PipeChat Digest #2193 - Wednesday, July 4, 2001
 
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by <DEMPAR1@aol.com>
Re: Allen Renaissance
  by <DEMPAR1@aol.com>
A "Fuller" key
  by "Paul R. Swank" <prswank@surfbest.net>
Allen vs. Rodgers vs. two manual trackers
  by "Patricia/Thomas Gregory" <tgregory@speeddial.net>
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
RE: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by "Stanley Lowkis" <nstarfil@mediaone.net>
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by "Jackson R. Williams II" <jackwilliams_1999@yahoo.com>
Re: Allen vs. Rodgers vs. two manual trackers
  by "Jackson R. Williams II" <jackwilliams_1999@yahoo.com>
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by <Innkawgneeto@cs.com>
Sibelius help ... DUH! (X-posted)
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!
  by "Russ Greene" <rggreene2@home.com>
Re: Rodgers (Question to list)
  by "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net>
Re: Sibelius help (X-posted)
  by "Stephen Barker" <steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk>
Re: A "Fuller" key
  by "Stephen Barker" <steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:20:44 EDT     --part1_cb.1321a8a0.2874aa6c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 7/4/01 10:20:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, = RMaryman@aol.com writes:     > . A well-designed, well built 2 manual tracker might be preferred > >>IF<< it is a well-rounded spec that would allow for a reasonable > representation of ALL periods of the organ literature realm to be = played.   This is avery unfortunate mindset that I believe has been responsible for much mediocre organ building. Expecting ANY instrument to do everything =   well is unreasonable. Sacrifices will have to be made in voicing, tuning, =   scaling and construction. With each compromise historic representation of =   any period is further removed and you wind up with an organ of yet another =   period. The American Classic, supposed do-all, organs are beautiful in their own right, but they CANNOT render music of all periods in a satisfactory way. Reasonable to one may not be reasonabel to another. Satisfactory, IMHO, is hardly a goal to strive for. Even more = unfortunate, is expecting a small organ to cover all of this obscure ground.   I enjoy playing music of all periods, but enjoy it more if the organ is unique to a particular period. If I had to choose, I would selecte my favorite period of music and have the organ designed specifically for that =   period so that my enjoyment would be maximixed. When I wanted relief, = all I need do is jump in the car and drive to an instrument that is suitable = for my current need. The really unfortunate part is that there are so few instruments that ARE unique that this is really not possible. As I look around town there are only two unique instrument out of a possible ten to choose from. One is 2/28 germanic and the other is 1/6 19th century american. The rest are large composite do-all instruments that have a character of their own, but are in no way unique to a period of music or building and are really unsatisfactory in playing ANY literature well.   Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/   --part1_cb.1321a8a0.2874aa6c_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 = 7/4/01 10:20:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, RMaryman@aol.com <BR>writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">. A well-designed, = well built 2 manual tracker might be preferred <BR>&gt;&gt;IF&lt;&lt; it is a well-rounded spec that would allow for a = reasonable <BR>representation of ALL periods of the organ literature realm to be = played. </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>This is avery unfortunate mindset that I believe has been responsible = for <BR>much mediocre organ building. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expecting ANY = instrument to do everything <BR>well is unreasonable. &nbsp;Sacrifices will have to be made in = voicing, tuning, <BR>scaling and construction. &nbsp;With each compromise historic = representation of <BR>any period is further removed and you wind up with an organ of yet = another <BR>period. &nbsp;&nbsp;The American Classic, supposed do-all, organs are = beautiful in <BR>their own right, but they CANNOT render music of all periods in a <BR>satisfactory way. &nbsp;&nbsp;Reasonable to one may not be reasonabel = to another. &nbsp; <BR>Satisfactory, IMHO, is hardly a goal to strive for. = &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Even more unfortunate, <BR>is expecting a small organ to cover all of this obscure ground. = &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR> <BR>I enjoy playing music of all periods, but enjoy it more if the organ = is <BR>unique to a particular period. &nbsp;If I had to choose, I would selecte my <BR>favorite period of music and have the organ designed specifically for = that <BR>period so that my enjoyment would be maximixed. