PipeChat Digest #3324 - Wednesday, December 25, 2002
 
fundamentals and harmonics
  by "Ray Kimber" <ray@kimber.com>
Re: Tierce from Undulating Rank
  by "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com>
SEASONS GREETINGS
  by "Judy A. Ollikkala" <71431.2534@compuserve.com>
HTML
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, IL" <kzrev@rr1.net>
HTML
  by <Kzimmer0817@aol.com>
HTML messages
  by <Wuxuzusu@aol.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #3322 - 12/24/02
  by <Kzimmer0817@aol.com>
Re: IRC
  by <Chicaleee@aol.com>
HTML messages & AOHell!
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net>
Re: Which Harmonic
  by "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com>
Merry Xmas
  by "Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com>
HTML
  by "Administrator" <admin@pipechat.org>
Sending No HTML from AOL
  by <Myosotis51@aol.com>
Re: Sending No HTML from AOL
  by <ContraReed@aol.com>
Re: Which Harmonic
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Merry Xmas
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Christmas Across America
  by "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com>
Re: Merry Xmas
  by <Chicaleee@aol.com>
Re: Which Harmonic
  by "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com>
Re: Which Harmonic
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: Tierce from Undulating Rank
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
MERRY CHRISTMAS / HAPPY HOLIDAYS
  by "Administrator" <admin@pipechat.org>
 

(back) Subject: fundamentals and harmonics From: "Ray Kimber" <ray@kimber.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:56:29 -0700   Hello List,   We have a similar mis-speak with "polarity" and "phase" regarding speaker systems, lots of folks (most who know better) say that a speaker is "out = of phase", when they really mean "out of polarity" Phase is a shift in time, polarity is swapped leads. same would be true on microphones.   I always use the term fundamental, then 2nd harmonic (and so on). I have broken myself of using the term 1st harmonic.   Best regards and Merry Christmas,   Ray Kimber        
(back) Subject: Re: Tierce from Undulating Rank From: "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:54:11 -0800 (PST)   Dear Ross:   I agree with you wholeheartedly about the manner of tuning celestes - tuning them to their companion rank individually from bottom to top. I hate to hear trebles beating fast (frying). I would NEVER tune a celeste in octaves.   In flute celestes however, I always tune them sharp. I tried tuning one flat once, and the organist and I agreed that it sounded better tuned sharp, so I have always done that. When I finish tuning a celeste, I play some music on it, and if it does not sound questionable, I leave it alone. I usually don't have to worry about that, though. There are relatively few organs around big enough to have a Flute Celeste, anyway.   About deriving a celeste from a tierce stop, that is something that I am totally unfamiliar with. I would like very much to hear one.   D. Keith Morgan     --- Ross & Lynda Wards <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> wrote: > Uusually, in fact in all the organs I've ever tried, > string celestes are > tuned sharp, and flutes always flat. Dulcianas (the > real English kind) can > be tuned either way. A Dulciana Celeste is normally > known as Vox Angelica. > > In my experience, a Celeste sounds infinitely better > if all notes are tuned > to the rank the Celeste is to beat with, so you get > the same beating speed > all the way up. If you tune the Celeste in octaves > to itself, it will be > beat faster as you ascend and it creates an ugly > sound. > > Sometimes, people have extended mutations down and > made Celestes of them. It > can work well in some acoustic situations, but I > don't think a general rule > can be made about it. On a local organ here, there > is a 6 2/5 Tierce on the > Great, taken off a Dulciana Celeste. It actually > works very well in that > organ, placement and acoustic, to the surprise of > all of us, including the > organist who asked for it. It adds a certain > gravitas to full Great of 16, > 8, 4, 2 2/3, 2, and Mixture. > > Ross > -----Original Message----- > From: Kzimmer0817@aol.com <Kzimmer0817@aol.com> > To: pipechat@pipechat.org <pipechat@pipechat.org> > Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 4:42 PM > Subject: Tierce from Undulating Rank > > > List, > > There are probably problems with this concept, but > I'd like to ask if > anybody has tried this before with success. I > understand that, for the > Tierce 1 3/5' to form a proper Cornet, it must be > tuned a perfect fifth. > Therefore, it cannot be successfully derived from a > unified rank. > > The recommendation was made to me to take an > undulating rank and derive > the Tierce from it. > > I "think" that the intervals are flattened > slightly in Well-Tempered > tuning. I'm not familiar enough with tuning to know > if all the various > intervals (except the octaves, of course) are > "tempered" to the same degree. > I understand that some undulating ranks are tuned > slightly flat and others > slightly sharp. > > 1. Is there a standard for how far off pitch a > Celeste or Unda Maris is > tuned. > > 2. Is a Celeste rank actually in tune with itself > - but simply each note > being a fixed amout off tune from the rank with > which it will be played? > > 3. In creating an undulating rank, is it possible > to "detune" the > undulating rank such that its quint would be a > perfect fifth from the rank > with which it would be paired as a celeste. When > played at the 1 3/5' > pitch, it will form a proper Tierce; when played at > 8', it will undulate. > > I'd appreciate your comments. > > Thanks, > Keith > > > "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!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: SEASONS GREETINGS From: "Judy A. Ollikkala" <71431.2534@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:53:17 -0500   Hello and Merry Christmas from Judy Ollikkala in Worcester MA, where we have been warned about a Nor'Easter tomorrow for Christmas Day with heavy snow. May you all drive safely and may your music be meaningful.  
