PipeChat Digest #2211 - Sunday, July 8, 2001
 
Re: thaxted
  by "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk>
Re: being content - was - well, I guess it WON'T
  by "Randy Terry" <randyterryus@yahoo.com>
Carnegie Hall Rodgers "out of this world" !!! ???
  by "Antoni Scott" <ascott@epix.net>
Re: well, I guess it WON'T go away (grin)
  by "Jim" <bald1@prodigy.net>
Re: thaxted
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: stoplists and the literature
  by "Tim Bovard" <tmbovard@arkansas.net>
Re: stoplists and the literature
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net>
Re: Carnegie Hall Rodgers "out of this world" !!! ???
  by <Mattcinnj@aol.com>
Re: Carnegie Hall Rodgers "out of this world" !!! ???
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net>
"Canadian Classic"
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: "Canadian Classic"
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net>
Casavant # 2268
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net>
On Digitals and Stoplists... here's one!
  by "Wayne Grauel" <wgvideo@attglobal.net>
RE: "Canadian Classic"
  by "Andrew Mead" <mead@eagle.ca>
 

(back) Subject: Re: thaxted From: "Chris Baker" <chorale@clara.co.uk> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 10:23:18 +0100   From: Stanley Subject: Re: thaxted     > Excerpts from mail: 7-Jul-101 thaxted by "Carlo Pietroniro"@total > > I put this on one of the lists I'm on, and I thought I'd offer it to > everyone. I > > scanned > > the hymn "Thaxted" out of one of my hymnals, set to the words "O God > Beyond All > > Praising". > > If anyone'd like a copy, let me know. > > > > Take care: the text is copyright 1982 by Hope Publishing. Don't know > whether the Holst-derived tune is copyrighted or public domain. > > Stan   Yes, and the author might be a tiny bit miffed. Michael Perry is one of the editors of Church Family Worship Hymnal here in UK   The Holst tune IS public domain, but most published arrangements of it as a hymn tune are still well in the scope of the copyright regulations.   One of the advantages of downloading versions from net sources, is that very often the arranger himself will state that he allows free downloading for non-commercial purposes. Simply scanning a hymnal page and transmitting it almost invariably breaks the law. I think, but am content to be corrected, that the only printed music and lyrics which safely can be treated as 'free and clear', is that contained in volumes which were wholly printed and published at a time which now places them outside the regulations. I suspect that there is no version of Thaxted as a hymn tune which currently falls into this category.   Cheers, Chris B    
(back) Subject: Re: being content - was - well, I guess it WON'T From: "Randy Terry" <randyterryus@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 04:04:42 -0700 (PDT)   --- Cremona502@cs.com wrote: > Actually, I'm more interested in what ranks are there, rather than what = names > are on the console. So maybe just a list of ranks by division with = an > indication as to what is unified or borrowed. I hope it would be of > interested to the whole list for discussion. THanks. >   OK Bruce and list here is the present specification and rank list:   Great:   16' Rohr Gedeckt (1-12 Old Quintadena 16' bass, revoiced, 13-24 1890's = Kimball stopped bass, remainder 4' Rohrflote, all these are borrowed from various swell ranks)   8' Diapason (exposed) RANK 1 8' Hohlflote (enclosed, 1915 Austin Clarabella (with above mentioned = Kimball bass, drastic revoicing) RANK 2   8' Gemshorn (sw) 8' Celeste (sw) 4' Octave (exposed) Rank 3 4' Koppelflote Rank 4 2-2/3' Nasard (sw) 2' Fifteenth (ext Diap 8') IV Mixture (sw) IV Sharp (sw, plays mixture 1 octave above unison, has extra octave of = pipes) 16' Double Trumpet (sw) 8' Trumpet (sw) 8' Oboe Rank 5 Swell to Great   SWELL:   8' Principal (unit) 8' Gedeckt (1928 Aeolian, nicks filled, no other changes) RANK 6 8' Gemshorn RANK 7 8' Celeste RANK 8 4' Principal (custom for this job by Tom Anderson) RANK 9 4' Rohrflote (original Nasard reassigned w/ scrounged up bass) RANK 10 2-2/3' Nasard (New Tom Anderson bass, originally a Stinkins 2' Gemshorn) = RANK 11 2' Octave (ext) 2' Blockflote (from GT Kopelflote) 1-3/5' Tierce RANK 12 IV Mixture 1-1/3' RANKS 13-16 8' Trumpet RANK 17 4' Clarion (ext)   PEDAL:   32' Bourdon (resultant) 16' Subbass (RANK 18) 16' Quintflote (see gt 16' flue) 8' Principal (gt) 8' Gedeckt (sw Aeolian Ged) 8' Gemshorn (sw) 4' Choralbass (from Great 8') 4 Flute (I have not decided where this stop will be borrowed from V Grave Mixture 2' (swell 2' + IV) 16' Double Trumpet (sw ext) 8' Trumpet (sw) 4' Clarion (sw) 4' Oboe Schalmey (gt)     =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Randy Terry Minister of Music, Organist & Choirmaster The Episcopal Church of St. Peter Redwood City, California www.stpetersrwc.org   __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/  
