PipeChat Digest #3270 - Sunday, December 1, 2002
 
Re: My little organ
  by "Roy Redman" <rredman@imagin.net>
Re: My little organ
  by <Seedlac@aol.com>
Re: Harpsichord
  by "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com>
Re: Expressing ourselves tactfully.
  by <Chicaleee@aol.com>
Re: Why are we playing?? was: Who controls the volume?
  by "Paul Soulek" <soulek@frontiernet.net>
Re: Harpsichord terminology
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: BACH CANTATAS
  by "MARAUDER" <kmoyer@marauder.millersville.edu>
Re: My little organ (Spelling error)
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: My little organ (Spelling error)
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: My little organ
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: My little organ (Spelling error)
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Expressing ourselves tactfully.
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: Schwimmers as winding additia
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Harpsichord terminology
  by "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com>
Re: My little organ
  by "Tim Bovard" <tmbovard@earthlink.net>
Re: Harpsichord terminology
  by "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com>
Re: Expressing ourselves untactfully
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Expressing ourselves tactfully.
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net>
Schwimmers and pneumatics.
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net>
Re: Schwimmers and pneumatics.
  by "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: My little organ From: "Roy Redman" <rredman@imagin.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:00:11 -0600   The German "Schwimbalg" was originally only a regular reservoir, but with = a membrane and floating plate without ribs. See Klotz, The Organ Handbook. = Herman Schlicker used it, but soon applied internal eveners to stabilize plate = motion. Other builders still use this type reservoir, Schantz, I believe in = particular. The advantages are obvious: Easier to build, and far easier to recover. = Well designed and constructed, this type bellows can serve very well. Its application to the bottom of a windchest probably evolved out of the = concussion bellows. Not all inbuilt reservoirs are schwimmers, by definition, since = some are hinged at one end like a wedge bellows. An inbuilt reservoir could, of = course be built with ribs, as well. By adding a controlling valve, very steady pressure can be obtained with = optimal design. This is because there is no intervening wind trunk to uncouple = the reservoir from direct communication with the windchest. Some eliminated = the static reservoir entirely, but most have found that the bottom of the chest = bellows, with its usual disk valve can only regulate a pressure difference of about 1" efficiently. The elimination of the static, or blower, reservoir to = initially lower the pressure has caused many oscillation problems. One inherent = limitation with the upside down reservoir is that normally only springs, instead of = springs and weights, can be used. The pantograph springs mentioned earlier were = developed, probably by Josef Glatter-Gotz, to solve some of those problems. As with any relatively new technology, some unsuccessful inbuilt = reservoirs have been built and installed. Some complain that they cannot be recovered = without removing the chest because of an internal retaining frame. That's easy, = just add an external frame to hold the membrane and there is never any reason to = remove or tilt the windchest. Properly designed and built, however, the inbuilt = reservoirs can solve some problems, including space considerations and wind = steadiness, if those are your goals. Roy Redman   Mike Gettelman wrote:   > Hi Seb and others, > I wonder if we might hear a bit about Schwimmers vs. Reservoirs, and = why > Schwimmers were created in the first place. Is it a space issue? Are = Sshwimmers > inherently less reliable or adjustable for maintaining stable pressures? = They > must be more difficult to work on due to their need to be maintained "in = place" > on the chest. I wonder if Schwimmers create turbulence problems due to = the fact > the wind must enter the chest before reaching the Scwimmer to be = regulated? Any > information you might be willing to share on this topic would be most > appreciated. > > Mike > > TubaMagna@aol.com wrote: > > > Have you considered replacing the schwimmerbalgen with real = reservoirs? That > > might help. > > > > "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 > > "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: My little organ From: <Seedlac@aol.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 15:28:05 EST   I have had success with correcting a fluttering schwimmer by diverting = some wind from the chest back to the blower intake. A a small paper hose (1" = dia if I remember) was attached to the weighed side of the of the wind, in the =   schwimmer. The hose was neatly snaked back to the blower intake. I suppose = a blast gate at the schwimmer end would be helpful to fine tune the amount = of air bled off.   Steve Bartley  