(back) Subject: HTML From: "First Christian Church of Casey, IL" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:12:11 -0600   AMEN! and AMEN! The stuff is a royal pain on lists! (though I must = admit I don't know why most lists can't handle it; html, I would think, is = really more the standard now than the non-html).   Dennis Steckley ----- Original Message ----- Subject: HTML messages From: "Michael David" <michaelandmaggy@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:36:43 -0600   I know the point has already been raised on this and other lists but,,,,,   Those of us who get this list in digest mode have to put up with things = like the following. This represents most of an entire HTML formatted message after it has been "translated" by the list server.   Would any of you who cannot or will not post to the list in plain text format care to explain the advantages of this format. I'm really curious = as I am unable to extract any useful information from these posts.   Michael        
(back) Subject: HTML From: <Kzimmer0817@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:34:53 -0500   Chatters,   I sympathize with Michael somewhat. I receive the digest form and get all = kinds of extraneous characters.   I am on AOL, and cannot control, AFAIK, which format I use to send = messages. I see my own messages as well as others repeated 2 and, = sometimes 3, times right after the other when I read the digest. I hate = that this happens, but i don't know how to stop it.   I would appreciate any advice. Thanks, keith  
(back) Subject: HTML messages From: <Wuxuzusu@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:36:52 EST     --part1_153.19649b87.2b3a1154_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Greetings Michael and all,   As you might note, I am as guilty of this as anyone else.   Sadly, AOL does not give me any choice. I type what I perceive to be a = plain text email message, yet the digests receive two messages from me, one the plain text, and the other (whatever Michael talked about). I've complained = to AOL several times to no avail.   I'm sorry; I apologize, I'm guilty; but AOL won't let me send it any other =   way.   Sorry,   Stan Krider   PS Did I say, I'm sorry?   In a message dated 12/24/2002 1:57:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael = David writes: > > Those of us who get this list in digest mode have to put up with things > like > the following. This represents most of an entire HTML formatted message > after it has been "translated" by the list server. > > Would any of you who cannot or will not post to the list in plain text > format care to explain the advantages of this format. I'm really = curious > as > I am unable to extract any useful information from these posts. >   --part1_153.19649b87.2b3a1154_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">Greetings Michael and all,<BR> <BR> As you might note, I am as guilty of this as anyone else. <BR> <BR> Sadly, AOL does not give me any choice. I type what I perceive to be a = plain text email message, yet the digests receive two messages from me, = one the plain text, and the other (whatever Michael talked about). I've = complained to AOL several times to no avail.<BR> <BR> I'm sorry; I apologize, I'm guilty; but AOL won't let me send it any other = way.<BR> <BR> Sorry,<BR> <BR> Stan Krider<BR> <BR> PS Did I say, I'm sorry?<BR> <BR> In a message dated 12/24/2002 1:57:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael = David writes:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR> Those of us who get this list in digest mode have to put up with things = like<BR> the following.&nbsp; This represents most of an entire HTML formatted = message<BR> after it has been "translated" by the list server.<BR> <BR> Would any of you who cannot or will not post to the list in plain text<BR> format care to explain the advantages of this format.&nbsp; I'm really = curious as<BR> I am unable to extract any useful information from these posts.<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> </FONT></HTML> --part1_153.19649b87.2b3a1154_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #3322 - 12/24/02 From: <Kzimmer0817@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:39:44 -0500   In a message dated 12/24/2002 1:37:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, Colin- = writes:   > HE has a Rolls-Royce and a twin engined private aircraft.....where did I = go wrong? > Regards, > Colin Mitchell UK   He's playing what the people want to hear, and he entertains them, and = they like it. I'm saying that somewhat in jest, I'm really not trying to = sound like a smart aleck.   Keith  
(back) Subject: Re: IRC From: <Chicaleee@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:50:24 EST     --part1_46.32f87c23.2b3a2290_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   I still can't get there, even with all the instructions. Lee   --part1_46.32f87c23.2b3a2290_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">I still can't get there, even with all the = instructions.&nbsp; Lee</FONT></HTML>   --part1_46.32f87c23.2b3a2290_boundary--  
