PipeChat Digest #2961 - Friday, July 12, 2002
 
Re: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic
  by "Mike Gettelman" <mike3247@earthlink.net>
Fur clad rooms
  by <cmys13085@blueyonder.co.uk>
Re: Fur clad rooms
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Mixtures vs. Harmonics
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: Back from Hamilton and Felix Hell.
  by "Scott Rollins" <srollins@primus.ca>
Re: Fur clad rooms
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: Back from Hamilton and Felix Hell.
  by "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net>
Stop Tab Arrangement Question
  by "Bob Richardson" <bob@peak.org>
VoxCatoe On-Line (Chicago Area Newsletters)
  by "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org>
Re: Mixtures vs. Harmonics
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
 

(back) Subject: Re: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 10:23:58 +1200   Please don't stay on-topic. The diversions are always fun. Ross -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan B. Hall <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Date: Friday, July 12, 2002 3:12 AM Subject: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic     >> >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Subject: Re: Riegers and Regals and Bagpipes, oh my! >> From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> >> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 12:22:13 +1200 >> >> No, you do not skirl the pipes. Look up skirl in a Scots dictionary. >> It's a >> totally inappropriate word for the melodious, resonant sound of a >> good set >> of pipes. >> >> From the font the email uses, I'm sure if your "Maclane" is actually >> Mac Ian >> or meant to be Mac Lane? Which? In any case, I must confess I don't >> know >> that name. To me, it's either McIan, or Maclean. >> >> Best wishes, >> Ross >> > > > >AD PRIMAM respondeo: > >I found the following on an online dictionary: > > >Powered by Ask Jeeves > >4 entries found for Skirl. > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ----- > >skirl Pronunciation Key (sk=FBrl) >v. skirled, skirl=B7ing, skirls >v. intr. >To produce a high, shrill, wailing tone. Used of bagpipes. > >v. tr. >To play (a piece) on bagpipes. > >n. >The shrill sound made by the chanter pipe of bagpipes. >A shrill wailing sound: =93The skirl of a police whistle split the >stillness=94 (Sax Rohmer). > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ----- >[Middle English skrillen, skirlen, probably of Scandinavian origin.] > > >Perhaps it's not the ideal term; it seems a bit pejorative. But in >America one hears the term often...maybe it's our collective ignorance. > > >AD SECUNDAM respondeo: > >We have always spelt it Maclane, and I find both Maclane and Maclain, >but not Maclean, both of Lochbuie, in my ramblings on the Internet. >perhaps Maclane is an archaic spelling. I have a tie, purchased in >Scotland (and NOT in a scheissy tourist trap) that boldly states >MACLANE OF LOCHBUIE on the back, and indeed the design is correct and >verified in standard reference works, under the same spelling. > >I think we're probably just dealing with variant spellings over time, >and the slow but inevitable change and evolution in a language. > >It must be maddening to deal with genealogy-besotted Americans spouting >utter rubbish about who begat whom and what their coat of arms should >be. I was embarrassed to see the touristy "Find Your Family Coat of >Arms" on High Street in Edinburgh. In Scotland, of all places--where >Lord Lyon controls heraldry with a mastery unmatched in Europe! > >My Maclane of Lochbuie tie did NOT come from one of these, however! > >:) > >promising to stay on topic in the future, > >Jon > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free >http://sbc.yahoo.com > >"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: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic From: "Mike Gettelman" <mike3247@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:30:22 -0400       Ross & Lynda Wards wrote:   > Please don't stay on-topic. The diversions are always fun. > Ross   [ much much much snippage]   I heard somewhere that bagpipes make for great road building substrate = when crushed to oblivion beneath a pavement roller. Is this true? I have also = heard that the best pavement material is ground up accordions. ( Oh dear, I = can't seem to find the substantiating quotes in my notes files.) :-) Mike        
(back) Subject: Fur clad rooms From: <cmys13085@blueyonder.co.uk> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 00:39:31 +0100   Hello,   Sorry about this, but the original posting with this title really got = messed up.   I was trying to make an important point about acoustics and what is = possible/impossible.   If a room is covered in carpet, soft toys, cushions, acoustic tiles and = the clergy wear mohair cassocks, the amount of energy absorbed is = enormous.=20   Malcolm Wechsler rightly referred to 19th century organ building, but in = a room which resembles an anachoic chamber, the chances of this = suceeding are quite small. Light to medium pressure would result in a = power level which wouldn't overcome the absorbency of the building.It is = a problem which MUST be uniquely American, unless we are talking plushly = furnished concert halls.   The Festival Hall in London is a classic example.....a powerful = instrument which sounds incredibly distant at the rear of the building.   