PipeChat Digest #2074 - Tuesday, May 1, 2001
 
Re: organ-building
  by "Panning" <jpanning@cal-net.net>
Re: Latin vs. translations?
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: Latin vs. translations?
  by <Innkawgneeto@cs.com>
Re: Calvert Shenk
  by "Randy Terry" <randyterryus@yahoo.com>
Re: Pneumatic
  by <flcg1018@mails.fju.edu.tw>
Re: Latin vs. translations?
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: organ-building
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: "Panning" <jpanning@cal-net.net> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:09:40 -0500   Dear Bud,   >Someone remarked that the reed organ was the 19th century equivalent of >today's >digital organ ... but it seems to me that a two-manual and pedal reed >organ wasn't >cheap either, by 19th century standards.   I think that two manual and pedal reed organs were the exception. Many smaller churches in the Midwest had one manual reed organs, and many moved up to one manual pipe organs. Hinners and others made hundreds of them and sold them by through bi-lingual catalogs. Today, however, for a variety of reasons, few organists would agree to play a one manual pipe organ when they could play a two manual electronic with lots of knobs.   >A lot of churches that COULD afford pipe organs in 1900 CAN'T afford pipe >organs >in 2001 ... why?   I live in rural Iowa. My state is filled with substantial churches, many dating from the last several decades of the 19th century. They are often incredibly beautiful, and what's more, they are often in towns of less than 1,000 inhabitants...quite a few are surrounded by nothing but corn fields, and are as impressive in their own way as Ely is in the fens.   How is it that common farmers and shopkeepers managed to put up these buildings?* The world has never known a nation blessed with the kind of prosperity we in the US are enjoying right now, so why is it that the Methodist Church in Glidden, Iowa, just put up a church building that is nothing more than a corrugated metal shed with some brick veneer and a fiberglass steeple? And how can one explain the $30,000 SUVs sitting in = the parking lot?   The secularization of the church, the erosion of the concept of sacrifical giving and rampant consumerism are all underlying reasons. Fundamentally: it is a matter of priorities.   >If there are records, has anybody ever compared the charitable >contributions of >1900 with 2000?   This would be very interesting indeed.   >I'm not a builder, just a tinkerer ... but I wonder how much of space-age >technology CAN be applied to the pipe organ.   >Organ-pipes can be (and have been) made out of just about anything that = can be >formed into a cylinder or a square ... but there must be a REASON that >builders >settled on wood, tin/lead alloys, copper, and zinc.   Setting aside for a moment the matter of tone, the main problem with organ pipes is that, relatively speaking, none of them are the same. Before the industrial revolution, labor was cheap and materials were expensive. In today's world, the reverse is true. This is why trying to make pipes out = of exotic materials is such a dead end. Of course, one can make pipes out of plastics and solvent weld them together. But that technique produces no labor savings. You still have to pay a guy to cut the stuff out, roll it = up and join the pieces together somehow. In addition, now the pipemaker is exposed to toxic and probably carcinogenic substances far more insidious than simple tin/lead alloys. And we still haven't said anything about tone...   >One doesn't see anything comparable going on in the building of = orchestral >instruments, at least not to my knowledge. And I don't think any major >orchestra >is contemplating replacing their grand piano with an electronic keyboard, >except >with a composer calls for it (grin).   An excellent point. There are electronic substitutes for every real, acoustic instrument, yet I don't hear calls for PVC piccolos, vinyl E-flat horns or fiberglass mandolins. Why is that?   Thanks for your thoughtful comments.   John   * For an interesting diversion, check out this history of Sacred Heart Church, Meyer, Iowa (pop. 30) http://www.meyeriowa.com/history.html        
(back) Subject: Re: Latin vs. translations? From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 11:28:53 +0800   Colin, it's Beagle grammar. Bob Elms. Colin Hulme wrote: > > Since we're on the topic of Latin, you really should use good grammar. > "If you cannot play goodly, play loudly." snrk snrk snrk > Since when is " snrk snrk snrk " good grammar?. Which language is it in? >    
(back) Subject: Re: Latin vs. translations? From: <Innkawgneeto@cs.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:41:30 EDT     --part1_b9.db5dd86.281f8a6a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   We know the grammar is wrong, because it really should be, "If you cannot play well, play loudly." But it doesn't have the same alliterative ring (pardon the spelling if it's wrong) as good and loud.   My youth choir is going to sing a Latin piece in Latin on Mother's Day: = "Soli Deo Gloria" (I think it's Pergolesi arranged by Liebergen). The English = just doesn't cut it. The Youth Choir has sung on Mother's Day for both traditional services for the last 5 or 6 years -- I think it's safe to say =   it's now a tradition.   Now if I can just keep our older son out of the hospital over Mother's Day =   (where he was last year), we'll be doing well.   Peace everyone! Neil B.   --part1_b9.db5dd86.281f8a6a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>We know the grammar is = wrong, because it really should be, <BR>"If you cannot play well, play loudly." &nbsp;But it doesn't have the = same <BR>alliterative ring (pardon the spelling if it's wrong) as good and = loud. &nbsp; <BR> <BR>My youth choir is going to sing a Latin piece in Latin on Mother's = Day: "Soli <BR>Deo Gloria" (I think it's Pergolesi arranged by Liebergen). &nbsp;The = English just <BR>doesn't cut it. &nbsp;The Youth Choir has sung on Mother's Day for = both <BR>traditional services for the last 5 or 6 years -- I think it's safe to = say <BR>it's now a tradition. <BR> <BR>Now if I can just keep our older son out of the hospital over Mother's = Day <BR>(where he was last year), we'll be doing well. <BR> <BR>Peace everyone! <BR>Neil B.