(back) Subject: Re: Harpsichord From: "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 12:32:35 -0800   Alan Freed wrote: > ... > But, as you say, it=92s like a guitar or a viola=97or a harp, for that > matter. You tune it every time you want to play it.     I built a couple of Zuckermann kits (sold the first one, still have the second), and find the tuning to be very stable. I can go for a month or more between tunings. Of course I don't move mine around very much. I find tuning it to be a breeze, takes no time at all; easy as a guitar, except for having more strings.   My first was a single manual 2x8, the second a Flemish Double 2x8, 1x4. I wish I still had the 2x8; it actually sounded better to me, and of course was much easier to tune.   Mac Hayes  
(back) Subject: Re: Expressing ourselves tactfully. From: <Chicaleee@aol.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 15:47:07 EST     --part1_188.11ce82e2.2b1bcf4b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Richard, you said what I was thinking. Thanks. Lee   --part1_188.11ce82e2.2b1bcf4b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">Richard, you said what I was thinking.&nbsp; = Thanks.&nbsp; Lee</FONT></HTML>   --part1_188.11ce82e2.2b1bcf4b_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Why are we playing?? was: Who controls the volume? From: "Paul Soulek" <soulek@frontiernet.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:48:50 -0600   On the subject of organists getting paid as much as pastors, the truth is that they do----when church musicians have the same amount of training, and spend as much time as the pastor does, they do. I know of many churches where the director of music is paid just as much as the pastor. I'm sure that there are cases where this ISN'T happening as well.   (Most) Pastors spend huge amounts of time working on worship services, sermons, visiting shut-ins, etc. They should be compensated well for this. But most people should realize that pastors aren't there for the money either. They DO need to have money to meet their earthly needs, and most churches provide for this, and then some. "We love because He first loved us"--- support for our pastors and musicians is part of this.   Paul  
(back) Subject: Re: Harpsichord terminology From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:46:42 -0500   On 12/1/02 3:32 PM, "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com> wrote:   > Alan Freed wrote: >> ... >> But, as you say, it=92s like a guitar or a viola=97or a harp, for that >> matter. You tune it every time you want to play it. >=20 > I built a couple of Zuckermann kits (sold the first one, still have the > second), and find the tuning to be very stable. I can go for a month or > more between tunings. >=20 > My first was a single manual 2x8, the second a Flemish Double 2x8, 1x4. > I wish I still had the 2x8; it actually sounded better to me, and of > course was much easier to tune. >=20 Mac, you';re just the guy who can help me. My harpsichord is a small single-manual Zuckermann, built from a kit ($350) by two ladyfriends of min= e (one a very good musician, and the other a highly skilled worker in exotic woods--she made balalaikas backgammon boards, etc.) in the 60s. I blessed their project by accepting their dinner invitations, with the result that when they broke up and the musician went into a cloistered monastery, it became mine. It's now being restrung, new jacks, all new felt, re-plectra'd, etc, for $1K, whereupon I'm donating it to St. Luke's.   Thirty-five years ago I knew how to describe it (and even knew what the words meant!): one manual, one rank, with a lute stop. But now I've lost all recollection of what that means. Obviously, you can fill me in. What does it mean what you say,   a single manual 2x8, the second a Flemish Double 2x8, 1x4?   Since it's in the shop, I can't look to confirm this, but as I recall there are TWO little levers to adjust; one is the lute stop, of course; what's th= e other? Plectra adjustment for light or heavy bite?   Thank you for the lesson!   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: BACH CANTATAS From: "MARAUDER" <kmoyer@marauder.millersville.edu> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:25:53 -0500   >The Feast of the Purification falls on a Sunday [Feb 2/03], and I was = thinking of Bach's solo cantata # 82, "Ich Habe Genug".   