PipeChat Digest #1419 - Thursday, May 25, 2000
 
Re: oboe vs. cornopean
  by "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk>
Re: linguistic soup
  by "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk>
Parry's Elegy
  by "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net>
Re: PipeChat Digest #1417 - 05/24/00
  by <George.Greene@RossNutrition.com>
Re: linguistic soup
  by "John Vanderlee" <jovanderlee@vassar.edu>
Re: linguistic soup
  by "John Vanderlee" <jovanderlee@vassar.edu>
Re: Parry's Elegy
  by "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk>
Re: PipeChat Digest #1417 - 05/24/00
  by "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk>
Re: Parry's Elegy
  by "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net>
Re: linguistic soup
  by "Mark Harris" <M.Harris@Admin.lon.ac.uk>
Re: oboe vs. cornopean
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: linguistic soup
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: linguistic soup
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: oboe vs. cornopean
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Fwd: One Hour of Theatre Organ Music on the Internet
  by "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com>
Organ Terms (of Endearment)
  by "Paul R. Swank" <prswank@bellatlantic.net>
Re: linguistic soup
  by "STRAIGHT" <STRAIGHT@infoblvd.net>
Re: linguistic soup
  by "Erik Johnson" <the_maitre@hotmail.com>
Re: linguistic soup
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment)
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Digital Voices  (WAS: Organ Terms (of Endearment))
  by "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com>
Re: Digital Voices  (WAS: Organ Terms (of Endearment))
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca>
the mysterious symposium
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment)
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: the mysterious symposium
  by "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu>
Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment)
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: the mysterious symposium
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca>
Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment)
  by "Ray Ahrens" <ray_ahrens@hotmail.com>
 


(back) Subject: Re: oboe vs. cornopean From: "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 11:05:06 +0100     ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave G. <dave_hat@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: oboe vs. cornopean     > Indeed. Why not go completely MIDI, send all the existing pipes off to the > recycler... bet someone needs scrap tin. May I also propose tomatoes so > genetically engineered that they are indistinguishable from oranges. And > with enough artifical flavorings and a good dose of MSG we can make any of > 50 different varieties of pastry from lard and sawdust at a fraction of the > cost and hassle. > > </sarcasm>   Wouldn't work Dave, (check with the 'linguistics' thread), the problem isn't the pipes, it's the engraving on the stop knobs <G> The solution has to be - rip off all stop knobs and send 'em to Bud for re-engraving. On second thoughts, tell him how many reed stops you've got, and he'll send you some stickers to put over the existing names. They'll then be called Trumpet 1, Trumpet 2, Trumpet 3 etc., etc.. ( or maybe Half Trumpet, Full Trumpet and Double Trumpet.)   I'm beginning to think it's time for James Hooternoise to get involved in this ............. ah, no, sorry, that's the other list isn't it?   :))) Chris    
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 10:45:00 +0100     ----- Original Message ----- From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Subject: Re: linguistic soup     > Come on now ... does a swell with the following REALLY make any SENSE??!! > > 16' Bazuin > 8' Trompette > 8' Hobo > 8' Something-or-other Regal > 4' Clarin Real   Of course it makes sense! Faced with that lot, I'm going to pull 'em and listen to 'em *right now.* Give them standardised Bud-friendly, ordinary, common names, and I'll maybe get around to it later .... perhaps ......<yawwwwn> <zzzzzzzzzz> :)))   Chris      
(back) Subject: Parry's Elegy From: "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 07:41:16 -0500   Ok - here's another chance for ya'll to amaze me with the incredible bank of knowledge this group represents:   There is a piece called Elegy by H. Parry - under the title it says: for April 7, 1913.   Does anyone know what this elegy is for? It is about a year to early to be WWI related. Isn't the death of a monarch. An internet search is turning up nothing. Anyone know what death or tragedy this piece commemorates?   Thanks!! Margo    
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #1417 - 05/24/00 From: <George.Greene@RossNutrition.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 08:40:55 -0400     Chris B. wrote...   "Why give names to stops at all? Just give'em numbers..."   Isn't that basically what Laurens Hammond tried to do?        