(back) Subject: HTML messages & AOHell! From: "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:07:29 -0600   Greetings Michael and all,   As you might note, I am as guilty of this as anyone else.   Sadly, AOL does not give me any choice. I type what I perceive to be a plain text email message, yet the digests receive two messages from me, one the plain text, and the other (whatever Michael talked about). I've complained to AOL several times to no avail.   I'm sorry; I apologize, I'm guilty; but AOL won't let me send it any other way.   Sorry,   Stan Krider   PS Did I say, I'm sorry?   You know the answer is simple, don't you?   Instead of saying: I'm sorry, say: "I'm DUMPING AOHELL!"   Make that your New Year's Resolution!   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: Which Harmonic From: "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:05:07 -0800 (PST)   Dear Keith and Ross:   When I was in college, my music theory instructors taught that the fundamental was the first harmonic.   When I took the examinations to become a Registered Piano Technician (RPT) in the Piano Technicians Guild, they referred to the octave as the first harmonic, and I had to change my thinking and move everything up one step in order to answer the questions correctly.   The words "partial" and "harmonic" are not synonymous. In a piano string, the upper partials are thrown a little out-of-tune on the sharp side because of the inharmonicity of the string. This is caused by the thickness and tension of the string. An organ pipe does not have inharmonicity because the sound is generated by a vibrating column of air and not a tightly stretched string. The piano's upper partials are no longer "harmonics" because they have deviated slightly sharp from what a true harmonic would be; whereas, the organ pipe still has "harmonics" because they have not been thrown sharp and have not deviated from their natural positions.   Sometime, if anyone is interested, I may go into a more thorough discussion of inharmonicity.   D. Keith Morgan --- Kzimmer0817@aol.com wrote: > Chatters, > > Ross said, "> The octave by the way is the second > harmonic, as the fundamental > > is the first harmonic. I know that sounds strange, > but it's true. The G is > > therefore the third harmonic, the double octave is > the 4th, the Tierce or > > 17th is the 5th harmonic." > > Are you sure about this? I had always thought that > the fundamental is just > that, the fundamental. Then the first harmonic is > the octave, the 2nd is the > 12th, the 3rd is the superoctave, the 4th is the > 17th, and the 5th is the > 19th....... or is that the case when you're > discussing "overtones" or > "partials". Kinda like in most of Europe, where the > ground floor of a > building has a name, and the 1st floor/story is > really "our" 2nd floor. > > Additionally, are the terms, "harmonics", > "overtones", and "partials" > synonymous? > > Thanks, > Keith >     __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Merry Xmas From: "Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:52:24 -0800 (PST)   Merry Christmas to you and yours!   We've just finished a children's service, which went quite well, and now it's off to the traditional pre-midnight mass chinese food (at the Hunan Balcony on 2nd Ave and 74th St) and then choir rehearsal, carol singing, and Mass.   The choir will be singing "Love Came Down at Christmas" by Leo Sowerby, the Rutter "Nativity Carol," and the Gustav Holst "Christmas Day." We're also uncorking "Gesu Bambino" at Communion. Bill Powers will be playing flute; we're skipping the brass ensemble this year.   Lessons and Carols on Sunday broke long-standing church attendance records! I had calls of inquiry from as far away as Suffolk County, Long Island, an 80-minute drive away. For that matter, our children's service--just ended--also had a record attendance. Something good is happening at Epiphany!   Tonight I am staying near the church, courtesy of a dear friend who's welcoming us to her--convent! Tomorrow morning I play at 10 AM. Then off home to prepare Christmas dinner.   We're roasting a tenderloin, and I have already made a pate' more or less as prescribed in The Joy of Cooking. (Our new blender was inaugurated with a pound of chicken livers.) We're also having creamed onions, and peas, and wild rice. Dessert will be a Mrs. Smith's Mince Pie; I didn't feel like making a plum pudding this time. A very good single-barrel Kentucky bourbon awaits us as well. If I live long enough, I'll convert the entire organist community from Martinis to Bourbon! :)   All I have NOT done so far is filled the stockings. Oh, well.   My best wishes and prayers that the holidays will be filled with joy, and that 2003 will be a happy year.   Best,   Jon NYC        
