PipeChat Digest #2560 - Monday, December 10, 2001
 
Re: Electronic, and pipe organs....[long]
  by "David Carter" <david_n_carter@hotmail.com>
RE: Electronic, and pipe organs....[long]
  by "COLASACCO, ROBERT" <RCOLASACCO@popcouncil.org>
Re: Electronic, and pipe organs
  by "Dennis Goward" <dlgoward@qwest.net>
Suggestion VS Imitation
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #2559 - 12/10/01
  by "Ken Earl" <ken_earl01@hotmail.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #2559 - 12/10/01
  by "Ken Earl" <ken_earl01@hotmail.com>
Assuring our future
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Back!
  by "Paul Austin" <paul-austin@ntlworld.com>
Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
oh PIFFLE! (chuckle)
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: Electronic, and pipe organs
  by "Stan Yoder" <vze2myh5@verizon.net>
Re: oh PIFFLE! (chuckle)
  by "Paul Valtos" <chercapa@enter.net>
Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: Question on Handel's "Messiah"
  by "Mandy Glass" <amadpoet@lycos.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Electronic, and pipe organs....[long] From: "David Carter" <david_n_carter@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:22:00   My turn... First off, let me say that I do not have hearing as sensitive as others on =   the list (my wife can vouch for that, she thinks that I employ selective hearing when she asks me to do something, but I digress).   I do enjoy hearing the auxiliary sounds that a pipe organ makes, as Chris mentions in his excellent post (the sounds made as the organ fills with = air, the sound of stops being pulled manually or the pleasant "thunk" of the combination action), all of this being the "presence" of a pipe organ. I enjoy the thrill of hearing a pipe organ at full cry, as in the final = chord of Widor's toccata, as well as soft flutes and celestes.   I've heard several pipe and electronic instruments, ranging from the great =   organ in the Mormon Tabernacle, to a small 11-or-12 rank tracker in Carmel =   Valley, CA. I've heard and played several electronic instruments as well. One of the first organ recitals that I attended was played on touring electronic organs (Worth-Crow duo). That experience turned me on to = organs, and I've loved organ music ever since. If I remember correctly, the first organ I took lessons on was an Aeolian-Skinner at St Paul's Episcopal in Salinas CA, when I took a group organ class. My second organ teacher (private) played, and taught, on an Allen digital, of early 80's vintage, with the stiff paper alterable stops. Six months into my lessons with her, =   she presented an all-Bach organ recital on the Allen. I assisted with page =   turning and stop-pressing. I became intimately involved with Bach's Passacaglia & Fugue. Margaret spent many hours registering the piece, and played it marvelously. To my admittedly untrained ears, it sounded great.   I belong to a church, where the vast majority of congregations have electronic instruments. There are very few of our buildings that actually have pipe instruments. However, I don't believe that the music suffers because of the electronic instruments. The church chooses to place greater =   monetary priority on ministry efforts, both internal and external.   All this said, I will admit that I enjoy hearing a pipe organ more so than =   an electronic. I think though, that what I enjoy most about organ music, = is the music that comes from an instrument, regardless of how the sound is produced. The bottom line for me, is that I believe that great music can come from all types of organs, if the organist playing the instrument has the skill to produce the music.   Ready for the flamethrowers out there..   David Carter Sacramento, CA   _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp    
(back) Subject: RE: Electronic, and pipe organs....[long] From: "COLASACCO, ROBERT" <RCOLASACCO@popcouncil.org> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:32:45 -0500   Be thee prepar-est. For they shall cometh forth-eth.   Ready for the flamethrowers out there..   David Carter Sacramento, CA   _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp     "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: Electronic, and pipe organs From: "Dennis Goward" <dlgoward@qwest.net> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:38:37 -0700   There has been a ton of traffic on this list lately, and some of it has = been interesting -- but most of it has been the eternal, infernal "pipe vs electronic" non-debate that will never be resolved. Not that a resolution is required.   I wonder if, one hundred years ago, our "organic" ancestors flogged the topic "harmonium vs pipes" to death with such dedication? Or did they simply accept that some venues had pipe organs, and some had harmoniums or reed organs, and then go about the business of making music on whatever = was there?   Organists are unusual among most musicians, because with few notable exceptions, we don't carry our instruments with us when we travel. Unlike = a Yo-yo Ma, we can't just book a second seat on the plane for our ideal instrument. We have to make do with whatever is where we're playing.   If you don't like it, don't play it.   Me, I'd love to have a decent pipe organ everywhere I play. But I have to be a realist -- it probably won't happen. But I'll do whatever I can with whatever is there. The act of making music is where I draw my joy.   Anyway, feel free to continue the "debate", or dissect my comments at = will. It's time for a break from email lists.   Have a blessed Christmas, all.   Dennis      
