing our reduced music. = Did you hear any of us complain? The standards that I am held to require such =   measures. It is difficult for a page turner to stand over the console, which is slightly lowered, to turn a page without falling. There is = nothing to hold on to while leaning. And good page turners are hard to come by especially at my early service, which has no choir. I have rutinely = reduced my music for many years now. It works for me, resulting in much better acuracy. My choirmaster is happy! So are the choir and congregation. = More importantly, so am I!   :o)   Roy Wilson St. John's UMCh Lubbock, TX     >Reducing music ?? Is turning pages too hard ?? ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Evelyn Rowe" <efrowe@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:47:55 -0400   Eye doctors and opticians who don't have a life are a pain in the a**. I have bifocals that are not that much help with close work because the one who prescribed my reading glasses insisted that reading distance was 16", even though I'm only 5'1". This hasn't been a big problem for reading organ music, but singing is more difficult -- the line falls right in the middle of the page if I'm holding a score low enough to see the conductor. Working with legal reference sources like Shepard's or the periodical guides, all done in tiny type similar to the minor league scores in the back of the sports section, is dreadful. I also like to do fine needlework. The only way I can do either is to take off my glasses and hold the work 6" from my face.   Evie  
(back) Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Evelyn Rowe" <efrowe@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:52:19 -0400   At 09:11 PM 6/27/00 -0400, Ron Severin wrote: >I also reprint my music so I can see it on Sunday. I slightly reduce the = size >and >mount it on hard board, as the A/C sometimes blows whole scores away. = I've >used >paper clips and book edges for years to tame the wind, now I just scotch = tape >it and it doesn't blow away.   What you need are binder clips, the little black thingies with prongs on hinges that allow you to open them when removing them. They come in 3 sizes for a moderate sum at Office Depot, but I have a collection I got = for free in connection with some legal research I do on the side. There are also larger clamps, and the organist at St. Thomas's, Dupont Circle, has a couple of those to deal with the A/C draft.   Evie  
(back) Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Evelyn Rowe" <efrowe@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:55:36 -0400   At 09:34 PM 6/27/00 -0400, Ed Kolcz wrote: >Reducing music ?? Is turning pages too hard ??   Yes, especially if you are a petite person playing more than 2 manuals and have hands to match. I won't even turn for friends if the console is 4+ manuals.   Evie  
(back) Subject: Re: Reducing music vs turning pages From: "Maynard Cuppy" <cuppy.maynard@mcleodusa.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 22:59:23 -0500   I guess we've been through this before, but one solution is to photocopy = your music, especially if it's somewhat complicated or has a lot of page turns. Sometimes just having the piece start on a left hand page rather than a right-hand one can work wonders. At worst you can sometimes cut and paste = to make the turns come when one hand is free. I once did this to the entire Rheinberger f minor Concerto. Alas, I never got to perform it. Another solution is to cut the actual page (or phtocopied page) so that you turn = the top of the page first and the bottom later. Seems to me I read somewhere that = E. Power Biggs used to do this. It works well as long as you turn at the = right time and keep your wits about you so you don't jump to the top of the next = page too soon. Talk about dropping notes. It seems to me that editors used to = be more concerned with such matters. Now they seem to be more concerned with getting as many notes in as few pages as possible...except for B. Schotts Sohne. I have some Pepping editions that must have 2-inch top and bottom margins. They could easily cram another line on each page and (maybe?) eliminate a page turn?   But my must-used solution is the same as yours. For service playing, = what's a few lost notes among friends. Most people I suspect won't notice. How = many people do you suppose are in your congregation who are actually following counterpoint?   Page turning can be a nightmare. I once ripped a page out of a book = making a quick turn during an audition. Didn't get the job. I didn't feel too = bad, because the organ was terrible. But a few years later they installed a = nice 50-some rank Tellers. Then I felt bad. It was that Rheinberger fellow = again (4th Sonata, 1st movement). Later the book was stolen. I hope whoever = took it fell off the bench and broke his/her glasses trying to turn the pages.   