(back) Subject: Carnegie Hall Rodgers "out of this world" !!! ??? From: "Antoni Scott" <ascott@epix.net> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 09:00:22 -0400   To Carlo and the List:   "let us also not forget that the concert which featured this organ was out of this world!!!"   It is interesting that Carlo made this statement. Being an avid follower of Virgil Fox from his Riverside days to his "Touring Organ" days , I was present at Carnegie Hall at the Virgil Fox dedication concert of this huge electronic organ ( by the way I tend to disagree with another List member's statement that it was the "First" 5 manual electronic organ. I thought Allen made a tube generator 5 manual in the 60's). I was also present the year before when he played the "Christmas" concert using the 3 manual "Black Beauty". Same acoustic environment, same organ company, same organist. I thought the three manual sounded better. All I can say is that the three manual organ had the speakers placed all over the stage and the 5 manual speakers were not visible. I remember Virgil explaining that the Solo division speakers were above the stage. I was not impressed with the sound of this electronic giant at all, when comparing it to the "puny" three manual.   Without knowing any real details, I suspected that something special was used in Virgil Fox's touring organ that was not available in commercially available Rogers organs. I have played enough to know that they sound definitely electronic.       Antoni Scott  
(back) Subject: Re: well, I guess it WON'T go away (grin) From: "Jim" <bald1@prodigy.net> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 09:10:12 -0500   Sorry Bud, I missed your point. And I do agree with you on the voicing of the instrument. However, I would prefer to have a larger organ and limit the number of stops that I pull. If on those few occassions that the congregation is in a real singing mood, I have found that I can always add more. But, the options for the organist are greater with the larger = organs.   Jim H ----- Original Message ----- From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 11:32 AM Subject: Re: well, I guess it WON'T go away (grin)     > > > Jim wrote: > > > So let me see, > > > > Jim H > > > > Not at all, Jim ... scaling and voicing is everything; that's the discussion > necessarily mean you SHOULD. > > 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: thaxted From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 22:01:29 +0800   The tune Thaxted is set to Hymn No. 900 in the Methodist Hymn Book of 1933. Since that was published 68 years ago and the conmposer has been dead for 80 odd years the tune as published in that hymn book is well in the public domain. The quote below was referring to "category" as "out of copyright" Bob Elms.     >. I suspect that there is no version of Thaxted as a hymn tune which = currently falls into this category. > > Cheers, > Chris B > >    
(back) Subject: Re: stoplists and the literature From: "Tim Bovard" <tmbovard@arkansas.net> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 10:25:26 -0500   At 02:16 AM 7/8/01 -0400, Bruce wrote: > > Bud, > I agree with your concept, but disagree that this is American Classic = design, > > at least in the examples around for the past forty or fifty years. > <snip> > Again, I do agree with your concept of what is needed for an = "all-purpose" > instrument, but I think you give the American Classic formula more = credit > than is due.       Good morning, Bruce and Bud!   Bruce, I sorta think you're being a bit "restrictive" with your definition = of "Am. Classic". Seems as though you're thinking pretty exclusively of the = GDH "formula". (which admittedly is the original concept, I suppose, but...)   