Theodore Hoelty-Nickol told the story of being in a church in Germany when this solo cantata was sung. It includes a lengthy, sonderful aria on the words "Ich habe genug," literally, "I have enough," and in the = context is a poetic way of saying that I've had enough of this world's travail, Lord; take me to heaven at your own sweet time.   Problem was: the soloist sang only the aria and out of context. = Some poor soul sitting in church that morning was trying to deal with his own problems in life, found this "mindless repetition" of the text a bit more than he coujld handle, stood straight up in church as the aria was going = on, shook his fist at the soloist, and fairly shouted "I habe AUCH genug," and walked out!!   True story. :-)   Karl E. Moyer Lancaster PA    
(back) Subject: Re: My little organ (Spelling error) From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:11:18 +0000 (GMT)   --0-1343201138-1038780678=3D:20245 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit     Ha!     Mach Hayes sent me a welcome e-mail.........I mistook seized for ceased.   Now I know why we sing, "Most highly flavoured gravy" in "The Angel = Gabriel"   I guess it all started when "mighty dread had seized her troubled = mind"....a condition which ceased when the Angel Gabriel spoke.   Of course, there is also disease and decease....both closely related of = course, and both fully covered if spelled "dieseize". (In the grip of = death)   My favourite is "Mer(s)entile Banks".....the Mercantile love of money!   English is such a complex language, requiring the most "ardentious" study = and care.     Regards,     Colin Mitchell UK     PS: I always forget to use the spell-checker, but this one would have = "past by" I guess!   :)         --------------------------------- With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits = your needs   --0-1343201138-1038780678=3D:20245 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit   <P>Ha!</P> <P>&nbsp;</P> <P>Mach Hayes sent me a welcome e-mail.........I mistook seized for = ceased.</P> <P>Now I know why we sing, "Most highly flavoured gravy" in "The Angel = Gabriel"</P> <P>I guess it all started when&nbsp;"mighty dread had seized&nbsp;her = troubled mind"....a condition which ceased when the Angel Gabriel = spoke.</P> <P>Of course, there is also disease and decease....both closely related of = course, and both&nbsp;fully covered if spelled "dieseize". (In the grip of = death)</P> <P>My favourite is "Mer(s)entile Banks".....the Mercantile love of = money!</P> <P>English is such a complex language, requiring the most "ardentious" = study and care.</P> <P>&nbsp;</P> <P>Regards,</P> <P>&nbsp;</P> <P>Colin Mitchell UK</P> <P>&nbsp;</P> <P>PS: I&nbsp;always forget to use&nbsp;the spell-checker, but this one = would have "past by" I guess!</P> <P>:)</P><p><p><br><hr size=3D1><a = href=3D"http://uk.yahoo.com/mail/tagline_xtra/?http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mai= l_storage.html"><b><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2">With Yahoo! Mail you = can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your = needs</font></b></a><br> --0-1343201138-1038780678=3D:20245--  
(back) Subject: Re: My little organ (Spelling error) From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:03:34 +1300   Endlessly fascinating to me, too.   I came across a good one right here just the other day: something made of unobtainium. That's a great new word. Mind you, there are squillions of wonderful words that are now obsolete but deserve to be revived.   Ross -----Original Message----- From: Colin Mitchell <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> To: Pipechat@pipechat.org <Pipechat@pipechat.org> Date: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:11 AM Subject: Re: My little organ (Spelling error)     Ha!       Mach Hayes sent me a welcome e-mail.........I mistook seized for ceased.   Now I know why we sing, "Most highly flavoured gravy" in "The Angel Gabriel"   I guess it all started when "mighty dread had seized her troubled mind"....a condition which ceased when the Angel Gabriel spoke.   Of course, there is also disease and decease....both closely related of course, and both fully covered if spelled "dieseize". (In the grip of = death)   My favourite is "Mer(s)entile Banks".....the Mercantile love of money!   English is such a complex language, requiring the most "ardentious" = study and care.       Regards,       Colin Mitchell UK       PS: I always forget to use the spell-checker, but this one would have "past by" I guess!   :)             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - -- With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs      