Maynard   Roy Wilson wrote:   > Yes, turning pages is too hard. The counterpoint in a fugue is lost if > notes are left out while turning pages. > > You will note that several of us who have responded to this theme report > reducing music. Reaching over three manuals takes a lot of time = resulting > in lost notes. We don't seem to have trouble seeing our reduced music. = Did > you hear any of us complain? The standards that I am held to require = such > measures. It is difficult for a page turner to stand over the console, > which is slightly lowered, to turn a page without falling. There is = nothing > to hold on to while leaning. And good page turners are hard to come by > especially at my early service, which has no choir. I have rutinely = reduced > my music for many years now. It works for me, resulting in much better > acuracy. My choirmaster is happy! So are the choir and congregation. = More > importantly, so am I! > > :o) > > Roy Wilson > St. John's UMCh > Lubbock, TX > > >Reducing music ?? Is turning pages too hard ?? > ________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > "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: Reducing music vs turning pages From: "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:03:54 -0500   When I played live stage shows, I taped the scores end-to-end and unfolded the whole schmere out on the music rack. No page-turning, but heaven help = a strong draft should come along!   Rick    
(back) Subject: stable music in a draft (was: Delete) From: <Innkawgneeto@webtv.net> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 00:22:34 -0400 (EDT)   Clothes pins work in a pinch. A bit unsightly, but hey, one does what one must.   >>What you need are binder clips, the little black thingies with prongs...<<   Neil    
(back) Subject: Re: Reducing music vs turning pages From: <Innkawgneeto@webtv.net> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 00:29:53 -0400 (EDT)   I hate turning pages w/ a passion. If I can't memorize the thing (and I do try, let me tell ya), then I copy and reduce a page here, a page there, so I can manage.   I've done the cardboard thing, the "tape/glue music to manila folders" thing, the tape pages together so it stretches out to the back of the nave thing. It's whatever works for the given piece.   About missed notes (because of page turns): there's always somebody out there that notices...either that first-time visitor who runs the organ department of XYZ conservatory, or Mrs. So-and-So whose husband played organ for 45 years, or whomever. More importantly, I know.    
(back) Subject: Glasses for Organists From: "Marylyn Wright" <mwmusic@flash.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:46:28 -0700   Greetings from Texas! I am a pianist, church organist, professional accompanist, and college instructor. I feel so much better knowing that others understand what we = go through when the eyesight starts to wane. I suffered many years trying to get used to glasses that were prescribed by eye doctors. Not one person that I consulted here in Texas would believe that I was having such a bad time making the transition from reading the music, the computer, my textbooks during lecture, the conductors, etc. either. Playing piano was = the worst problem because of the body movement which repositioned the eyes everytime that I changed registers. I developed terrible headaches = everytime I played the three-manual Wicks (42 ranks) for my church job; it had a = high music desk.   To add more to my suffering, I have a bad neck and buldging spinal discs from an auto accident and was hurting from having to play while holding my chin up. The fact that I am only 5' 1" tall and must play while sitting on = a fixed, non-adjustable organ bench added to my near neurotic state. (That's another ongoing problem that I am working on at my church).   However, I finally solved some of my problems. Eventually, I bought just plain reading glasses from our local drug store, then from a local = discount store. The single vision made it possible to see without straining so badly.   The last opth. who tested my eyes actually understood my problems. He teaches at a medical college in Dallas and grew up with musicians and = later had many professional musicians as friends. He actually prescribed single vision glasses for the correct distance of my music rack, each frame side correcting individual problems for each eye. I lecture, read, and drive using bifocals. I have been SO happy since then. Previous opths. had wanted to try all of the new lenses but nothing worked. I wasted hundreds = of dollars and was discouraged, angry, and resigned myself to live in pain. Now, I can enjoy playing. We need to send everyone who prescribes = glasses a copy of our experiences.   Marylyn Riley Wright; Athens, Texas    