I think "concept" is the operative word, though -- for I don't believe the definition of "American Classic" is so set-in-stone as you imply. Yes, = that's the way GDH wanted to build 'em -- but he's gone now, and lots of other builders still continue to build (more-or-less) in his "style". Each of = them, though, adds *their* own 'slant' to the basic concept -- based upon their = own personal experience of "what works" and (more importantly) "what doesn't work". Take, for example, the reedless Great Organ. Harrison liked 'em. Organists weren't so enthusiastic, as it turned out. And so, we have one = of the first "rules" of Am. Classic organs to be "broken" on a regular basis = these days in 'new' Am. Cl. organs. Are we not *allowed* to term an instrument "American Classic" if it posesses a Gt Trumpet?   As with most aspects of organ design, I feel that our "labels" are only representations of general styles and dispositions (periods of history?). There are, fortunately, *no* absolute "rules". Thus, I wouldn't be uncomfortable with Bud's design being Am. Classic -- it's just Am. Classic = *as it has evolved over the last 40 years*. Until another half-a-century goes = by (and somebody coins yet another "definition/name", that's the name we've = got!! <g>   Cheers --   Tim Bovard Little Rock AR      
(back) Subject: Re: stoplists and the literature From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 11:37:28 -0400   moving this thread north of the border, I wonder what would be considered = "Canadian Classic" design? Casavant being the mother of all Canadian organ builders, = I would assume the instruments they built in their early days would have become what = might be called 'Canadian Classic organ design', or maybe not. Having played many, if not = all of the Casavants here in Montreal (some dating as far back as 1896), I can = honestly say their consoles are still built the same way, with those 'clumsy' wrought-iron = expression & crescendo pedals, although they will provide the more 'standard' style, if = the customer demands it. As for the sound.........something seemed to have gone a bit = awry in the 1960's. I don't know if there was a massive personnel shift or what, but = their organs pre-1960 seem to have a warmer sound than their post-1960 instruments.   Any comments?   c.p.    
(back) Subject: Re: Carnegie Hall Rodgers "out of this world" !!! ??? From: <Mattcinnj@aol.com> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:06:37 EDT   Hi All,   I also was present for this dedication along with one of the others that = made up this series. This was by the late Claire Coachie (spelling ???? = .... the original "First Lady" of the organ). When Virgil played using just flutes, strings, and solo reeds, the sound was pleasant and fairly representative of the real thing. When anything else was added, the sound =   was just plain ugly. Nothing at all resembling pipes!   When I attended Claire's concert, I noticed she played the entire program using just the above mentioned good sounding stops. At this concert, = there were so few there, the ushers turned up all the stage lights to blind = Claire so she didn't see what was going on. We were all then told to sneak down = to the orchestra seats once she started playing so that she could hear and = feel somebody was present. I was upstairs in $4.00 seats with a friend ... = guess who was behind me in the $2.00 seats with a few gal friends ?? Virgil = ... who mostly chatted through the entire program without once mentioning the concert, organ etc. He was very generous with his applause though.   About 15 years ago, I was talking with a former NJ Rodgers, and now Allen dealer. He was a close friend of both Virgil and Claire and when I = mentioned their concerts, he told me a little story. It seems that when Claire went = to try out the organ she gave my friend a frantic call that except for the flutes, strings and solo reeds, she couldn't find anything else to use because the sound was so UGLY, her exact words. He ran down to help her register and came to the same conclusion. Hence she played the entire program using just the softest, pretty stuff. My friend provided this = info. without knowing that I had come to the same conclusion, or my opinions.   Thought you all might find this interesting with the Virgil tie in.   Matt  
(back) Subject: Re: Carnegie Hall Rodgers "out of this world" !!! ??? From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:14:20 -0400   her name was Claire Coci, and she was great. There were many female = organists over the years who were also great......   Nita Akin Claire Coci Catharine Crozier Wilma Jensen Joan Lippincott Marilyn Mason   to name but a few.........   c.p.    