(back) Subject: Re: My little organ From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:27:57 -0600   Mike Gettelman wrote: > > Hi Seb and others, > I wonder if we might hear a bit about Schwimmers vs. Reservoirs, and = why > Schwimmers were created in the first place. Is it a space issue? Are = Sshwimmers > inherently less reliable or adjustable for maintaining stable pressures? =     Schwimmers ought not to be considered as an alternative to reservoirs, but they are in my opinion invaluable for creating an excellent winding characteristic for an organ where they are used IN ADDITION TO reservoirs. We at Quimby Pipe Organs provide on our new organs (1) a static reservoir (2) a substantial reservoir under each division AND (3) a schwimmer under each chest. We have discovered that by tinkering with the geometry of the schwimmers it is possible to adjust them so that they will not allow any drop in the wind pressure of the chest, but at the same time they will allow small rises in pressure up to about a quarter of an inch. This creates a wind supply that has no possibility of unsteadiness, but at the same time allows a certain feeling of "flexible winding" by swelling on big chords. If schwimmers are to work satisfactorily, however, it is important that most of the regulation is done by the reservoir, and in no cases should the schwimmer change the wind pressure by more than an inch.   John Speller  
(back) Subject: Re: My little organ (Spelling error) From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:35:18 -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_3121608918_12051330 Content-type: text/plain; charset=3D"ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable   On 12/1/02 5:11 PM, "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:   > this one would have "past by" I guess!   I HAVE to assume that=3DB9s deliberate for =3DB3passed by=3DB2 (which, of = course, also would have done)--No?   Tee hee   Alan   --B_3121608918_12051330 Content-type: text/html; charset=3D"ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable   <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Re: My little organ (Spelling error)</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <FONT FACE=3D3D"Times New Roman">On 12/1/02 5:11 PM, &quot;Colin = Mitchell&quot;=3D &lt;cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk&gt; wrote:<BR> <BR> </FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D3D"Times New Roman">this one would have = &quot;p=3D ast by&quot; I guess!<BR> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D3D"Times New Roman"><BR> I HAVE to assume that&#8217;s deliberate for &#8220;passed by&#8221; = (which=3D , of course, also would have done)--No?<BR> <BR> Tee hee<BR> <BR> Alan</FONT> </BODY> </HTML>     --B_3121608918_12051330--    
(back) Subject: Re: Expressing ourselves tactfully. From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:37:10 -0600   > Keith Zimmerman wrote:   > > Can we pleeeeeeeeeeeeease clean this up a bit. We're an educated = bunch, so can we please find a way to express > > disappointment, anger, disgust, etc. without stooping to sh-------, = f----------, d----------, g---d--------, etc?   Or at least save such language for very special occasions. Swearing loses its impact if it is used all the time for trifling and petty matters.   John Speller  
(back) Subject: Re: Schwimmers as winding additia From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 17:41:37 EST   Dear Mr. Speller:   Is there some kind of cut-out ventil to disengage the action of the schwimmers when the tremulants are engaged, or do the schwimmers not noticeably defeat the action of the tremulants?   Sebastian M. Gluck  
(back) Subject: Re: Harpsichord terminology From: "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:45:27 -0800   Alan Freed wrote: > ...What does it mean what you say, > a single manual 2x8, the second a Flemish Double 2x8, 1x4?   Zuckermann probably offered a model with a single 8' rank of strings at one time, but by 1979, when I built my first one, two ranks of same-pitch strings were used. I don't recall there being any reason for an instrument with lute stop to have two levers unless it had two 8' ranks, and the extra lever was to turn off one of the 8' ranks. It's possible the extra lever is a dummy, provided for future addition of a second 8'. The amount of motion to turn on/off the plectra is very small, maybe 1/32", so it isn't practical to fine-tune the plectra bite. The double that i have now has three controls; an on/off for the 4', an on/off for one 8', and on/off for the lute.   