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: "John Vanderlee" <jovanderlee@vassar.edu> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 09:03:59 -0500   >----- Original Message ----- >From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> >Subject: Re: linguistic soup > > >> Come on now ... does a swell with the following REALLY make any >SENSE??!! >> >> 16' Bazuin >> 8' Trompette >> 8' Hobo   Yes, to some of us that are bi-lingual it does!   ;-)   Just another point of view.....   John V      
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: "John Vanderlee" <jovanderlee@vassar.edu> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 09:09:48 -0500   Another question in/on this thread:   I often read "Cromorne"   Now is that merely a bastardisation of the the Dutch: "Krom hoorn" or the German: "Krumm horn"? Which in both cases means "crooked horn" If "Cromorne" is indeed used for that stop, and sticking with linguistic correctness, would not "crook horn" or "curved horn" be more correct?   Just curious   John V      
(back) Subject: Re: Parry's Elegy From: "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:19:37 +0100     ----- Original Message ----- From: Margo Dillard <dillardm@airmail.net>   Subject: Parry's Elegy   > Does anyone know what this elegy is for? It is about a year to early to > be WWI related. Isn't the death of a monarch. An internet search is > turning up nothing. Anyone know what death or tragedy this piece > commemorates?   Composed in honour and memory of Brahms, I believe.   Chris    
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #1417 - 05/24/00 From: "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:21:28 +0100     ----- Original Message ----- From: <George.Greene@RossNutrition.com>     > > Chris B> > "Why give names to stops at all? Just give'em numbers..."   George > Isn't that basically what Laurens Hammond tried to do?   Chris B. Who? <g>    
(back) Subject: Re: Parry's Elegy From: "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 08:31:57 -0500   Once again the list proves what a wealth of information its corporate mind contains! The definitive answer in under 30 minutes!   I'm going to be using this piece in worships this Sunday. We are having a memorial service emphasis for Memorial Day. I thought that if perhaps this piece was related to some war-related incident, I would mention it in the bulletin. Oh, well. Still a beautiful piece - still gonna play it.   Thanks!!!! Margo   Bob Grube wrote:   > The cover of my copy of Parry's Elegy reads: > > ELEGY > > (For the occasion of the Funeral of SIDNEY, 14th Earl of Pembroke > April 7th, 1913) > > Bob Grube >    
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: "Mark Harris" <M.Harris@Admin.lon.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:20:49 GMT     > >> 8' Hobo   Is that dangerous? Should one address an 8' Hobo as "sir"?   Just an idle thought from an idle fellow.   Mark Harris =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Ursa sapientior in medio  
(back) Subject: Re: oboe vs. cornopean From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 08:13:07   At 11:05 AM 5/25/2000 +0100, you wrote: >I'm beginning to think it's time for James Hooternoise to get involved >in this ............. ah, no, sorry, that's the other list isn't = it?<snip>   GAAAAAAAAAAACK! Noooooooooooooo! ANYTHING but that!!!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:37:47 EDT   In a message dated 5/25/00 9:05:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jovanderlee@vassar.edu writes:   > >> Come on now ... does a swell with the following REALLY make any > >SENSE??!! > >> > >> 16' Bazuin > >> 8' Trompette > >> 8' Hobo > > Yes, to some of us that are bi-lingual it does! > Oh geez.... let's not complicate this threat with SEX!!!   bwaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahaha   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: linguistic soup From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:47:42 EDT   In a message dated 5/25/00 9:11:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jovanderlee@vassar.edu writes:   > Now is that merely a bastardisation of the the Dutch: "Krom hoorn" or = the > German: "Krumm horn"? Which in both cases means "crooked horn" > If "Cromorne" is indeed used for that stop, and sticking with = linguistic > correctness, would not "crook horn" or "curved horn" be more correct? The advantage of using the appropriate "national" name is that there are small differences in style:   the German Krummhorn is thin, and somewhat buzzy. the French Cromorne is fat, loud, and rich (like their wimmin) hehehe the English and 19th C USA Cremona is more Clarinet-like, but still = retains the primary character of the "crooked" one!! The Dutch Krumhoorn is usually closer to the German example.   