Wind pressure does not only affect tone and speech; it has a major = impact on amplitude, all things being equal. The problem is, if we pump = high pressure air into an organ pipe, the amount of adge tone generated = makes the sound harsh in the extreme. I believe that the upper limit for = actual flue speaking pressure is about 7"wg.....beyond that, the pipes = are regulated "down" effectively.   The regulation process "kills" the upper partials especially, resulting = in the sort of tone we associate with (say) a Wurlitzer Diapason, but = importantly, there is enough sound energy to make the pipes heard at the = back of a highly absorbent room. However, in reducing coarseness, it is = often necessary to leather the kipes of the pipes.   It seems to me that, in highly absorbet rooms, heavy wind is the only = way to go.....with all that this implies. The alternative is a huge = increase in scales to the point whereby the speech becomes extremely = sluggish.   This is a very different problem from mere lack of reverberation which, = to answer another post, is ideal at around 2.5 secs. It is the = absorption charcteristics which are the ciritical factor in the = ruination of good organ tone.   In these circumstances, I can well understand the popularity of digital = instruments, which will sound good because they are introducing an = unnatural (and better) sound into a room which is simply not capable of = delivering that quality of sound in the first instance.   Indeed, the analogy can be heard every day in our own living spaces. If = we place a CD on the hi-fi and play it back through good quality = loudspeakers, we hear the "effect" of an instrument being played in = another room....in other words, it is real time synthesis as we sit = there and listen. Through the loudspeakers, we hear the magnificent = sound of (say) Notre Dame in Paris.   Those who doubt this may wish to consider how truly awful a four manual = Cavaille-Coll would sound if it were placed in a garage and fed into a = living space through holes in the wall.........it just doesn't work like = that.   So perhaps there is NO solution to the problem.....19th century = scaling/voicing or not.   Does this make sense?   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK    
(back) Subject: Re: Fur clad rooms From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:58:31 EDT   Dear Mr. Mitchell:   How much high-pressure voicing do you do? Your stated need to leather the lips of fluework to keep it from being =   "coarse," even though you say that such pressures actually "kill" upper partials, seems a unique phenomenon. Upon what experience and statistics are you basing your maximum = pressure of 7" wg?  
(back) Subject: Re: Mixtures vs. Harmonics From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:44:35 -0500   "Mixture" is a generic name for any compound stop with more than one rank for each note on the keyboard. "Harmonics" refers to a particular kind of mixture that was popular in the first third of the twentieth century. It generally comprised four ranks -- seventeenth 1.3/5', nineteenth 1.1/3', flat twenty-first 1.1/7' and twenty-second 1'. Occasionally a fifteenth = 2' was added to make it five ranks. The pipes were normally scaled and = voiced as Dulcianas, and the mixture was usually carried pretty much up to the = top of the keyboard without any breaks. It was designed to supply additional harmonics to the chorus, as the name suggests. The flat twenty-first (septieme), however, stands out and gives the chorus something of an unpleasant acidic, reedy edge. It has accordingly often been stopped off = in surviving Harmonics mixtures. The stop was used by Arthur Harrison and Henry Willis III in England and in late Ernest M. Skinner and early G. Donald Harrison organs in the U.S.   John Speller   ----- Original Message ----- From: "COLASACCO, ROBERT" <RCOLASACCO@popcouncil.org> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: Mixtures vs. Harmonics     > If there is a difference between what is generically labelled "Mixture" and > Harmonics, can someone explain what that difference is? > I'm aware of all the named compounds and what they are, e.g., scharff, > cymbel, bla, bla. What I'm not clear on is that the words mixture and > harmonics, which are both, to me anyway, generic terms describing a compound > make up of the respective stop so is there a difference between them? > > Robert B. Colasacco > Administrative Assistant/Secretary > Distinguished Colleagues > Population Council > One Dag Hammarskjold Plaza > New York, NY 10017 > Direct Telephone: (212) 339-0685 > Main Telephone: (212) 339-0500 > Fax: (212) 755-6052 > e-mail: rcolasacco@popcouncil.org > Visit our web site: > www.popcouncil.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: Back from Hamilton and Felix Hell. From: "Scott Rollins" <srollins@primus.ca> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 21:08:58 -0400 (EDT)   Wish I could have made it, but Hamilton was too far and too expensive to get to on such short notice as I had after hearing of the concert.   Scott   Scott Rollins INSTANT MESSAGING VIA srollins@primus.ca MSN MESSENGER: sirollins@hotmail.com Arnprior, ON YAHOO MESSENGER: cafe_musique   [If my ISP's spam block interferes with your mail to me, please use my srollins@canada.com address]    