Does your instrument have a curved or flat "bent-side"? I seem to recall that the earliest Zuckermanns (Zuckermenn?) with 1x8 were flat on the bent-side.   That price you are paying for "all that work" sounds very good; they are probably giving you a price break.   Reading the literature from Zuckermann, they were pretty clear about the added maintenance problems of adding the 1x4 - they even had a single-manual model with 2x8 and 1x4, which they didn't really recommend because all the extra bracing for the 4' reduced the resonance of the soundboard. Some people insist on putting up with extra clatter and maintenance, just for the added complexity of sound with all strings "on". But when you are using just one or two 8' it is missing the singing quality (sustain? Resonance?) of a simple instrument.   Mac  
(back) Subject: Re: My little organ From: "Tim Bovard" <tmbovard@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:55:34 -0600   At 11:42 AM 12/1/2002 -0500, Mike wrote: >Hi Seb and others, > I wonder if we might hear a bit about Schwimmers vs. Reservoirs, and = why >Schwimmers were created in the first place.     Hi Mike, and other schwimmer-curious folk --   The AIO Video Lecture Series includes a tape of a lecture given to the = 1999 AIO Convention by Charles Kegg of Kegg Pipe Organs in Canton, OH. I attended that lecture personally, and can attest to the quality of the information presented, as well as the presentation itself. (who'da thunk you could make a talk about schwimmers *funny*..??! <g>) The tape is available (at least) from the AIO website: <http://www.pipeorgan.org/> click on "video lecture series" and scroll to =   the bottom of the page.   Hope this helps --   Tim      
(back) Subject: Re: Harpsichord terminology From: "Mac Hayes" <mach37@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:56:43 -0800   To put my previous post on topic, retroactively, I became interested in building a harpsichord because of a trip to the library to read up on organs. I came across a book on Zuckermann harpsichords written by David J. Way, who became the force behind Zuckermann until Way's death a few years back.   Early on in the book, Way says that he also got interested in harpsichords because of HIS interest in pipe organs.   Mac Hayes  
(back) Subject: Re: Expressing ourselves untactfully From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:00:46 +0000 (GMT)   --0-172249307-1038783646=3D:3076 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit     Hello, This reminds me of the old organist & choirmaster who had been at a = Yorkshire Church ever since Moses lived. He was bad-tempered, a bit of a = choral tyrant and a fine organist. Everyone was terrified of him; = including the adults in his superb choir. He had a stock answer for any clergyman who came up to him whilst he = played a voluntary......... "Bugger off!" It never failed to work! Regards, Colin Mitchell UK "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> wrote:> Keith Zimmerman = wrote:   > > Can we pleeeeeeeeeeeeease clean this up a bit. We're an educated = bunch, so can we please find a way to express > > disappointment, anger, disgust, etc. without stooping to sh-------, = f----------, d----------, g---d--------, etc?   Or at least save such language for very special occasions. Swearing loses its impact if it is used all the time for trifling and petty matters.   John Speller           --------------------------------- With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits = your needs   --0-172249307-1038783646=3D:3076 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit   <P>Hello, <P>This reminds me of the old organist &amp; choirmaster who had been at a = Yorkshire Church ever since Moses lived. He was bad-tempered, a bit of a = choral tyrant and a fine organist. Everyone was terrified of him; = including the adults in his superb choir. <P>He had a stock answer for any clergyman who came up to him whilst he = played a voluntary......... "Bugger off!" <P>It never failed to work! <P>Regards, <P>Colin Mitchell UK <P>&nbsp; <P>&nbsp; <P>&nbsp;<B><I>"John L. Speller" &lt;jlspeller@mindspring.com&gt;</I></B> = wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt; Keith Zimmerman wrote:<BR><BR>&gt; &gt; Can we = pleeeeeeeeeeeeease clean this up a bit. We're an educated bunch, so can we = please find a way to express<BR>&gt; &gt; disappointment, anger, disgust, = etc. without stooping to sh-------, f----------, d----------, = g---d--------, etc? <BR><BR>Or at least save such language for very = special occasions. <BR>Swearing loses its impact if it is used all the = time for<BR>trifling and petty matters.<BR><BR>John = Speller<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><p><br><hr size=3D1><a = href=3D"http://uk.yahoo.com/mail/tagline_xtra/?http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mai= l_storage.html"><b><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2">With Yahoo! Mail you = can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your = needs</font></b></a><br> --0-172249307-1038783646=3D:3076--  