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;When = I wanted relief, all <BR>I need do is jump in the car and drive to an instrument that is = suitable for <BR>my current need. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The really unfortunate part is that = there are so few <BR>instruments that ARE unique that this is really not possible. &nbsp;As = I look <BR>around town there are only two unique instrument out of a possible ten = to <BR>choose from. &nbsp;&nbsp;One is 2/28 germanic and the other is 1/6 = 19th century <BR>american. &nbsp;The rest are large composite do-all instruments that = have a <BR>character of their own, but are in no way unique to a period of music = or <BR>building and are really unsatisfactory in playing ANY literature well. <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>Visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</FONT></HTML>   --part1_cb.1321a8a0.2874aa6c_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:31:24 EDT     --part1_35.176280e1.2874acec_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 7/4/01 11:17:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jackwilliams_1999@yahoo.com writes:     > All right, folks: The tracker would be about 20-25 > ranks, the 4-manual electronic would have the > equivalent of about 110 ranks with a complete solo > division as well. Forget about questions of space and > such. Just decide your instrument of preference. >   If I'm not mistaken, this is a question for an instrument for personal = use. It could be a fun thread if you can pull your heads out of your churches = and use your imaginations. It might even be interesting to see what type of 20-25 stop instruments people would like to have. We can assume that the =   electronics would have "one of each."   So how about lightening up and enjoying a fun thread.   Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/   --part1_35.176280e1.2874acec_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 = 7/4/01 11:17:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>jackwilliams_1999@yahoo.com writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">All right, folks: = &nbsp;&nbsp;The tracker would be about 20-25 <BR>ranks, the 4-manual electronic would have the <BR>equivalent of about 110 ranks with a complete solo <BR>division as well. &nbsp;Forget about questions of space and <BR>such. Just decide your instrument of preference. <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>If I'm not mistaken, this is a question for an instrument for personal = use. &nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>It could be a fun thread if you can pull your heads out of your = churches and <BR>use your imaginations. &nbsp;&nbsp;It might even be interesting to see = what type of <BR>20-25 stop instruments people would like to have. &nbsp;&nbsp;We can = assume that the <BR>electronics would have "one of each." <BR> <BR>So how about lightening up and enjoying a fun thread. <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>Visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</FONT></HTML>   --part1_35.176280e1.2874acec_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: <DEMPAR1@aol.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:59:59 EDT   << If you were offered a four manual Rodgers (or Allen, if you prefer), or a two manual tracker, which one would you prefer. >>   It depends on what you are playing. A good 2 manual tracker is definitely = something I might want to have in my collection of musical instruments = (assuming I had the space and the money), but a tracker is almost useless = to play popular music. If this was the only organ I could get my hands on = for practice, I would take a 4 manual George Wright Allen over a 2M = tracker any day. Those tracker couplers are hell on the fingers when = playing 'I Got A Gal in Kalamazoo".  
(back) Subject: Re: Allen Renaissance From: <DEMPAR1@aol.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 14:02:34 EDT   Don't forget deteriorating paper cones that let voice coils shift and rub = on the magnet until they go "poof".   Mice, silverfish, humidity, poling voice coils, spiders in a comfortable home between voice coil and magnet, etc. etc. etc. Bob E.       CVStanford@aol.com wrote: > > Speakers wearing out... > > that is a new one for me............ > > how do they "wear out"......I would be curious to know????? >    
(back) Subject: A "Fuller" key From: "Paul R. Swank" <prswank@surfbest.net> Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 14:06:33 -0700   I have always been "partial" (pardon the pun) to the key of D Flat. It just seems to me to have a "fuller" sound, more majestic, rounder, etc. = Is this the imagination of an old man, or is there something to the different =   "feelings" evinced by the use of different keys?   This question was brought to the fore for me recently at the OHS Convention, when the hymn tune "San Rocco" (in D Flat) was used during the =   final session of the conference. The tune is #253 in The Hymnal 1982 (Episcopal) in D Flat, and is used again in the hymnal as #604 in the key of C Major.   To me, there is a difference in the sound of the two keys, with the D Flat =   more full.   By the way, I can hardly wait for the CD's of the OHS Convention, and am hoping that this hymn will be included. The sound of 350 people singing this hymn (and mostly men at that), was wonderful.   Paul R. Swank    