(back) Subject: Re: Fur clad rooms From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 20:16:08 -0500   Colin Mitchell wrote:   >If a room is covered in carpet, soft toys, cushions, >acoustic tiles and the clergy wear mohair cassocks, the >amount of energy absorbed is = enormous.   >Malcolm Wechsler rightly referred to 19th century organ >building, but in = a room which resembles an anachoic >chamber, the chances of this suceeding = are quite small. >Light to medium pressure would result in a power level = >which wouldn't overcome the absorbency of the >building.   This rather depends on the size of the room. The church with the worst acoustics I have ever come across in my entire life -- being in it is disconcerting to the point of being surrealistic -- is nevertheless quite small. It has a well- designed pipe organ built about fifteen years ago that sounds remarkably well. The instrument speaks on 3.1/2" wind, and carries throughout the building very well -- but it is nevertheless quite = a small building, so it doesn't have far to carry.   In a larger room, as you suggest, you would need to use higher wind pressures. In most cases six or seven inches would suffice, but = suggesting that 7" would be the maximum for flues is, however, something of an oversimplification, and under certain circumstances one might voice the diapasons on a pressure as high as ten or twelve inches. A lot depends on the mouth width. It is generally assumed that the wider the mouth the louder the pipe, and this in a sense is true. What this overlooks, = however, is the fact that a narrower mouth can be forced a lot further without the pipe speech becoming unstable. This also means that lower cut-ups are necessary with narrower mouths, and by forcing the pipe to the max you do not lose so much of the harmonic development.   This is something that Ernest M. Skinner well understood, which is why his No. 1 Open Diapasons are frequently voiced to the max with 2/9 or even 1/5 mouths, while the No. 2 and No. 3, which does not need to be so loud, = often have a 1/4 mouth. Or perhaps in some instances there might be a 2/9 mouth only in the lowest octave or so, where the power is most needed, and then changing to 1/4 in the treble.   And then there are double-languid diapasons, sometimes used on pressures = of 20" or more. I'm afraid I don't know much about these, but Skinner, who seems to have known what he was doing, took a dim view of them.   John Speller            
(back) Subject: Re: Back from Hamilton and Felix Hell. From: "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 21:36:01 -0400   Too bad. Well perhaps you have time to think about Trinity Lutheran = Church, London, next Monday, July 15th at 7:30.   For the record, here is Simon Irving's posting of mid April:   Dear Listers,   I'm delighted to announce that Felix and Hans-Friedrich will be visiting Canada in July, and will play three concerts. On TUESDAY JULY 9th, Felix will play a solo recital at Central Presbyterian Church in Hamilton, which is the proud owner of a IV/ 83 Casavant, originally installed in 1908, and tonally revised and upgraded in 1950 and again in 1982. It's a fine, versatile instrument in a good space (seats 750).   The next evening WEDNESDAY JULY 10th, there will be an organ crawl of several downtown churches in Hamilton, culminating at Christ Church Anglican Cathedral, where - surprise surprise! an orchestra will be ready and waiting. Together they and Felix will perform Guilmant's Organ Symphony No. 1. This event is mounted in conjunction with the Brott Summer Festival, during which maestro Boris Brott and his National Academy Orchestra mount a variety of concerts in many imaginative venues. Tickets for either or both evenings are available through the Festival boxoffice - discount if you buy both.   The following week Felix travels to London Ontario, where he plays a solo recital at Trinity Lutheran, which boasts a large, recently expanded instrument. I don't have the spec by me, but as I recall it is four manuals, with around 75 ranks.   If you are within travelling distance of either location, make a note of these dates. Ticket prices in Hamilton are $20/$15 (adult/senior) for Tuesday, and $25/$20 for Wednesday with the orchestra. {those are Canadian dollars, so it's Re-e-e-e-e-e-e-ally cheap if you're from the US!)   See you there,   Simon Irving (craving the indulgence of listers in Australia, UK, or south of the Mason-Dixon line)   And his more recent posting of July 4th.   If I may beg the indulgence of teh list for a shameless commercial plug, Felix Hell will play in HAMILTON, ONTARIO, CANADA on Tuesday next, July 9th at 7:30 pm. The location is Central Presbyterian Church, which has a fine IV/83 Casavant in a very nice room (seats about 750). This concert is co-sponsored by the Hamilton Centre of the RCCO and the Brott Music Festival. Details of how to get tickets (actually at the door is good) are on the <www.brottmusic.com> website. Central Pres is located in downtown Hamilton at Charlton and Caroline streets.   THe following evening Felix will lead an organ crawl starting at 6:15 pm at Ascension Church (John and Charlton) and visiting St Paul's Presbyterian before the Anglican Cathedral. At this last, Felix will play the Guilmant Organ Symphony with the National Academy Orchestra with Boris Brott conducting. There's a hefty discount of 25% if one buys tickets for both events.   