Interesting, however, that a Holy Trinity on the V-R, the Krumhoorn is distinctively French. The organ is decidedly eclectic, but all nomenclature is Dutch (to confuse the novice!! ;-) ... )   We have on the Hoofdwerk, an English principal chorus; the Rugwerk has a German/Dutch principal chorus, and the Zwelwerk is 4 and 2 so its hard to tell. It is the 8 Principal that gives the chorus it "accent" IMHO. = There are, however, the differences in 4 and 2 strength which tie in with nationality, my experience being the English a bit more gentle than the germanic. Our reeds are French on the Rugwerk, Germanic on Zwelwerk, and English (an =   excuisite, silky smooth, but "biggish" Trumpet). Pedal reeds are = germanic. Flutes are sort of homogenized.   After extensive time at this instrument, I'm beginning to see the = strengths that Pieter built into it. Even though there are things I would have done =   differently (of course), I see clearly his approach and it is (as he!!) basically uncompromising! ;-) 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: oboe vs. cornopean From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:57:59 EDT   In a message dated 5/25/00 11:19:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, desertbob@rglobal.net writes:   > >I'm beginning to think it's time for James Hooternoise to get involved > >in this ............. ah, no, sorry, that's the other list isn't = it?<snip> > > GAAAAAAAAAAACK! Noooooooooooooo! ANYTHING but that!!! > Message forwarded...   BBBWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA   Bruce .. . . .in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles Molly, Duncan, and Miles Cremona502@cs.com HOWLING ACRES: http://ourworld.cs.com/Brucon502  
(back) Subject: Fwd: One Hour of Theatre Organ Music on the Internet From: "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:24:34 -0500   Since the question was asked of me about how to connect to the Theatre Organ Times program via RealAudio I thought I would forward this to the whole list. The program is very enjoyable and some of us that are on PipeChat IRC every Friday night listen to it was we chat.   David   >Hello, > >We hope that you can join us again this week for one hour of great >Theatre Organ Music. > >Regards > >Lesley and Gary > >You can hear "Theatre Organ Time" with Real Audio at Web site: ><http://www.global.net.au/~duo>http://www.global.net.au/~duo > >or <http://www.rtrfm.iinet.net>http://www.rtrfm.iinet.net > >Times > >Western Australia------Saturday 10.00 am (GMT + 8 Hours) > >USA >Add an hour if you are on daylight saving. > >Eastern Standard Time-----Friday 9.00 pm >Central Standard Time ---- Friday 8.00 pm >Mountain Standard Time---Friday 7.00 pm >Pacific Standard Time -----Friday 6.00 pm > >Canada >Manitoba-------------Friday 8.00 pm >Alberta -------------- Friday 7.00 pm >British Columbia------Friday 6.00 pm > >New Zealand ---------Saturday 3.00 pm > >UK------Saturday 2.00 am > >The Netherlands ----Saturday 3.00 am >    
(back) Subject: Organ Terms (of Endearment) From: "Paul R. Swank" <prswank@bellatlantic.net> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:08:33 -0400   someone wrote: >By definition, a "straight" theatre organ is an oxymoron.     There do not seem to be "definite" definitions of various terms used by organists and organ-builders. Very often I see terms used, then followed by a qualifier to further delineate the meaning.   The Skinner Organ Company organ Opus 500 & 500A, which I used to play regularly, was described as a duplexed organ. It has the same ranks on both the swell and the great manuals. In fact, Skinner did not call the manuals swell and great in the specifications, but listed them as Manual I and Manual II. However, the 16 foot and 4 foot couplers are marked great and swell. Was this just a merchandising technique to make it seem that the organ was larger than it really was? Of course, there is flexibility in being able to play any rank from either manual, but was that the only reason?   This all leads me to my question:   Can we discuss, rant, rave, opine, delineate, disagree, propound, and come to a concensus on what the following terms mean?   1. straight organ 2. unit organ 3. unified organ 4. duplexed organ 5. borrowed ranks.   Eagerly awaiting the "answers" (and please don't tell me to look them up; = I have, and the definitions are various.)   Paul R. Swank    