(back) Subject: Allen vs. Rodgers vs. two manual trackers From: "Patricia/Thomas Gregory" <tgregory@speeddial.net> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 13:14:08 -0500   Greetings:   I have been reading the postings regarding Allen vs. Rodgers for several days (weeks??).   Now....we add two manual trackers into the scenario.   I respect, although may not agree, with individual opinions espressed on PipeChat.   May we get on to discussions that may help us, amateur or professional, improve performing and listening skills.   Sincerely,   Tom Gregory   p.s. Maybe someone will ask for comparisions between Allen, Rodgers and E.M. Skinners! (just kidding) -- Thomas Gregory 716 West College Avenue Waukesha WI USA 53186-4569    
(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 14:18:58 EDT   Whether choosing the instrument for myself, a house of worship, or as a consultant, I would choose the mechanical action pipe organ. I would be choosing it for its pipes, not necessarily any fierce attachment to mechanical action. But that was the choice with which we were presented.   I have been invited by major electronic and digital firms to play and hear =   what they truthfully feel is the "best" of their work, and have had the opportunity to interview choir members who have used electronics = temporarily while pipe organs have been reconstructed, restored, or newly built. The general experience from listening to conservatory trained organists and professional vocalists is that they do not like the sterile, unnatural = sound, and that the balances almost always seem odd or wrong, since it is = extremely rare in any imitative installation that the size of the instrument bears = any relationship to the size of the room.   While it has been made very clear to me that the average organist doesn't really care one way or another, and would prefer a much larger imitative specification to a smaller, handcrafted musical instrument, I would still prefer, and would urge any committee or individual, to thoughtfully and carefully consider the real thing. While there isn't a single serious concertgoer who would leave their home to listen to Heifetz or Stern play = a digital violin, organists are adamant and militant about not caring, declaring that they cannot tell the difference, and love the variety, especially when they can pull up a suggestion of ANY stop they want from a =   library of thousands.   The comfort in all of this is that many people, both musicians and non-musicians, are choosing the pipe organ on a gut level, on an artistic level, with much appreciation. As a gentleman said on one of the other = chat lists, both MacDonald's and Le Cirque have cooked beef on their menu; one will give you the Big Mac, the other the most amazing Filet Mignon you've ever saved up for. FAR more people eat at MacDonald's than will EVER eat = at LeCirque, yet the latter survives brilliantly, and has a waiting list for =   party reservations as long as the waiting list for a good pipe organ from = a reputable craftsman. And MOST people would rather eat chopped mystery = meat, as evidenced by all of the gigantic national chains which compete in that market.   So most organ-players will choose the big electronic, because it's a suggestive simulation of what they really want in a pipe organ, and once = they have consciously decided that they really don't have the ability to judge = the difference, they are very happy with the choice. Many pipe organ = craftsmen will have to close their doors LONG before the digital manufacturers will, = if ever. But that does NOT mean that there will no longer be a demand for = our work.   On a final note, I would urge most people to stick with one or the other, either all pipes, or all simulated. The artificial organ is here to stay, = we know that, and therefore it should evolve as a separate instrument, as the =   pipe organ continues to evolve through advances in scholarship, apprenticeship programs, organbuilding educational institutions, = development of tools and techniques, and the continued patronage of serious musicians = and clients.   Sebastian Matthaus Gluck New York City  
(back) Subject: RE: Rodgers (Question to list) From: "Stanley Lowkis" <nstarfil@mediaone.net> Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 14:33:02 -0400   Bruce made the observation:   "If I'm not mistaken, this is a question for an instrument for personal use. It could be a fun thread if you can pull your heads out of your churches and use your imaginations. It might even be interesting to see what type of 20-25 stop instruments people would like to have."   These organs exist!!   ....They are called "WurliTzers"!!!!   Stan  