The Tuesday concert features many of the works Felix has toured with successfully - Bach P & F in D, plus F & F in G min, and Liepzig Chorale Schmuecke Dich. Then Mendelssohn Sonata No1, Franck Chorale #3, Schneider Toccata (that Felix has made his own), plus Liszt on B-A-C-H and Widor #5 last two movements. Wow!   Come if you can - should be great.   Cheers Simon Irving   If you are interested, you can keep in touch with Felix's schedule through his website at www.felix-hell.com   I hope you can make next Monday.   Yours,   Malcolm Wechsler www.mander-organs.com   ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Rollins" <srollins@primus.ca> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:08 PM Subject: Re: Back from Hamilton and Felix Hell.     > Wish I could have made it, but Hamilton was too far and too expensive to > get to on such short notice as I had after hearing of the concert. > > Scott > > Scott Rollins    
(back) Subject: Stop Tab Arrangement Question From: "Bob Richardson" <bob@peak.org> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 21:09:44 -0700 (PDT)   Hi again -   Work continues on our touring desert classical organ. :-)   We are constructing a new front panel for the console which will hold both the stop tabs and the Alhborn Archive modules which will provide the tone generation.   There are more stops available than will fit in one row of stop tabs. The size and configuration of the console prohibits using drawknobs to the sides or tilting tablets, and we have plenty of spare tab actions and cost is a factor.   So, we need to arrange the stop tabs in two straight horizontal rows. (Not horseshoe like a theatre console). I've seen a few photos of classical consoles with two rows of stop tabs, but wonder how they are arranged.   The best fit for us seems to be pedal, then swell on the top row, and great as one large bottom row. Is there a "standard" configuration? I have a copy of the AGO console specifications and it is mainly concerned with the shape of the pedalboard, distance of keys to pedals, etc, wihtout mentioning stop layout suggestions.   Any advice would be appreciated.   Thanks!   Bob Richardson          
(back) Subject: VoxCatoe On-Line (Chicago Area Newsletters) From: "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 23:53:53 -0500   For those of you who may have check the website recently for current newsletters, I apologize. There is really no good excuse for falling behind. We are now up to date and they can be found on the CATOE PAGE at http://www.catoe.org and clicking on the VOX BOX on the left side.   Some of the articles cover review of the ATOS Chicago Theatre concerts and =   the CATOE plaque presentation, JATOE FEST venues, remembering the Uptown Theatre Wurlitzer and various other events and area =   organs. ENJOY.   regards,   JON    
(back) Subject: Re: Mixtures vs. Harmonics From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 20:04:54 +1200   I think these days most of us would want to reserve the word Mixture for a compound stop of quints and unisons. If there was a tierce in it = somewhere, it would then be Terz Mixture or somesuch to make it obvious. "Harmonics", to me at least, generally implies some sort of compound stop with a b21st = in it, or an attempt to make a stop that will drop a resultant, like a 4rk compound stop to drop a 32ft reed-sounding resultant. Anyone else think this is a fair analysis of where we are today? Ross -----Original Message----- From: COLASACCO, ROBERT <RCOLASACCO@popcouncil.org> To: 'pipechat@pipechat.org' <pipechat@pipechat.org> Date: Friday, July 12, 2002 5:12 AM Subject: Mixtures vs. Harmonics     >If there is a difference between what is generically labelled "Mixture" = and >Harmonics, can someone explain what that difference is? >I'm aware of all the named compounds and what they are, e.g., scharff, >cymbel, bla, bla. What I'm not clear on is that the words mixture and >harmonics, which are both, to me anyway, generic terms describing a compound >make up of the respective stop so is there a difference between them? > >Robert B. Colasacco >Administrative Assistant/Secretary >Distinguished Colleagues >Population Council >One Dag Hammarskjold Plaza >New York, NY 10017 >Direct Telephone: (212) 339-0685 >Main Telephone: (212) 339-0500 >Fax: (212) 755-6052 >e-mail: rcolasacco@popcouncil.org >Visit our web site: >www.popcouncil.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: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 20:36:06 +1200   Hey, I thought we were going to be friends! But if you start introducing vandalistic iconoclastic practices, I'll have to make you come to my place and listen to several piobaireachds one after the other, followed by an interlude with a Scottish Country Dance exercise, concluding with canntaireachd as I teach you. Ross -----Original Message----- From: Mike Gettelman <mike3247@earthlink.net> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Date: Friday, July 12, 2002 11:31 AM Subject: Re: bagpipes etc, lamentably off topic     > > >Ross & Lynda Wards wrote: > >> Please don't stay on-topic. The diversions are always fun. >> Ross > >[ much much much snippage] > > I heard somewhere that bagpipes make for great road building = substrate when >crushed to oblivion beneath a pavement roller. Is this true? I have also heard >that the best pavement material is ground up accordions. ( Oh dear, I = can't seem >to find the substantiating quotes in my notes files.) :-) > Mike > > > > >"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 >