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: "STRAIGHT" <STRAIGHT@infoblvd.net> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:43:23 -0400   They just spelled it wrong. It was the 8' Strumpette and the 8' Hobo.   Diane S. ---   > >> Come on now ... does a swell with the following REALLY make any > >SENSE??!! > >> > >> 16' Bazuin > >> 8' Trompette > >> 8' Hobo > > Yes, to some of us that are bi-lingual it does! > Oh geez.... let's not complicate this threat with SEX!!!   bwaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahaha          
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: "Erik Johnson" <the_maitre@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:51:53 EDT   Greetings All, Since a certain persons minor was in English I hence forth suggest that 'they' search for a name for the most common organ stop. However - you = can't use Diapason (greek), or Prinzipal (German), or Montre (French), = Principale (Italian), Principal (English/ latin roots). So dear fellow - just what = word Do you tend yo use for the most basic organ tone? Perhaps a spriteful suggestion: You could call the 32' pitch the "Foundation" 16' would be "Basement" 8' would be "Living Area" 4' would be "Bed Room Space" and 2' would be "The Attic" and mixture work would be "Aerial Antenae'" LOL   Perhaps while we are at it, we can make EVERTHING Americanized - No more Lasagna or Crepes!   All the Best, The Maitre     >My minor was English ... words have MEANING (or at least they're SUPPOSED >to) ... my point is simply this: French organs have French stop-names, >WHATEVER sound they're connected to (German prinzipal, French montre, >Italian principale, etc.); German organs have German stop-names, etc. ... >it seems that it's only in English-speaking countries that we have French >Swells, American Classic Greats, German Positives, and Heinz 57 Pedals. > >I agree that an argument can be made that a Montre SOUNDS different from = a >Prinzipal, and therefore should be so labeled. Fine ... in FRANCE. On the >other hand, "Double Flute" conveys the same meaning to me as >"Doppelfloete" ... and there's nothing wrong with calling a stop "French >Diapason" or "German Diapason" ... hundreds of American organs of the = '20s >had an "English Diapason" on the Choir organ (a libelous appellation, ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com    
(back) Subject: Re: linguistic soup From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:24:00 -0700   Perhaps Aeolian had it right all along (grin):   Organ Tone 8' Loud String 8' Soft String 8' Loud Flute 8' Soft Flute 8' Vibrato Organ Tone 8' (yes, it really WAS a Diapson celeste) Vibrato String 8' Vibrato Flute 8' High Flute 4' Trumpet Oboe   Deep Flute 16' Deep String 16' Deep Soft Flute 16'   On a more (semi) serious note: unlike the guardians of the pure French = language (grin), I accept the cognates that have entered English common usage ... = but I don't consider myself a linguisting Luddite for wanting organs in English-speaking countries to have English stop-names (grin).   On the other hand, "French pancakes" and "meat pie" will do just fine = (grin).   Cheers,   Bud   P.S. - I once had to WRITE my requests in French at Durand in Paris = because my accent wasn't "Parisian" enough. I love their organs, but ... they're = QUITE mad (grin).     Erik Johnson wrote:   > Greetings All, > Since a certain persons minor was in English I hence forth suggest that > 'they' search for a name for the most common organ stop. However - you = can't > use Diapason (greek), or Prinzipal (German), or Montre (French), = Principale > (Italian), Principal (English/ latin roots). So dear fellow - just what = word > Do you tend yo use for the most basic organ tone? > Perhaps a spriteful suggestion: > You could call the 32' pitch the "Foundation" 16' would be "Basement" 8' > would be "Living Area" 4' would be "Bed Room Space" and 2' would be "The > Attic" and mixture work would be "Aerial Antenae'" LOL > > Perhaps while we are at it, we can make EVERTHING Americanized - No more > Lasagna or Crepes! > > All the Best, > The Maitre > > >My minor was English ... words have MEANING (or at least they're = SUPPOSED > >to) ... my point is simply this: French organs have French stop-names, > >WHATEVER