(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: "Jackson R. Williams II" <jackwilliams_1999@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:55:11 -0700 (PDT)   --- Cremona502@cs.com wrote: > In a message dated 7/4/01 10:20:22 AM Eastern > Daylight Time, RMaryman@aol.com > writes: >   .. The American Classic, supposed do-all, > organs are beautiful in > their own right, but they CANNOT render music of all > periods in a > satisfactory way.   I think it is more the player who renders the music in a satisfactory way.   __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/  
(back) Subject: Re: Allen vs. Rodgers vs. two manual trackers From: "Jackson R. Williams II" <jackwilliams_1999@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:03:08 -0700 (PDT)   Thomas, there is a reason why I asked this question , and Sebastian's letter may be the most eloquent answer. I'm not interested in taking a poll, but rather provoking the kind of thought that Mr. Gl=FCck has exhibited that. Take your thinking to that level and you will see that there is indeed something to learn in this thread. Everyone on this list is invited to discuss something that is organ related. I think I can speak safely for the entire list in saying that we are not interested in a pipes vs. electronic discussion. My question was posed simply to find out if even the most ardent purists among us would bend if offered the "other" alternative.   --- Patricia/Thomas Gregory <tgregory@speeddial.net> wrote: > Greetings: > > I have been reading the postings regarding Allen vs. > Rodgers for several > days (weeks??). > > Now....we add two manual trackers into the scenario. > > I respect, although may not agree, with individual > opinions espressed on > PipeChat. > > May we get on to discussions that may help us, > amateur or professional, > improve performing and listening skills. > > Sincerely, > > Tom Gregory > > p.s. Maybe someone will ask for comparisions > between Allen, Rodgers and > E.M. Skinners! (just kidding) > -- > Thomas Gregory > 716 West College Avenue > Waukesha WI USA > 53186-4569 > > > "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 >     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/  
(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: <Innkawgneeto@cs.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:32:26 EDT     --part1_3c.df495d4.2874c94a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   I will add my mere 2 cents to this discussion.   Which ever instrument one is called upon to play, whether electronic, = pipe, or combo, it is up to the organist to make it sound the very best he/she = can.   We don't often have choices on what kind of instrument to play, but we do have a choice on how we shall play it.   This seems to be the bottom line for me. But given the choice, I'd rather =   have the genuine article: pure unadulterated pipe organ.   Neil Brown   --part1_3c.df495d4.2874c94a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR=3D"#ffffff"><FONT = SIZE=3D2>I will add my mere 2 cents to this discussion. <BR> <BR>Which ever instrument one is called upon to play, whether electronic, = pipe, <BR>or combo, &nbsp;it is up to the organist to make it sound the very = best he/she can. <BR> <BR>We don't often have choices on what kind of instrument to play, but we = do <BR>have a choice on how we shall play it. <BR> <BR>This seems to be the bottom line for me. &nbsp;But given the choice, = I'd rather <BR>have the genuine article: pure unadulterated pipe organ. &nbsp; <BR> <BR>Neil Brown</FONT></HTML>   --part1_3c.df495d4.2874c94a_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Sibelius help ... DUH! (X-posted) From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:04:48 -0700   Importing Sibelius files into WordPerfect:   It's so simple I'm embarrassed ...   This from Dennis Goward on OrganChat ... THANK YOU, DENNIS!!!   "If you're using version 1.4 of Sibelius, check out 'save as EPS (or Encapsulated Post Script)'. This is a graphics form that most programs can use, and most printers can reproduce. It has the advantage of being scalable. It should work in your setup."   And indeed it does ... I discovered one trick in playing with it: it helps to change all the margins to "0" before you save the Sibelius file as an EPS file ... that way when you import it into WordPerfect, you can drag the size out to the margins of your WordPerfect document and make it fit exactly. Otherwise you have a margin within a margin.   Now WHY couldn't Sibelius have put that in the BOOK, and/or TOLD me that when I called Tech Help??!!   Yeah, I know, I'm the last dinosaur on the planet who uses WordPerfect .... it wasn't worth their time (grin).   I presume, since it's converted to a Post Script file, that the receiving computer doesn't have to have Sibelius in order to open it or print it out if I e-mail it to the church (or elsewhere).   Now I can make the Rector REALLY crazy ... (grin).   Cheers,   Bud-by-the-Beach    