</FONT></HTML>   --part1_b9.db5dd86.281f8a6a_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Calvert Shenk From: "Randy Terry" <randyterryus@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:04:17 -0700 (PDT)   I agree with Marilyn's comments about Calvert. At the Region IV convention = in Birmingham in 1997 (?) there were morning services at all the big churches in the area, and I = was a bit surprised to be going to St. Paul's for a morning liturgy. Well, that proved to be the = highpoint of the whole convention for me - equal with Jack Mitchner's wonderful recital at St. = Luke's Episcopal. But the worship at St. Paul's was *perfect.* The music was wonderfully elegant, = tastefully understated, beautifully played, and beautifully sung by the Cathedral's choir - I am = not kidding. The faux bourdons were all Mr. Shenk's - or most of them were, and the hymns were = wonderful, too. Add a large gothic room with the best acoustics in the state of Alabama - must = be 4 or 5 seconds of reverb, and a modest mid 80's Moller organ in a shallow case (all 50 some = odd ranks of it, that (again tastefully) obscures some monstrous Gabriel Loire style window that = would probably be fine in a contemporary building but as I remember was totally innappropriate in = that space) that sounds darn good.....   Anyway, I know her post was several days old and I should have quoted some = of it, but I thought I should comment. I don't think they went out of their way because it was an = AGO event, either. I do remember after attending that service that it made the others (including = the Episcopal Cathedral that at least back then had a wonderful choir - I have no idea one way or = another what the music at either place is like now, but if I could have Calvert Shenk all the = time, I would be in HEAVEN!!   =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!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/  
(back) Subject: Re: Pneumatic From: <flcg1018@mails.fju.edu.tw> Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 13:01:31 +0800 (CST)       On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 Cremona502@cs.com wrote:   > In a message dated 4/30/01 3:51:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > desertbob@rglobal.net writes: > > > > Many installation of the > > original Perflex formulation are still working just fine and will = probably > > outlast any leather. > > > >   Yes.... more information please.... because on at least one other august organ related list, some distinguished list members were "very" critical of Perflex...   Yes.... more information please...   Best wishes,       Morton Belcher fellow pipechat list member...       > > More information please!!! Spefics? What churches, what organs, = where? > > 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/ >  
(back) Subject: Re: Latin vs. translations? From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 02:20:59 EDT     --part1_8b.5ea8d01.281fafcb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 4/30/01 8:42:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Innkawgneeto@cs.com writes:     > ." But it doesn't have the same > alliterative ring (pardon the spelling if it's wrong) as good and loud. = > >   However, when you translate it into Latin, it will have a completely different ring! ;-)   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_8b.5ea8d01.281fafcb_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 = 4/30/01 8:42:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>Innkawgneeto@cs.com writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">." &nbsp;But it = doesn't have the same <BR>alliterative ring (pardon the spelling if it's wrong) as good and = loud. &nbsp;&nbsp; <BR> <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>However, when you translate it into Latin, it will have a completely <BR>different ring! &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>Visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</FONT></HTML>   --part1_8b.5ea8d01.281fafcb_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 03:15:39 -0500       Bud wrote:   > Someone remarked that the reed organ was the 19th century equivalent of = today's > digital organ ... but it seems to me that a two-manual and pedal reed = organ wasn't > cheap either, by 19th century standards.   Neither was music. If you look at the prices on old anthems, you find = that many of them cost a nickel or ten cents, but remember this was back in the days = when a dollar a (16-hour) day was good money for a skilled laborer. At comparable = costs, the same anthem today would cost five or six dollars.       > A lot of churches that COULD afford pipe organs in 1900 CAN'T afford = pipe organs > in 2001 ... why?   I don't think it was a matter of could then and can't now; I think "chose = to then, chose not to now" is a more accurate assessment. IMnsHO, part of it was = the priorites of the congregations. Judging by the number of copies of anthems I have = seen in files of "old" churches, those same churches had choirs or twenty or thirty = souls, where together they do well to get half that number.   Also, remember, that this was in a day when every community--and I use the = term very broadly--a band, chorus or both.   > OK, there ARE some outside factors ... there was no personal income tax = in 1900, > for instance. > > If there are records, has anybody ever compared the charitable = contributions of > 1900 with 2000?   I think the fact that there was no radio, tv, or cinema influenced the = situation, too. If you wanted to be entertained, and you were very lucky you lived = in a large enough community that there was a vaudeville house; otherwise, if you = wanted music, you made it yourself.   > Organ-pipes can be (and have been) made out of just about anything that = can be > formed into a cylinder or a square ... but there must be a REASON that = builders > settled on wood, tin/lead alloys, copper, and zinc.   Easily worked and durable....   > One doesn't see anything comparable going on in the building of = orchestral > instruments, at least not to my knowledge. And I don't think any major = orchestra > is contemplating replacing their grand piano with an electronic = keyboard, except > with a composer calls for it (grin).   But, the principal oboist of the Chicago Symphony plays a resin (plastic) = oboe. A professional grade one, to be sure, but a plastic oboe, nonetheless. The = thing about electronic keyboards, is that most of the current manifestations are not = being true to themselves; they are electronic keyboards masquerading as pianos. Until = they go back to being faithful to themselves, they will be avoided by institutions = which want the "real thing".   > > > 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