sound they're connected to (German prinzipal, French montre, > >Italian principale, etc.); German organs have German stop-names, etc. = ... > >it seems that it's only in English-speaking countries that we have = French > >Swells, American Classic Greats, German Positives, and Heinz 57 Pedals. > > > >I agree that an argument can be made that a Montre SOUNDS different = from a > >Prinzipal, and therefore should be so labeled. Fine ... in FRANCE. On = the > >other hand, "Double Flute" conveys the same meaning to me as > >"Doppelfloete" ... and there's nothing wrong with calling a stop = "French > >Diapason" or "German Diapason" ... hundreds of American organs of the = '20s > >had an "English Diapason" on the Choir organ (a libelous appellation, > ________________________________________________________________________ > 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: Organ Terms (of Endearment) From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:48:07 -0700       "Paul R. Swank" wrote:   > (snip) > > The Skinner Organ Company organ Opus 500 & 500A, which I used to play > regularly, was described as a duplexed organ. It has the same ranks on > both the swell and the great manuals. In fact, Skinner did not call the > manuals swell and great in the specifications, but listed them as Manual = I > and Manual II. However, the 16 foot and 4 foot couplers are marked = great > and swell. Was this just a merchandising technique to make it seem that > the organ was larger than it really was? Of course, there is = flexibility > in being able to play any rank from either manual, but was that the only > reason?   I don't know the particular Skinner you're speaking of, but Florida State University used to have a couple of similar Skinner duplexed organs ... I = think they were originally home organs; they had players. They were quite = compact ... perhaps space (and cost) for a home organ was a consideration.   > This all leads me to my question: > > Can we discuss, rant, rave, opine, delineate, disagree, propound, and = come > to a concensus on what the following terms mean? > > 1. straight organ   An organ having at least the principal choruses built with 61 pipes per = manual rank, whatever for the mixtures, and 32 pipes for the pedal ranks (give or take, depending on compasses). I would still call an organ with duplexed = or unified softer, non-essential ranks "straight", as long as the choruses = were intact. Purists would disagree (grin). The Fisk tracker in Caruth = Auditorium at SMU has a heavily-borrowed pedal ... does that make it a duplexed or unit organ?   > 2. unit organ   An organ where all or most of the pitches of each family of tone are drawn = from a single rank. I'd say it's a "unit" organ if the majority of ranks are so treated ... Moller Artistes, Kilgen whatever-they-called-them, small Wicks stock models.   > 3. unified organ   Same as "straight" organ, above ... I think it depends on how much is = unified, and what. We can speak of an organ as being "highly unified" and it can = still have independent principal choruses, for instance. I wouldn't dismiss an = organ simply because the Swell 16' Bassoon was an extension of the Swell 8' = Oboe, for instance ... that's a venial sin at most (grin). Yes, yes, I know ... = they're supposed to be of different scale and volume ... maybe I don't HAVE an = extra $20K for an independent 16' Bassoon.   > 4. duplexed organ   All or at least some of the stops are available on more than one manual.   > 5. borrowed ranks.   Most often from the manual to the pedal, to save space and money. Many = organs in the '20s borrowed (duplexed) most of the Great to the Choir to make a = third manual. Think the two terms are more-or-less interchangeable ... maybe "borrowed" applied to manual-to-pedal borrowings, and "duplexed" to manual-to-manual borrowings.   > > > Eagerly awaiting the "answers" (and please don't tell me to look them = up; I > have, and the definitions are various.) > > Paul R. Swank   Here's another one: is an organ with one or more digital voices still a = pipe organ? A minority of digital voices? A MAJORITY of digital voices? A = recent symposium held that even the bottom 12 electronic notes of a 32' bourdon = make a pipe organ NOT a pipe organ. Comments? (grin)   Cheers,   Bud   > >    