(back) Subject: "Canadian Classic" From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 09:34:32 -0700       Carlo Pietroniro wrote:   > moving this thread north of the border, I wonder what would be = considered "Canadian > Classic" design? Casavant being the mother of all Canadian organ = builders, I would assume > the instruments they built in their early days would have become what = might be called > 'Canadian Classic organ design', or maybe not. Having played many, if = not all of the > Casavants here in Montreal (some dating as far back as 1896), I can = honestly say their > consoles are still built the same way, with those 'clumsy' wrought-iron = expression & > crescendo pedals, although they will provide the more 'standard' style, = if the customer > demands it. As for the sound.........something seemed to have gone a bit = awry in the > 1960's. I don't know if there was a massive personnel shift or what, but = their organs > pre-1960 seem to have a warmer sound than their post-1960 instruments. > > Any comments? > > c.p. >   The answer lies partially in the succession of Casavant tonal directors, = and I don't have the list at hand. Certainly Larry Phelps loomed large in the change of their = tonal concepts.   BUT, the 1960s also saw the rise of the neo-baroque organ among a LOT of = the heretofore more conservative "mainstream" builders, who saw contracts slipping away to the = tracker builders, both foreign and domestic. The PROBLEM with most of those electric-action = neo-baroque organs was that they didn't go far ENOUGH, and the results were decidely mixed.   For instance, you can't simply plant garden-variety pipes on a = "window-box" exposed electric-action pitman chest and expect them to do what pipes on a slider = windchest in an encased tracker organ do. Even leaving aside the question of the ACTION, = the VOICING techniques are DECIDEDLY different.   To explain: in that period, many builders built "window-box" exposed = chests without casework; they placed the smallest ranks (usually mixtures) in the front, and the = tallest ranks in the back. This is exactly BACKWARDS from the layout of an encased organ, where = the facade is normally the Principal stop, and then the ranks go from LARGEST to = SMALLEST from front to back on the chest (except for the reeds, which are normally placed closest = to the pallets, behind the mixtures). This has the effect of "taking the curse off the = mixtures", among other things, and promotes BLEND. You'll see many Holtkamps (and others) from = that same period that have had plexiglass "mixture shields" erected in front of the mixtures on = their window-boxes for just that reason.   The 1968 3m Casavant in the teaching studio at Cincinnati = College-Conservatory of Music was EAR-BLEEDING loud and shrill, even AFTER they came and replaced or = revoiced a majority of the pipework. The Swell and Choir were enclosed, but the Great sat atop the = two expression boxes in all its naked glory, mixtures in front. Of course, it made no SENSE to = put a THREE-manual organ of 30+ ranks in a room that only seated MAYBE 30 PEOPLE, but that = was what was wanted by Wayne Fisher, the head of the department at the time ... as was the = enclosed Choir. The present head of the department, Dr. Roberta Gary, recently acquired a = 10-stop Juget tracker as the main teaching organ (grin).   Carlo, I'd say that the "Canadian Classic" sound is probably EARLIER than = its American counterpart ... the EARLY Casavants, for the most part, never descended to = the depths of the "8' orchestral organ" that practically everybody in this country did (even = E.M. Skinner) . Harrison BEGAN his work in the 1930s (? not sure of dates), and it wasn't = accepted in some quarters as late as the 1950s ...there were churches that hung on to their = E.M. Skinners.   The 1950 Harrison rebuild of the 1915 E.M. Skinner at Oberlin (recently = removed to make way for the new Fisk) was a CLASSIC (grin) example of not going far ENOUGH ... = behind that magnificent case facade was a hodge-podge of pitman chests. In fairness to = Harrison, Oberlin changed the game-plan and the budget AFTER the rebuild had begun. As a = result, the organ was never particularly successful, even of type.   It has been said that from the 1950s onward, Casavant coasted on their = reputation ... I played a 4m Casavant from the 1950s in Christ the King RC Church, Dallas = when I was in graduate school, and *I'd* certainly say that was the case. Mechanically, = the organ was BUILT like a Mack TRUCK, but TONALLY it was ... well, INDESCRIBABLE (grin) ... = loud, coarse ... hmmm, like a Mack truck (grin).   Cheers,   Bud    
(back) Subject: Re: "Canadian Classic" From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:44:04 -0400   there are a few 3-manual Casavants here from the 1950's, whose stop-lists = leave MUCH to be desired. One such instrument is # 2258, built in 1955. It lives and = breathes on it's couplers!!!   c.p.    