(back) Subject: Expressing ourselves tactfully. From: "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:11:56 -0600   "John L. Speller" wrote:   > Or at least save such language for very special occasions. > Swearing loses its impact if it is used all the time for > trifling and petty matters.   Not to turn this into a debate, but in recognition of the fact that this list is a group of learned people expressing themselves in a public forum, I don't think there's ANY necessity for profanity. Ever. Though I am certainly the first to admit having failed more times than I care to count in that regard, I still find the use and hearing/reading of such base vocabulary patently offensive and vulgar.   I was always taught that profanity is evidence of a weak mind attempting to express itself forcibly.   Since I don't happen to consider any of my colleagues to be weak-minded (or at least don't at least want themselves to be CONSIDERED to be such!), then I think we can all benefit by taking the high road.   Worth thinking about. . .   Faithfully,   G.A. -- Richard Schneider, PRES/CEO SCHNEIDER PIPE ORGANS, Inc. Pipe Organ Builders 41-43 Johnston St./P.O. Box 137 Kenney, IL 61749-0137 (217) 944-2454 VOX (217) 944-2527 FAX mailto:arp@schneiderpipeorgans.com SHOP EMAIL mailto:arp@starband.net SHOP SATELLITE EMAIL mailto:arpschneider@starband.net HOME OFFICE EMAIL http://www.schneiderpipeorgans.com WEB PAGE URL    
(back) Subject: Schwimmers and pneumatics. From: "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:19:21 -0600   TubaMagna@aol.com wrote: > Is there some kind of cut-out ventil to disengage the action of the > schwimmers when the tremulants are engaged, or do the schwimmers not > noticeably defeat the action of the tremulants?   A very effective and controllable Tremulant can be achieved by adding a pneumatic bellows to the Spring Rails underneath the Schwimmer plate which is alternately inflated/deflated with wind by means of a double-acting valve, driven in turn by a solid state Tremulant Pulastor, sold by a number of organ vendors. The most elaborate of these electronic controls allows adjustment of the speed and pulse-width of the energy going to the magnet controlling the pneumatic. If the Schwimmer is small enough, I have controlled these directly by means of a large solenoid, such as is used in coupler controls; sold by Laukhuff and Heuss in Germany.   I know of one major builder whose firm uses pneumatic cylinders for their Slider Chest Stop Action similar to pneumatic controls for HVAC systems in commercial buildings. One day, I would like to experiment with an arrangement using a pneumatic cylinder or two using 30 PSI Compressed air, such as these systems have.   It would also be interesting to experiment with pneumatic Rotary Actuators for Swell Shade control. There are many times where more "horsepower" is needed for larger sets of Swell shades than what Peterson engines can do. The older bellows-type pneumatics seem a bit sluggish by comparison.   Just to modify the subject a little bit. . .   Faithfully,   G.A.   -- Richard Schneider, PRES/CEO SCHNEIDER PIPE ORGANS, Inc. Pipe Organ Builders 41-43 Johnston St./P.O. Box 137 Kenney, IL 61749-0137 (217) 944-2454 VOX (217) 944-2527 FAX mailto:arp@schneiderpipeorgans.com SHOP EMAIL mailto:arp@starband.net SHOP SATELLITE EMAIL mailto:arpschneider@starband.net HOME OFFICE EMAIL http://www.schneiderpipeorgans.com WEB PAGE URL    
(back) Subject: Re: Schwimmers and pneumatics. From: "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 17:37:28 -0600   At 5:19 PM -0600 12/01/02, Richard Schneider wrote: > >I know of one major builder whose firm uses pneumatic cylinders for >their Slider Chest Stop Action similar to pneumatic controls for HVAC >systems in commercial buildings. One day, I would like to experiment >with an arrangement using a pneumatic cylinder or two using 30 PSI >Compressed air, such as these systems have. > >It would also be interesting to experiment with pneumatic Rotary >Actuators for Swell Shade control. There are many times where more >"horsepower" is needed for larger sets of Swell shades than what >Peterson engines can do. The older bellows-type pneumatics seem a bit >sluggish by comparison.   That same firm also uses pneumatic cylinders for whiffle-tree stop engines which work very well. And the engine is much smaller than the old fashioned bellows-type engine.   David