(back) Subject: Suggestion VS Imitation From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:59:47 EST   Pipe organ stops were always meant to suggest their instrumental = counterparts. It was not until the early twentieth century that "imitative" crept into = the tonal vocabulary...  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #2559 - 12/10/01 From: "Ken Earl" <ken_earl01@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:09:31 -0000     >>>ross wrote>>Sorry, but don't talk rubbish - pipes are not fashioned to copy or imitate other instruments. There is no other sound, anywhere, similar to a Principal, or a Rohr Flute, or a Dulciana, let alone Mixtures, mutations = and things like a Sesquialtera or a Cornet. Imitation? Nope.<<   Sorry to correct you Ross - but ?Imitation? - mainly Yes!!   Whilst the Principal, Montre, Diapason, (call it what you like) is a = unique sound to the pipe organ, the others are all imitations of other things.   Put the descriptive suffix 'flute' after any fanciful name, be it Rohr, Wald, Hohl, Claribel, Harmonic, or any others you can think of, and they = all mean they are types of ... ?what? you guessed - the Flute. A common orchestral instrument since the time of Pan.   I take it you don't know the origin of the French organ stop 'Cornet'. A compound stop imitating the historical (orchestral) instrument of that = name.   The Sesquialtera in its true form is two of the basic harmonics of the = above 'Cornet', broken out of the historical 3 - 5 rank Cornet for other solo or chorus use.   The Dulciana is (or should be) 'a mild string toned stop'. Pipe organs don't have strings, they have pipes. Stringed instruments have strings, which is what the organ tonal family are named after. And don't mention Salicionals either, because historically and in their true form, they are just enclosed Dulcianas.   Mutations - why are they there, not just to give squeaky sounds. No - = they are provided to either aid in the synthesis of other (imitative) sounds, = or to add 'brilliance' to an 'organ type' sound.   I know you love to poke holes in other people's opinions, but if you take any "average" pipe organ, around 60 per cent of its stop list will be in fact imitative of orchestral tonalities.   Ken  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #2559 - 12/10/01 From: "Ken Earl" <ken_earl01@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:19:54 -0000   Hi all   I have to agree with Bruce Cornelly on the subject of pipes v electronics.   I've played dozens of well installed Allen instruments, as well as several or many old Rodgers, Norwich, and Compton, electronics, in addition to hundreds of the UK's best and worst pipe organs.   In all cases, where these instruments are in public buildings, I would prefer to use a bad pipe organ, than a good electronic. Even with the latest breed of Allen organs, there is a complete lack of fullness, depth, and richness of tone to the tutti, when compared with even a small, bad, pipe organ. Putting on the 'romantic tuning' stop (the 'turn the organ = into a harmonium stop' IMHO) just makes things worse. Yes, they all have some wonderful solo v oices, and yes, for a little while, they sound amazingly like the real thing (so long as you play in the middle of the manuals all the time), but over a period of time, they grow both tiresome and increasingly thin toned to my ears.   It doesn't really matter how many loudspeaker cabinets are added to the digital thingy, it still lacks the ability to shake the building with a = soft 32' on the pedal and soft 8' swell strings played with the box (sorry - volume pedal) closed, the way that a pipe organ can do.   I maintain that the digital organs are wonderful practice instruments for someone's living room - but keep them out of the churches. In this = country, some buildings that have spent up to =A3150,000 on a digital box with lots = of speakers, are now fundraising to have the pipe organ restored again, = simply because the choir and congregation cannot sing to the digital beast.   And yes, I am another that got hooked on the pipe organ at a very early = age (around 6). And what knocked me over about it, was this very effect in = our local cathedral.   Ken  
(back) Subject: Assuring our future From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:20:20 EST   If we're going to talk about youth and the organ, and their future, then let's give them something to look forward to.   I find it ironic that people fuss over large instruments, whether it is Crystal Cathedral, or Wanamakers, or some big Baptist church in the South with a huge pipe organ, and then take a stand in favor of electronics. Or = is it just the four-manual, 100-stop electronics in 200-seat chapels? I = realize that many of these sycophantic statements are made by ignorant teenagers, = but if adult organists, who should know better, encourage them to destroy the future of the pipe organ, they are not helping. Yes, electronic organs are =   good for affordabel home practice, we all know that. We also know that = there has never been a church in which there REALLY was no room for a pipe = organ.   Fortunately, amongst the "Lite" beer drinkers, which are the true = majority, there will always be Veuve Clicquot drinkers. And although most people DO =   prefer McDonald's or White Castle, there is always a true clientele for = Filet Mignon.   While many bitter folk will condescendingly condemn these facts as = snobbery, they are choosing not to acknowledge that what the Almighty gave us above = all creatures was the ability to intelligently perceive and evaluate quality, = and to know the difference between what is fine and real, and what is a pedestrian, second-rate alternative.   Resenting something that is high quality, or the people who advocate high quality, neither elevates the lowly nor alters the differential. Let us be =   responsible adults and acknowledge that the electronic is here to stay, = but let us not be so quick as to hail it as the answer for the future.   Sebastian Matthaus Gluck Having just returned from a visit to "Ground Zero," and headed to Hawaii in the morning.  