(back) Subject: Re: a 19th century organ - hypothetical questions (X-posted) From: "Paul Opel" <popel@sover.net> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 01:53:42 -0400   I've also played this organ, and it is a real honey. Unfortunately, I couldn't get my church (an 1805 building that it would have fit into as if it had been there since day 1) to get serious about the money end, even though there was an exceptional deal in the air (they've ended up, several years later, sinking a substantial chunk of change into their 1965 2/11 Wix, much to my disappointment).   In any case, the only (and a most useful) alteration (other than an electric blower in addition to the hand pump) to the instrument, changing the GG pedalboard to C compass was done (presumably) by the Hooks when the instrument was moved from the Perkins School for the Blind (installed = there probably on the advice of Lowell Mason) to the Baptist Church in = Biddeford, ME sometime in the 1870s. For photos of the organ in that location, see Barbara Owen: The Organ in New England, pp. 538 and 541. When the Shortridges moved it from that church (which has gone to electric guitars and bongo drums for music), it still played, after a fashion- not bad for 130+ years. The pipes are now plain gilt instead of diapered, and the original false grained finish is restored. If you've never seen an Appleton, the quality of workmanship is stunning; although most of the Boston builders built fine cases, Appleton built to the level of fine furniture (which in that period was very fine indeed). The touch of the swell in particular is exceedingly articulate, and no heavier than a good harpsichord- it takes some getting used to. I found that Appleton's inclusion of a bass Principal on the swell in addition to the usual = Stopped Diapason makes the instrument much more flexible, there being at least a rudimentary full-compass second chorus.   Whoever ends up with this organ- please leave the damned thing alone! = There will never be any more Appletons, and if you want something else, get something else!   Paul   http://www.sover.net/~popel      
(back) Subject: Re: Delete this if you don't wear glasses.... From: "Cheryl C Hart" <info@copemanhart.co.uk> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 09:42:43 +0100   I can recommend the combination of contact lenses for distance plus = reading glasses for close work: it was a real joy to get rid of my varifocals (I am guessing that is our equivalent of progressives) for all the reasons already stated. Now, if I'm playing a four manual instrument I no longer =   have my nose and chin in the air with the concomitant neck and headache - and I'm not fumbling with changes of glasses, which was the equally unsatisfactory alternative. If I need my reading glasses for the organ, at least I only have to manoeuvre one pair. It's heaven.   There are varifocal contact lenses available these days - but I have no great yearning to try them. Does anyone have experience of these?   Cheryl     Copeman Hart & Company Ltd Church Organ Builders England   http://www.copemanhart.co.uk    
(back) Subject: Contact lense From: "Dr. Darryl Miller" <organdok@safari.net> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 04:37:12 -0400   Hi, Y'all!   The "eye thing" has plagued many organist whom I know, especially when = they move from distance only to distance plus reading. The intermediate = distance of the organ rack is the killer. Many wear trifocals, many just lift their heads back and read from their bifocals (very unsightly and harmful to the neck, I would think), but I solved the problem with monovision contact lenses. That's one lense for close up and one lens for distance. It WORKED fine until the last year, then it became apparent that the intermediate distance would have to be corrected.   I have the best eye doctor in the world. She works and works and works and works until I'm happy with the correction and that usually means many = trips to her office, but the end result is wonnnnderful. When it became apparent the monivision contacts could not solve the intermediate problem (bifocal contacts wouldn't work for me in this case), we decided to go to a pair of playing glasses (which is perfect for the computer screen at the office, too) for just playing the organ. I wear them over my contacts. I chose one of the contemporary smallish frames where I can look over the glasses if needed to see a conductor (do organists really look at conductors after = you get the downbeat?), yet still see the score with great clarity.   I'm happy with this new system and hope it works for a long time. The big problem is to remember to take my playing glasses to the console!!!!!!!!!!   Yours,   Darryl by the Sea