PipeChat Digest #1321 - Friday, March 24, 2000
 
Re: Recital notice
  by "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu>
RE: Recital notice
  by "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu>
Re: Recital notice
  by "Glenda" <gksjd85@access.aic-fl.com>
The "Popular" pipe organ
  by "Colin Hulme" <colin_hulme@lineone.net>
Re: The "Popular" pipe organ
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
(no subject)
  by <KriderSM@aol.com>
Re: The "Popular" pipe organ
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
 



(back) Subject: Re: Recital notice From: "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 07:24:00 -0500     ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Harris <M.Harris@Admin.lon.ac.uk> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 4:57 AM Subject: Re: Recital notice     > > Glenda wrote, > > >should we mail brownies? > > Didn't know the Postal Service (or the ATF Bureau) would let you > do that!   Guess you're just going to have to e-mail them!   -Rebekah    
(back) Subject: RE: Recital notice From: "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:11:20 -0600   Better to fax them....   -----Original Message----- From: Rebekah Ingram [mailto:rringram@syr.edu] Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 6:24 AM To: PipeChat Subject: Re: Recital notice       ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Harris <M.Harris@Admin.lon.ac.uk> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 4:57 AM Subject: Re: Recital notice     > > Glenda wrote, > > >should we mail brownies? > > Didn't know the Postal Service (or the ATF Bureau) would let you > do that!   Guess you're just going to have to e-mail them!   -Rebekah     "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: Recital notice From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@access.aic-fl.com> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:17:06 -0600   But they're so flat and mushy that way . . . . What a mess if one should fall on to the pedal board.   Glenda     ----- Original Message ----- From: Storandt, Peter <pstorandt@okcu.edu> To: 'PipeChat' <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 10:11 AM Subject: RE: Recital notice     > Better to fax them.... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rebekah Ingram [mailto:rringram@syr.edu] > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 6:24 AM > To: PipeChat > Subject: Re: Recital notice > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Mark Harris <M.Harris@Admin.lon.ac.uk> > To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 4:57 AM > Subject: Re: Recital notice > > > > > > Glenda wrote, > > > > >should we mail brownies? > > > > Didn't know the Postal Service (or the ATF Bureau) would let you > > do that! > > Guess you're just going to have to e-mail them! > > -Rebekah > > > "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 >      
(back) Subject: The "Popular" pipe organ From: "Colin Hulme" <colin_hulme@lineone.net> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 22:22:00 +0000   This thread reminds me of a theory I have had for some years.I long ago came to the conclusion that organists are a breed of musician unknown any where else in music.What other instrument has its own large repertoire known only to the instrumentalists who play it? There also seems to be a theory that if it is not dry and boring it is not worth playing. What proportion of the general listening public could name more than one or two pieces of music written for the organ, as opposed to arrangements of music originally written for other instruments/ensembles?   Cheers,   Colin.  
(back) Subject: Re: The "Popular" pipe organ From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:57:24   At 10:22 PM 3/23/2000 +0000, you wrote: >This thread reminds me of a theory I have had for some years.<snip> >What proportion of the general listening public could name more than one >or two pieces of music written for the organ, as opposed to arrangements >of music originally written for other instruments/ensembles?<snip>   A cogent point, indeed! Much of the problem stems from a disportionate share of the literature being written for "service" use...back to the church again! The successful touring organists of the 1800s/early 1900s equipped themselves with transcriptions of orchestral pieces and developed skills to pull off such conversions tastefully. This art was all but lost by the 1960s, when the aroque revival was in full swing. Also by this time, the late French Romantic school came into disfavor also, as it did not play well with the neo-Baroque oddities of organs being built at the time. Now, there's a loose movement afoot to return to strictly = orchestral organs, such as the mushmeisters of the early 1900s, another mistake.   It seems that, although they cost considerably more to build and maintain than any other musical instrument, organs (and their literature) seem to lend themselves to extreme fads more than any other. Perhaps if we stuck to a middle ground of organ design, to allow breadth of performable literature, the organ might find itself in favor by the public ear. By = all means, no part of the considerable literature of the organ should be totally ignored, but recitals composed of "Pachelbel's greatest hits" just do not play well, IMHO.   There are but few showpieces with successfully combine the organ with full symphony orchestra, but some of the ones that are out there garner public acclaim every time. The one that always comes to my mind is the Jongen. Definately modern, yet without the formless cacaphony and atonality of = some modern composers, it always shows the organ at its best, and seems to appeal to a great cross section of the public.   DeserTBoB   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: (no subject) From: <KriderSM@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 20:35:16 EST   ....and now I read that Steinway has purchased the O. S. Kelly Forge in Springfield, Ohio, where the metal sound plates were made for the Baldwin Pianos, and will now be used in Steinway pianos   Stan Krider   Subject: Re: Pipes and Bytes From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 17:28:06 -0600   Bob Scarborough wrote:   > Word has it that Baldwin, the last American piano factor, > (jab in ribs to Brewse) is ready to fold,   What of the Yamaha Pianos built in Georga, US?  
(back) Subject: Re: The "Popular" pipe organ From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 23:25:31 EST   In a message dated 3/23/00 6:03:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, desertbob@rglobal.net writes:   > A cogent point, indeed! Much of the problem stems from a disportionate > share of the literature being written for "service" use...back to the > church again! Ah! Yet another reason for organists to learn, play and list organ literature for voluntaries, rather than playing chorale preludes on all of =   the hymns of the day so that the "theme" appears in every title throughout =   the service sheet. If you MUST play CPs, put them in their proper place: = before the hymn itself.   >The successful touring organists of the 1800s/early 1900s > equipped themselves with transcriptions of orchestral pieces and = developed > skills to pull off such conversions tastefully. This art was all but = lost > by the 1960s, when the aroque revival was in full swing. Also by this > time, the late French Romantic school came into disfavor also, as it = did > not play well with the neo-Baroque oddities of organs being built at = the > time. Oh, please, Bob. Stop blaming EVERYTHING on the baroque revival. Tastes change. DEAL WITH IT!!! BWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAA     >Perhaps if we stuck to a middle ground of organ design, to allow breadth = of performable > literature, the organ might find itself in favor by the public ear. Another approach might be for those places with oodles of money to have = two or more organs of reasonable size which could play different kinds of literature appropriately. How wonderful it would be to go to a recital = and have the opening section on a lush romantic style instrument in equal temperament; the next section, sparkling baroque music on another in Kirnberger; and the next section in French Classic with another unequal temperament, or French Romantic with the appropriate temperament. Imagine =   how exciting it would be to hear contrasting reeds and the slight = variations in flue work from organs in various locations in the building. It would = be so much more interesting than having someone play 285 ranks full tilt or = full celestes all evening!     > There are but few showpieces with successfully combine the organ with = full > symphony orchestra. . . The one that always comes to my mind is the Jongen. > Definately modern, yet without the formless cacaphony and atonality of = some > modern composers, it always shows the organ at its best, and seems to > appeal to a great cross section of the public. Another fun modern piece is the Copland . I don't remember the name. Perhaps if organists would play more recitals using literature rather than =   CPs, more composers would take notice. Bruce .. . . .in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles Molly, Duncan, and Miles Cremona502@cs.com http://community.webtv.net/cremona84000/ALLHAILTHEPOWERand http://community.webtv.net/hydrant/TheBeaglesNest http://community.webtv.net/bruco/STORIESINGLASS