(back) Subject: HTML From: "Administrator" <admin@pipechat.org> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:28:09 -0600   Folks   This subject raises its ugly head again! And Michael is very correct, the Digests, that approximately 1/3 of this list gets, are a mess to read because of the HTML and RTF (Rich Text Format) that certain mail clients impose on their users. There are work-arounds for some of these problems in various email clients, I have done some research in finding out how to make it possible for some of the most notorious programs to avoid the formatting. Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to pull it all together and put it on a Web Page for everyone to access. I will try to get to that project over this coming weekend.   But, even if everyone can't get their email programs to send in Plain Text Only to the list we will be having some relief sometime after the first of the year. There is a new version of the List Server software that will be coming out early in the new year. It is supposed to have the capability of stripping out the formatting from the Digests. This is a feature that many of us that use this software have been asking for from the developers. I'm not sure exactly when this new version will be available for "prime-time" - I'm actually running it in a beta test version on another server for some other lists, ones that are not as important as this one is. I haven't tested out how it handles HTML as of yet and don't even know if that feature is in the beta version. I guess i should try that out to see what happens to the Digest for one of those lists.   Meanwhile, if you can figure out any possible way of disabling the formatting in your email program I'm sure ALL of the members who receive the Digest would be grateful!   Happy PipeChatting   David -- **************************************** David Scribner Owner / Co-Administrator PipeChat   http://www.pipechat.org mailto:admin@pipechat.org  
(back) Subject: Sending No HTML from AOL From: <Myosotis51@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:51:16 EST     --part1_f2.26d65f70.2b3a4cf4_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Here's how to wipe the HTML coding from AOL mail:   1. Write your mail as usual, making sure you don't copy anything you = don't need to respond to. Make sure you are using the "Arial" font, in black.   2. Highlight the entire text area.   3. Right-click with your mouse, and choose "Select All."   4. Right-click again, and choose "Text" --> "Normal."   5. Send, without adding anything else - if you do, repeat 2 - 4.   This should ease the Digestion problems!   Victoria   --part1_f2.26d65f70.2b3a4cf4_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">Here's how to wipe the HTML coding from AOL = mail:<BR> <BR> 1.&nbsp; Write your mail as usual, making sure you don't copy anything you = don't need to respond to.&nbsp; Make sure you are using the "Arial" font, = in black.<BR> <BR> 2.&nbsp; Highlight the entire text area.<BR> <BR> 3.&nbsp; Right-click with your mouse, and choose "Select All."<BR> <BR> 4.&nbsp; Right-click again, and choose "Text"&nbsp; --&gt;&nbsp; = "Normal."<BR> <BR> 5.&nbsp; Send, without adding anything else - if you do, repeat 2 - 4.<BR> <BR> This should ease the Digestion problems!<BR> <BR> Victoria</FONT></HTML>   --part1_f2.26d65f70.2b3a4cf4_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Sending No HTML from AOL From: <ContraReed@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 19:07:13 EST   In a message dated 12/24/02 6:52:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, Myosotis51@aol.com writes:   << Here's how to wipe the HTML coding from AOL mail: 1. Write your mail as usual, making sure you don't copy anything you = don't need to respond to. Make sure you are using the "Arial" font, in black. 2. Highlight the entire text area. >>   Great. Now how do we get rid of those annoying little " "s  
(back) Subject: Re: Which Harmonic From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:17:28 -0500   On 12/24/02 5:05 PM, "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> wrote:   > Sometime, if anyone is interested, I may go into a > more thorough discussion of inharmonicity. > DKM. I'd like that. A fair number of people on the list know this stuff very well; some, like myself, do NOT. There was a time when I thought I = had it somewhat mastered (close on 50 years ago)--but not having USED such information in all those years, it's all gone out the window. A refresher curse would be appreciated. Be gentle; my brain is not what it was--not that it was much!   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: Merry Xmas From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:32:53 -0500   On 12/24/02 5:52 PM, "Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com> = wrote:   > Something good is happening at Epiphany!   True, Jon. And you're too modest to say it, or even to think it. But you DO have something to do with it.   Alan    
(back) Subject: Christmas Across America From: "David Scribner" <david@blackiris.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:49:32 -0600   The HGTV program "Christmas Across America" is featuring in it's first hour in the segment about Philadelphia, an interview with Peter Conte at the console of the Wanamaker organ. The segment is about the holiday Light show at the store. There is also a brief shot of the organ at Longwood Garden just preceding the Wanamaker part. The show is broadcast several times tomorrow on HGTV.   David  