(back) Subject: Digital Voices (WAS: Organ Terms (of Endearment)) From: "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 15:29:57 -0500   At 12:48 PM -0700 5/25/00, quilisma@socal.rr.com wrote: > >Here's another one: is an organ with one or more digital voices still a = pipe >organ? A minority of digital voices? A MAJORITY of digital voices? A = recent >symposium held that even the bottom 12 electronic notes of a 32' >bourdon make a >pipe organ NOT a pipe organ. Comments? (grin)   I think that as long as a pipe organ can stand on its own without the digital additions then it is a pipe organ. The bottom 12 notes of a 32' are not really going to make a difference if they are missing. I think the AIO and APOBA wrestled with this several years ago and their decision about the use of digital voices follows this same idea.   If a "pipe" organ needs the digital voices to complete its choruses then it is NOT really a pipe organ but a combo organ.   At least those are my thoughts on the matter. I know there are a couple of builders on this list so I would hope that they will chime in on this subject.   BTW Bud, what symposium was this that you are referring to?   David    
(back) Subject: Re: Digital Voices (WAS: Organ Terms (of Endearment)) From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 16:45:13 -0400   I may be a minority of one here, but I think that if an organ has any digital voices at all, then it is not a pipe organ but a combination = organ.   I have no axe to grind regarding the relative worth of digital versus = pipes, and in many cases the digital organ is the way to go, but let us describe = an organ for what it is.   Bob   If you think knowledge is expensive, try ignorance.    
(back) Subject: the mysterious symposium From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 13:59:00 -0700       David Scribner wrote:   > BTW Bud, what symposium was this that you are referring to? > > David >   I forget (the mind is the first thing to go; the second is ...), but it = was reported either in The Tracker or the Diapoison ... most of the tracker = "heavy hitters" were on the panel ... about a year ago?   Cheers,   Bud, who's SO bored writing out the accompaniment for the Te Deum, line by = line .... the Cardinal Rector's LATEST demand ...    
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment) From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 13:37:19   At 12:48 PM 5/25/2000 -0700, you wrote: >A recent >symposium held that even the bottom 12 electronic notes of a 32' bourdon make a >pipe organ NOT a pipe organ. Comments? (grin)<snip>   Typical crockery.   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: the mysterious symposium From: "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 16:59:13 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 4:59 PM Subject: the mysterious symposium   > I forget (the mind is the first thing to go; the second is ...), but it was   I've always heard "They say the memory is the second thing to go....I = don't remember what the first is."   -Rebekah      
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment) From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:15:00 -0700   Gee, Bob ... tell us how you REALLY feel (grin).   Bob Scarborough wrote:   > At 12:48 PM 5/25/2000 -0700, you wrote: > >A recent > >symposium held that even the bottom 12 electronic notes of a 32' = bourdon > make a > >pipe organ NOT a pipe organ. Comments? (grin)<snip> > > Typical crockery. > > 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    
(back) Subject: Re: the mysterious symposium From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@post.queensu.ca> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 17:30:29 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: Rebekah Ingram <rringram@syr.edu> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 4:59 PM Subject: Re: the mysterious symposium   > I've always heard "They say the memory is the second thing to go....I don't > remember what the first is." > > -Rebekah   Rebekah,   At your time of life, you don't even want to know!   Bob ...   If you think knowledge is expensive, try ignorance.    
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Terms (of Endearment) From: "Ray Ahrens" <ray_ahrens@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 17:10:49 CDT   >A recent > >symposium held that even the bottom 12 electronic notes of a 32' = bourdon >make a > >pipe organ NOT a pipe organ. Comments? (grin)<snip> > >Typical crockery. > >DeserTBoB >   Do we have to endure this AGAIN? I could set my watch by the way these threads endlessly recycle themselves. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com