(back) Subject: Back! From: "Paul Austin" <paul-austin@ntlworld.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:32:42 +0400   This is a multi-part message in MIME format.   ------=3D_NextPart_000_000D_01C181CA.94A36E40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   I have been away from this mailing list for some time due to the fact =3D that I have been moving throughout the UK for some time. Geez!!! its =3D nice to be back, and see that so many of those familiar names still crop = =3D up in the list offering such a wide range of expertise. =3D20   Sorry to go off topic, but its great to see!   Paul. paul-austin@ntlworld.com or paustin@altavista.net     ------=3D_NextPart_000_000D_01C181CA.94A36E40 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D3D"text/html; charset=3D3Diso-8859-1" =3D http-equiv=3D3DContent-Type> <META content=3D3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3D3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT size=3D3D2>I have been away from this mailing list for some =3D time due to=3D20 the fact that I have been moving throughout the UK for some time.&nbsp; = =3D Geez!!!=3D20 its nice to be back, and see that so many of those familiar names still = =3D crop up=3D20 in the list offering such a wide range of expertise.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D3D2>Sorry to go off topic, but its great to =3D see!</FONT></DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D3D2>Paul.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D3D2><A=3D20 href=3D3D"mailto:paul-austin@ntlworld.com">paul-austin@ntlworld.com</A> or = =3D <A=3D20 href=3D3D"mailto:paustin@altavista.net">paustin@altavista.net</A><BR></FONT= =3D ></DIV></BODY></HTML>   ------=3D_NextPart_000_000D_01C181CA.94A36E40--    
(back) Subject: Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:14:52 -0800   Sounds as if you are saying the pipe organ is not a real instrument. B.E.   > mitate and produce the sound from another real instrument, not record = and reproduce artificially. There IS a difference. > > > Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com  
(back) Subject: oh PIFFLE! (chuckle) From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:54:48 -0800   At age nine I fell in love with   1) an Estey "Child's Organ" 2) a Hammond spinet 3) a folding Estey "missionary organ" 4) a seven-rank Estey pipe organ   SIMULTANEOUSLY.   They ALL inspired me; they ALL made me want to be an organist; I could make music on ALL of them.   Yes, we're going to (Deo volens) have a fine pipe organ at St. Matthew's that will eventually be a three-manual instrument of some 40+ speaking stops; BUT ... I can still play the STUFFING out of High Mass on an aged silicon-belching monster, yet ANOTHER Hammond spinet (which we keep around for the times we forget to feed the monster) OR an even MORE primitive Kawai spinet (which we keep around in case BOTH of the above fail) in the meantime ... or even an old Acrosonic spinet PIANO.   And WHY am I GETTING a pipe organ? In LARGE measure because I DO play the stuffing out of High Mass on any and all of the above, and because I'm CONSTANTLY saying "imagine what this would sound like on a PIPE organ!" (grin)   But my POINT (if there is one) is that music-making comes down to putting your hands and feet on the right keys and the right pedals at the right time, no matter WHAT those keys and pedals happen to be connected TO (grin). I'm not languishing in outer darkness waiting for my pipe organ; I'm MAKING MUSIC WITH WHAT I'VE GOT.   Isn't that what it's SUPPOSED to BE about?   Cheers,   Bud      
(back) Subject: Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:58:25 EST     --part1_11e.8da2afe.2946a621_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 12/10/01 6:17:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, elmsr@albanyis.com.au writes:     > Sounds as if you are saying the pipe organ is not a real instrument. > B.E. > > > mitate and produce the sound from another real instrument, not record = and > reproduce artificially. There IS a difference. >   Nope..... What I was trying to say is that the pipe organ imitates other instruments such as the clarinet or english horn, viola da gamba, or = flute, by using another "real" instrument.... a pipe. Whereas the "other = guys" simply record or simulate and reproduce without the use of another "real" acoustical instrument.   Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Please visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/ and wander through the Mall Without Walls   --part1_11e.8da2afe.2946a621_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>In a message dated = 12/10/01 6:17:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, elmsr@albanyis.com.au writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Sounds as if you = are saying the pipe organ is not a real instrument. <BR>B.E. <BR> <BR>&gt; mitate and produce the sound from another real instrument, not = record and reproduce artificially. &nbsp;&nbsp;There IS a difference. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>Nope..... What I was trying to say is that the pipe organ imitates = other instruments such as the clarinet or english horn, viola da gamba, or = flute, by using another "real" instrument.... a pipe. = &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Whereas the "other guys" simply record or simulate = and reproduce without the use of another "real" acoustical instrument. <BR> <BR>Bruce Cornely &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;~ &nbsp;Cremona502@cs.com &nbsp; <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi <BR>Please visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/ <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;and wander through the Mall Without Walls</FONT></HTML>   --part1_11e.8da2afe.2946a621_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:14:22 -0800   Bruce, you should have been a lawyer if you can justify that statement! B.E.   > Sounds as if you are saying the pipe organ is not a real instrument. > B.E. > > > mitate and produce the sound from another real instrument, not = record and reproduce artificially. There IS a difference. > > > > Nope..... What I was trying to say is that the pipe organ imitates other = instruments such as the clarinet or english horn, viola da > gamba, or flute, by using another "real" instrument.... a pipe. = Whereas the "other guys" simply record or simulate and reproduce > without the use of another "real" acoustical instrument.  
(back) Subject: Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:51:20 EST     --part1_a6.1e379eac.2946b288_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 12/10/01 7:17:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, elmsr@albanyis.com.au writes:     > Bruce, you should have been a lawyer if you can justify that statement! > B.E. >   Thanky..... When someone comes up with the $250/hour, I'll do just = that!! ;-) Now, honestly.... don't you sort of enjoy the pipe vs electroid debates!!! = ;-)   Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Please visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/ and wander through the Mall Without Walls   --part1_a6.1e379eac.2946b288_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>In a message dated = 12/10/01 7:17:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, elmsr@albanyis.com.au writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Bruce, you should = have been a lawyer if you can justify that statement! <BR>B.E. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>Thanky..... &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;When someone comes up with the = $250/hour, I'll do just that!! &nbsp;;-) <BR>Now, honestly.... don't you sort of enjoy the pipe vs electroid = debates!!! &nbsp;;-) <BR> <BR>Bruce Cornely &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;~ &nbsp;Cremona502@cs.com &nbsp; <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi <BR>Please visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/ <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;and wander through the Mall Without Walls</FONT></HTML>   --part1_a6.1e379eac.2946b288_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Electronic, and pipe organs From: "Stan Yoder" <vze2myh5@verizon.net> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:19:20 -0500   There is an interesting (?) parallel to this everlasting debate: = silver-based photography versus digital photography. I subscribe to several net lists for camera buffs, = e.g., Leica-users, Rollei-users. Occasionally a thread runs, usually along the lines of "if = it isn't silver-based [film] and chemically-processed, is it 'real' photography?" It is = acknowledged that digital has all but swept the field in photo-journalism, and is making rapid headway in = the amateur/snapshot market (dig. cams are very hot sellers this month); BUT, say its detractors, it = can't match the resolution and "look" of, say, a well-exposed and -projected slide. Yet. It's an = imitation of the 'real thing.' There is, though, a nagging fear that the days of film may be numbered.   Sound familiar?   This could be said: etymologically, the word "photograph" would not seem = to rule out any particular technology. What about "organ" as a word?   Stan Yoder Pittsburgh  
(back) Subject: Re: oh PIFFLE! (chuckle) From: "Paul Valtos" <chercapa@enter.net> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:08:20 -0500   Dear Bud, As always, you hit it right on the head.To make music from the most awful instrument is what it is all about and imagine what it would sound like at Riverside or Wanamaker's, or Longwood Gardens. I sit at my old (20 plus years) Allen, close my eyes and imagine what Pachabel's "Morning = Star" would sound like on the above.That, I believe, is one of the gifts we, as musicians have. To imagine the perfect instrument played perfectly. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> To: "pipechat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 6:54 PM Subject: oh PIFFLE! (chuckle)     > At age nine I fell in love with > > 1) an Estey "Child's Organ" > 2) a Hammond spinet > 3) a folding Estey "missionary organ" > 4) a seven-rank Estey pipe organ > > SIMULTANEOUSLY. > > They ALL inspired me; they ALL made me want to be an organist; I could > make music on ALL of them. > > Yes, we're going to (Deo volens) have a fine pipe organ at St. Matthew's > that will eventually be a three-manual instrument of some 40+ speaking > stops; BUT ... I can still play the STUFFING out of High Mass on an aged > silicon-belching monster, yet ANOTHER Hammond spinet (which we keep > around for the times we forget to feed the monster) OR an even MORE > primitive Kawai spinet (which we keep around in case BOTH of the above > fail) in the meantime ... or even an old Acrosonic spinet PIANO. > > And WHY am I GETTING a pipe organ? In LARGE measure because I DO play > the stuffing out of High Mass on any and all of the above, and because > I'm CONSTANTLY saying "imagine what this would sound like on a PIPE > organ!" (grin) > > But my POINT (if there is one) is that music-making comes down to > putting your hands and feet on the right keys and the right pedals at > the right time, no matter WHAT those keys and pedals happen to be > connected TO (grin). I'm not languishing in outer darkness waiting for > my pipe organ; I'm MAKING MUSIC WITH WHAT I'VE GOT. > > Isn't that what it's SUPPOSED to BE about? > > Cheers, > > Bud > > > > "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: Teaching organists to self-destruct From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:52:30 -0500   --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D_3688948= =3D=3D_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"; format=3Dflowed   Bruce,   Since you ask, - NO I do not enjoy this endless tirade!   Why can't you live and let live, you are never going to resolve this discussion, and there are better things to talk about than this eternal = round!   Bob Conway   At 07:51 PM 12/10/01 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 12/10/01 7:17:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, >elmsr@albanyis.com.au writes: > > >>Bruce, you should have been a lawyer if you can justify that statement! >>B.E. > > >Thanky..... When someone comes up with the $250/hour, I'll do just >that!! ;-) >Now, honestly.... don't you sort of enjoy the pipe vs electroid >debates!!! ;-) > >Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com >with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" > Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi >Please visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/ > and wander through the Mall Without Walls     --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D_3688948= =3D=3D_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"us-ascii"   <html> Bruce,<br><br> Since you ask, - NO I do not enjoy this endless tirade!<br><br> Why can't you live and let live, you are never going to resolve this discussion, and there are better things to talk about than this eternal round!<br><br> Bob Conway<br><br> At 07:51 PM 12/10/01 -0500, you wrote:<br> <blockquote type=3Dcite class=3Dcite cite><font face=3D"arial" size=3D2>In = a message dated 12/10/01 7:17:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, elmsr@albanyis.com.au writes: <br><br> <br> <blockquote type=3Dcite class=3Dcite cite>Bruce, you should have been a lawyer if you can justify that statement! <br> B.E. </font></blockquote><br> <font size=3D2><br> Thanky.....&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; When someone comes up with the $250/hour, I'll do just that!!&nbsp; ;-) <br> Now, honestly.... don't you sort of enjoy the pipe vs electroid debates!!!&nbsp; ;-) <br><br> Bruce Cornely&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ~&nbsp; Cremona502@cs.com&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ &quot;&quot;Haruffaroo, Bohawow!&quot; <br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi <br> Please visit Howling Acres at&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href=3D"http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/" = eudora=3D"autourl">http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</a> <br> &nbsp; and wander through the Mall Without Walls</font><font = face=3D"arial"> </font></blockquote><br> </html>   --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D_3688948= =3D=3D_.ALT--    
(back) Subject: Re: Teaching organists to self-destruct From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:44:21 -0800   Bruce, I never turn down a good argument! Maybe I should have been the lawyer!!! B.E.  
(back) Subject: Re: Question on Handel's "Messiah" From: "Mandy Glass" <amadpoet@lycos.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:59:18 -0600   >> Is Handel's "He Shall Feed His Flock" part of >> the Christmas = oratorio?   I don't know as much about "these things" as others on the list, but I = think I can see where your confusion is coming from. Messiah is indeed an = "oratorio," which Handel divided into three "parts." Probably all you = would hear if you went to a performance of Messiah is all of "Part 1" plus = the Hallelujah chorus, which is the final chorus of "Part 2." Put Part 1 = and the Hallelujah Chorus together and you have what is now known as "The = Christmas Portion of Handel's Messiah." There are scores out there that = have titles similar to this, since most people don't bother with the rest = of the work (which is a shame, to my feeble mind).   Hope that made some sense! ;o)   Best, Mandy