(back) Subject: Re: Merry Xmas From: <Chicaleee@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:57:52 EST     --part1_163.19111402.2b3a86c0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Jon, sounds like delightful services, as well as the dinner. Too bad I = did not go to Long Island for Christmas, lol. However, I do plan to be in NY sometime in Jan. Maybe you could keep some in the freezer, <grin, just kidding>, Lee   --part1_163.19111402.2b3a86c0_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">Jon, sounds like delightful services, as well as = the dinner.&nbsp; Too bad I did not go to Long Island for Christmas, = lol.&nbsp; However, I do plan to be in NY sometime in Jan.&nbsp; Maybe you = could keep some in the freezer, &lt;grin, just kidding&gt;,&nbsp; = Lee</FONT></HTML>   --part1_163.19111402.2b3a86c0_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Which Harmonic From: "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:30:21 -0800 (PST)   Dear Alan:   Thank you so much for your kind and encouraging words.   I will write up a more thorough discussion of inharmonicity and post it on the list.   D. Keith Morgan     --- Alan Freed <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> wrote: > On 12/24/02 5:05 PM, "D. Keith Morgan" > <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Sometime, if anyone is interested, I may go into a > > more thorough discussion of inharmonicity. > > > DKM. I'd like that. A fair number of people on the > list know this stuff > very well; some, like myself, do NOT. There was a > time when I thought I had > it somewhat mastered (close on 50 years ago)--but > not having USED such > information in all those years, it's all gone out > the window. A refresher > curse would be appreciated. Be gentle; my brain is > not what it was--not > that it was much! > > Alan > > > "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!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Which Harmonic From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:23:05 +1300   Keith,   Yes, I know it sounds as if it shouldn't be, but in fact the fundamental = is the first harmonic.   In NZ as well as in Britain, by the way, the first storey is the one above the ground floor. :-)   Cheers.   Ross Ross said, " The octave by the way is the second harmonic, as the fundamental is = the first harmonic. I know that sounds strange, but it's true. The G is therefore the third harmonic, the double octave is the 4th, the Tierce or 17th is the 5th harmonic."     Are you sure about this? I had always thought that the fundamental is just that, the fundamental. Then the first harmonic is the octave, the = 2nd is the 12th, the 3rd is the superoctave, the 4th is the 17th, and the 5th = is the 19th....... or is that the case when you're discussing "overtones" or "partials". Kinda like in most of Europe, where the ground floor of a building has a name, and the 1st floor/story is really "our" 2nd floor.   Additionally, are the terms, "harmonics", "overtones", and "partials" synonymous?   Thanks, Keith    
(back) Subject: Re: Tierce from Undulating Rank From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:39:37 +1300   >Dear Ross: > >I agree with you wholeheartedly about the manner of >tuning celestes - tuning them to their companion rank >individually from bottom to top. I hate to hear >trebles beating fast (frying). I would NEVER tune a >celeste in octaves. > >In flute celestes however, I always tune them sharp. >I tried tuning one flat once, and the organist and I >agreed that it sounded better tuned sharp, so I have >always done that. When I finish tuning a celeste, I >play some music on it, and if it does not sound >questionable, I leave it alone. I usually don't have >to worry about that, though. There are relatively few >organs around big enough to have a Flute Celeste, >anyway. > >About deriving a celeste from a tierce stop, that is >something that I am totally unfamiliar with. I would >like very much to hear one. > >D. Keith Morgan   Keith, 7:07pm Christmas Day, but still not too late to wish you a Happy Christmas and a Bright and Preposterous New Year!   I know about the tuning of flute celestes more from what I've read than = from experience, as there are probably only one or two in the whole of New Zealand.   In a former parish of mine, I had to threaten the organbuilder with dismissal if he wouldn't tune the string Celeste the way I wanted it - = equal beats throughout the compass, i.e. not tuned in octaves on itself. Their tuner said he had never heard such nonsense, but my threat remained until = he complied. The Gamba & Celeste, by the English firm of Bishop and from = about 1878, improved remarkably when tuned properly.   Cheers! Ross      
(back) Subject: MERRY CHRISTMAS / HAPPY HOLIDAYS From: "Administrator" <admin@pipechat.org> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:11:47 -0600   To all our friends on this list we just want to wish you a Merry Christmas and/or Happy Holidays as the case may be. Thank you all for being members of the PipeChat list, without you the list wouldn't exist.   And all the best in the coming NEW YEAR   Happy PipeChatting   David and Tim -- **************************************** David Scribner Owner / Co-Administrator PipeChat   http://www.pipechat.org mailto:admin@pipechat.org