(back) Subject: HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY! From: "Russ Greene" <rggreene2@home.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 15:07:06 -0500   > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not = understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.   --B_3077104027_5959418 Content-type: text/plain; charset=3D"ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable   I just want to wish all of our U.S. listmembers a happy Fourth of July. I hope all your celebrations are exquisite. My family and I, proud Canadians all, will be watching =3DB3Pops Goes the Fourth=3DB2 this evening to = celebrate with you.   Happy Independence Day,   Russ Greene   --B_3077104027_5959418 Content-type: text/html; charset=3D"ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable   <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <FONT FACE=3D3D"Helvetica">I just want to wish all of our U.S. listmembers = a ha=3D ppy Fourth of July. I hope all your celebrations are exquisite. My family = an=3D d I, proud Canadians all, will be watching &#8220;Pops Goes the = Fourth&#8221=3D ; this evening to celebrate with you.<BR> <BR> Happy Independence Day,<BR> <BR> Russ Greene</FONT> </BODY> </HTML>     --B_3077104027_5959418--    
(back) Subject: Re: Rodgers (Question to list) From: "VEAGUE" <dutchorgan@svs.net> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:10:38 -0500   If I had my druthers, I'd druther take a 3-manual Aeolean residence organ -of about 25-30 ranks with cascading stops. It would have to have Crawford's sobbing tibias, sizzling strings, fat strings, orchestral reeds (to include trombone), and several differently-voiced diapasons. A few choice traps and percussions (including a glass harp).   Now where'd I put my druthers?!   Rick    
(back) Subject: Re: Sibelius help (X-posted) From: "Stephen Barker" <steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 21:08:08 +0100   Thanks for the Plainsong Bud. It's just the sort of thing I THINK they want!   I'm surprised you find the bitmaps a problem when improting into wordperfect - is that even when you set it to 200%?? The alternative = would be to do the original at a larger size so you get a higher resolution when you send it across... I don't actually use Wordperfect, but it's an = educated guess from my own experiences of doing a similar thing with word for my Psalter.   Steve In a warm Canterbury 30 degrees C (although probably not as warm as you = over there!)   ----- Original Message ----- From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> To: "+mailing list, ANGLICAN-MUSIC" <anglican-music@list.stsams.org>; "organchat" <organchat@egroups.com>; "pipechat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 5:01 PM Subject: Sibelius help (X-posted)     > Summer is the only time I have to stop, catch my breath, and learn new > things. Last summer, I learned Sibelius; this summer, I need to learn > how to import Sibelius files into WORDPERFECT. > > Sibelius is set up to import into WORD, but WORD won't bookletize; in > any case, the Rector won't allow things to be done for the church in > anything but WORDPERFECT. Nope, not gonna go THERE (grin) ... that's > simply the way life is. > > So ... doing it as a bitmap looks terrible; I haven't gotten any further > than that. Sibelius tech help tried to explain to me how to do it as PDF > files (I think), but I got totally lost. > > Is there a reasonably SIMPLE way to do it that a 'puter NON-genius can > find his way through? I've got some big liturgy-cum-music booklets > coming up, and I'm tired of manually pasting the hard copies of the > music into the text booklet master. > > If anybody has the time to do step-by-step hand-holding, I'd really > appreciate it. I CAN follow step-by-step instructions (I THINK) ... > > THANKS! > > Bud-by-the-Beach > > > "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: A "Fuller" key From: "Stephen Barker" <steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 21:16:12 +0100   I agree with different keys sounding - well - different! D major is very bright (Angel Voices ever singing always sounds better in D than C, as = does Jesus Christ is Risen Today), and G-flat has a soft warm feel - possibly more so that D-flat??   Steve Canterbury UK     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul R. Swank" <prswank@surfbest.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 10:06 PM Subject: A "Fuller" key     > I have always been "partial" (pardon the pun) to the key of D Flat. It > just seems to me to have a "fuller" sound, more majestic, rounder, etc. Is > this the imagination of an old man, or is there something to the = different > "feelings" evinced by the use of different keys? > > This question was brought to the fore for me recently at the OHS > Convention, when the hymn tune "San Rocco" (in D Flat) was used during = the > final session of the conference. The tune is #253 in The Hymnal 1982 > (Episcopal) in D Flat, and is used again in the hymnal as #604 in the = key > of C Major. > > To me, there is a difference in the sound of the two keys, with the D = Flat > more full. > > By the way, I can hardly wait for the CD's of the OHS Convention, and am > hoping that this hymn will be included. The sound of 350 people singing > this hymn (and mostly men at that), was wonderful. > > Paul R. Swank > > > "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 > > >