(back) Subject: Casavant # 2268 From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 13:10:09 -0400   here's the specs for an organ I play frequently. It was re-built twice, = and got a new console from a church that was demolished in 1972. The original organ had = 4 manuals, but in 1972, the 4th manual (echo division) was removed. Like I said, this = organ lives and breathes on it's couplers. In my opinion, it desperately needs a 16-foot = manual stop somewhere, and maybe even a "Great Sub". It would also be better if there = was "Choir Sub" and "Choir Super".   S. R. Warren 1852 Casavant 1895 Providence Organ 1972 Console: 1955 Casavant, No. 2268   PEDAL Open Diapason 16 Bourdon 16 Principal 8 Stopped Flute 8 Choral Bass 4 Trombone 16   SWELL Gamba 8 Stopped Diapason 8 Voix Celeste 8 Principal 4 Harmonic Flute 4 Blockflute 2 Plein Jeu IV 2 Cornet III Oboe 8 Vox Humana 8 Tremolo Swell Sub Swell Super   CHOIR Dulciana 8 Gedeckt 8 Chimney Flute 4 Principal 4 Piccolo 2 Sesquialtera II 2 2/3 Larigot 1 1/3 Cymbel III 2/3 Clarinet 8 Tremolo   GREAT Open Diapason 8 Stopped Diapason 8 Clarabella 8 Octave 4 Doppel Flute 4 Twelfth 2 2/3 Fifteenth 2 Mixture IV 1 1/3 Trumpet 8 Great Super   GREAT to PEDAL 8, 4 SWELL to PEDAL 8, 4 CHOIR to PEDAL 8, 4   SWELL to GREAT 16, 8, 4 CHOIR to GREAT 16, 8, 4   SWELL to CHOIR 16, 8, 4   4 general pistons 4 SWELL pistons 4 GREAT pistons 4 CHOIR pistons 3 PEDAL pistons   setter piston full organ toe stud (no piston) GREAT to PEDAL 8 piston & toe stud SWELL to PEDAL 8 piston CHOIR to PEDAL 8 piston   SWELL to GREAT 8 piston CHOIR to GREAT 8 piston   SWELL to CHOIR 8 piston   CHOIR shoe SWELL shoe CRESCENDO pedal   crescendo indicator (dial) full organ indicator wind indicator voltage indicator        
(back) Subject: On Digitals and Stoplists... here's one! From: "Wayne Grauel" <wgvideo@attglobal.net> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 13:33:37 -0400     --------------6E52CABA2F447613106AE7E8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Bud Wrote:     My point as regards digital instruments was this: THEY *don't* have =3D the restrictions of space and money; why do they then stay with a design = =3D style that was dictated by those things, and is also (now) widely =3D regarded as inadequate or incomplete? Instead of expanding the stoplist = =3D to include more of the things needed, they seem to multiply celestes and = =3D flavours of stopped flutes and gadgets instead. A digital organ of =3D 75-100 stops SHOULD have a full 8'-based principal chorus, open and =3D stopped flutes, strings, Cornets composed and decomposed, and chorus =3D reeds in every manual division, surely. Virtually NONE of them DO.=3D20   Cheers,=3D20   OK Bud, I've got good news for you. Based on what you think a digital = should have, you obviously haven't seen Eminent's digital lineup. = Granted, most of you probably won't like the eminent because it doesn't = sound like a copy of an American Skinner. But if you want something with = some articulation to it, reeds that have some edge on them and mixtures = that are not screaming away read on!   Even with our modest 2 manual instruments we have full principal choruses = on all divisions with cornets and reeds!   I'm going to point you to several url's here and you can see for = yourself.. If you want to hear it there are real media files.   I certainly dont want to start big pissing contest about who's brand of = digital is better, that's a personal choice, but you wanted to see an off = the shelf stop list and here it is. One thing about our organs, If you = don't like the stop list you can certainly change it to suit your personal = preferences (standard option). This would be great for those who want a = digital instrument to play early Spanish music... just order the stop list with 42 ranks of Trumpets!!! (Grin) In fact, I have a small 2 manual instrument sitting in Maryland with a = principal chorus, cornets and reeds on all three divisions (less the = cornet in the pedal).   http://eminent-usa.com/Digital_church_organs_installs/index.htm (the = organ in Maryland) http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-digital-organ-325-370= .htm http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-organ-380.htm http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-church-organ-DCS400.h= tm   Wayne Grauel Eminent-USA www.eminent-usa.com 800.357.4545           --------------6E52CABA2F447613106AE7E8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> <i>Bud Wrote:</i> <br><i></i>&nbsp;<i></i> <p><i>My point as regards digital instruments was this: THEY *don't* have =3D</i> <br><i>the restrictions of space and money; why do they then stay with a design =3D</i> <br><i>style that was dictated by those things, and is also (now) widely =3D</i> <br><i>regarded as inadequate or incomplete? Instead of expanding the = stoplist =3D</i> <br><i>to include more of the things needed, they seem to multiply = celestes and =3D</i> <br><i>flavours of stopped flutes and gadgets instead. A digital organ of =3D</i> <br><i>75-100 stops SHOULD have a full 8'-based principal chorus, open and =3D</i> <br><i>stopped flutes, strings, Cornets composed and decomposed, and = chorus =3D</i> <br><i>reeds in every manual division, surely. Virtually NONE of them = DO.=3D20</i> <p>&nbsp; Cheers,=3D20 <p>OK Bud, I've got good news for you.&nbsp; Based on what you think a digital should have, you obviously haven't seen Eminent's digital = lineup.&nbsp; Granted, most of you probably won't like the eminent because it doesn't sound like a copy of an American Skinner.&nbsp; But if you want something with some articulation to it, reeds that have some edge on them and = mixtures that are not screaming away read on! <p>Even with our modest 2 manual instruments we have full principal = choruses on all divisions with cornets and reeds! <p>I'm going to point you to several url's here and you can see for yourself.. If you want to hear it there are real media files. <p>I certainly dont want to start big pissing contest about who's brand of digital is better, that's a personal choice, but you wanted to see an off the shelf stop list and here it is.&nbsp; One thing about our organs, If you don't like the stop list you can certainly change it to suit your personal preferences (standard option).&nbsp; This would be great for = those who want a digital instrument to play early Spanish music... just order the stop list with 42 ranks of Trumpets!!!&nbsp; (Grin) <br>In fact, I have a small 2 manual instrument sitting in Maryland with a principal chorus, cornets and reeds on all three divisions (less the cornet in the pedal). <p><A = HREF=3D"http://eminent-usa.com/Digital_church_organs_installs/index.htm">ht= tp://eminent-usa.com/Digital_church_organs_installs/index.htm</A>&nbsp; (the organ in Maryland) <br><A = HREF=3D"http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-digital-organ= -325-370.htm">http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-digital= -organ-325-370.htm</A> <br><A = HREF=3D"http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-organ-380.htm= ">http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-organ-380.htm</A> <br><A = HREF=3D"http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-church-organ-= DCS400.htm">http://eminent-usa.com/eminent-digital-organs/eminent-church-or= gan-DCS400.htm</A> <p>Wayne Grauel <br>Eminent-USA <br>www.eminent-usa.com <br>800.357.4545 <br>&nbsp; <br>&nbsp; <br>&nbsp; <br>&nbsp;</html>   --------------6E52CABA2F447613106AE7E8--    
(back) Subject: RE: "Canadian Classic" From: "Andrew Mead" <mead@eagle.ca> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 14:07:34 -0400       -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of quilisma@socal.rr.com Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 12:35 PM To: PipeChat Subject: "Canadian Classic"   The organ referred to below is now the property of an individual outside Traverse City, MI. He is( likely has by now ) installing it in his house in place of medium sized Moeller. He liked the Casavant better I suppose. He told me that during the Summer months he has recitals with guest organists every Sunday evening for the benefit of his guests. He owns and operates a very attractive seasonal trailer park.   Andrew Mead   The 1968 3m Casavant in the teaching studio at Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music was EAR-BLEEDING loud and shrill, even AFTER they came and replaced or = revoiced a majority of the pipework. The Swell and Choir were enclosed, but the Great sat atop the = two expression boxes in all its naked glory, mixtures in front. Of course, it made no SENSE to put a THREE-manual organ of 30+ ranks in a room that only seated MAYBE 30 PEOPLE, but that = was what was wanted by Wayne Fisher, the head of the department at the time ... as was the enclosed Choir. The present head of the department, Dr. Roberta Gary, recently acquired a 10-stop Juget tracker as the main teaching organ (grin).