PipeChat Digest #2964 - Sunday, July 14, 2002
 
Re: Bagpipes, formerly lots of topics
  by "V. David Barton" <vdbarton@erols.com>
Re: A loverly wedding
  by "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net>
RE: wanting to hear more about Philly!!
  by "Mark L. Hopper" <mlhopper@email.msn.com>
Traditional wedding marches
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net>
Re: wanting to hear more about Philly!!
  by <DudelK@aol.com>
Krumhorn
  by "Mike Gettelman" <mike3247@earthlink.net>
Re: Traditional wedding marches
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: A loverly wedding
  by "Russ Greene" <rggreene2@shaw.ca>
Re: Traditional wedding marches
  by <DrB88@aol.com>
Re: Traditional wedding marches
  by <DrB88@aol.com>
Re: A loverly wedding
  by "Paul Opel" <popel@sover.net>
RE: Krumhorn
  by "Andrew Mead" <mead@eagle.ca>
Re: Traditional wedding marches
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: A loverly wedding
  by "Richard Jordan" <mail@gesangbuch.org>
Re: Traditional wedding marches
  by <DudelK@aol.com>
Re: Krumhorn
  by "Tim" <tmbovard@earthlink.net>
music list
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
Re: Traditional wedding marches
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Bagpipes, formerly lots of topics From: "V. David Barton" <vdbarton@erols.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 06:58:02 -0400   Hi, on a different note, Ross!   During my trip to the UK, I found a little shop selling all things = Scottish in the old medieval part of downtown York. Therein, was bagpipe for sale = at the (by U. S. standard, at least) ridiculously low price of =A3125. I = bought it and brought it home as carry-on baggage. I never seriously intended to learn to play it, but wanted it more as a "collecter's item." Now, = hearing all this talk of bagpipes, I wouldn't mind seeing if there were any chance = I could master it, at least to some degree.   Are there any self-help booklets available on learning the bagpipes? If = so, can you point me in the right direction?   You aren't the only one who loves the pipes! Behind the organ and the = human voice, they're my favorite instrument.   Dave     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 5:32 AM Subject: Re: Bagpipes, formerly lots of topics     > As I've posted already, I would love some of you to come here and listen to > a piobaireachd or two. The pipes weren't designed to scare the heck out = of > anyone, but to provide enjoyment for both players and listeners, and = this > they most certainly do. > The pipes are not meant to be played in an inner-city minute little = flat, > but outside in open spaces like the Highlands and Islands. That's where they > come from. And I defy anyone to find a better instrument for marching to = - > brass and military bands just aren't in the race. Non-Scots are plain > jealous, that's all. :-) But I will admit to loving the Irish > uilleann pipes as well. > Ross > > > >Wouldn't have to be some kind of discordant mixture? A bagpipe was = after > all > >designed to scare the heck out of the enemy. Sure scares the heck out = of my > >sensitive ears. > > > > "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: A loverly wedding From: "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 07:21:44 -0400   Dear Friends,   Times have changed. What is written here below is what was said with = immense authority at Oberlin and Juilliard, where I achieved my omniscience in the 50s and early 60s! But, you know, there ain't no "negative connotations" anymore, and, most of the time, there never were. A couple that would = either know or care about the operatic significance of the Wagner and Mendelssohn pieces would be a rare thing indeed - possibly one in a million. The = Wagner is much loved by many for the perceived reality of its message which is, like it or not, "Here Comes the Bride." The Mendelssohn makes for a great and joyous ending, and since few know or care about its place in the Shakespeare play, for what earthly reason would one deny this music to = those who have loved it at their friends' weddings, and crave it for their own? This all sounds like ponderous Misery Synod thinking.   At Oberlin, my teacher was Fenner Douglass, a truly wonderful teacher, but ah so musically and liturgically pure. The wedding of the century was scheduled for Finney Chapel toward the end of term time one year, that of the daughter of the president of the college. The family pleaded for the Mendelssohn, and also would consider no other organist but Fenner. I can still hear him saying to us in organ class: "OK, if they want the Mendelssohn, they will get the Mendelssohn, all of it." Many of us = students occupied places in the balcony, high over the console, and, by God, they = got their Mendelssohn in full measure, and it was magnificent. The bride and groom went out to what they had wanted to hear, and most of the rest of us stayed to hear the rest of the transcription, to its happy ending, this followed by great cheers. What joy and fun. Why in hell not!   I am with Bruce on this issue, and it is not because I have three dogs!   Cheers,   Malcolm Wechsler www.mander-organs.com   ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Jordan To: PipeChat Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 11:39 PM Subject: Re: A loverly wedding   Yes and I suppose the Mendelssohn was appropriate as the bride really was marrying a jackass and was planing on being just as faithful as Wagner's bride <g> I really can't understand why anyone would want to use either piece there are so many things which are so much better and that do not convey such negative connotations     At 06:09 PM 7/13/02 EDT, you wrote: >>>>   the "traditional" wedding marches were used (and a good time was had by = all)   <<<<      
(back) Subject: RE: wanting to hear more about Philly!! From: "Mark L. Hopper" <mlhopper@email.msn.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 08:22:45 -0400   I would suggest purchasing a convention program (Extras were $25.00 at the convention) from AGO. It is a thick tome that is very thorough and = includes ample information about the performers, the instruments, the venues, and = the literature. The information about the Widor Symphony for Organ & = Orchestra is especially well-written. It's a good investment even if you weren't in Philly.   My two cents....   Peace, Mark   Mark L. Hopper Organist/Music Associate First Baptist Church Henderson, NC    
(back) Subject: Traditional wedding marches From: "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 09:26:36 -0500   The obvious reason is that for the vast majority of people there are no negative connotations........it's simply the music they've always heard at weddings.   Dennis Steckley   Ich liebe meine Katzen ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ I really can't understand why anyone would want to use either piece   there are so many things which are so much better   and that do not convey such negative connotations        
(back) Subject: Re: wanting to hear more about Philly!! From: <DudelK@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 10:28:53 EDT   The suggestion about getting a copy of the convention program is an = excellent one, assuming copies are still available.   There will undoubtedly be some kind of major review article in an upcoming =   issue of TAO. The offerings were so extensive and so wide-ranging that no = one person likely could have taken in everything. Likewise the venues, artists =   and programs. I suppose the experience will be different for each of the = 2400 or so people who attended, whether they were on the go from early morning until late at night or picked and chose those events that suited their interests and pursued a less-energetic pace. This convention was perhaps unique in that in addition to the "official" events, there was a program = of two daily recitals by Peter Conte on the Wanamaker organ that covered a = very impressive array of original works for the organ and transcriptions that showed the many colors and the power as well as the subtlety of this = unique instrument.   It will be interesting to see what the reviewer(s) in TAO have to say. It will be a major task to try to capture all that in print!  
(back) Subject: Krumhorn From: "Mike Gettelman" <mike3247@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 11:17:22 -0400   Good day, While TV channel surfing this morning, stumbled onto a PBS station playing an old favorite program of mine, "The Woodwright Shop" with Roy Underhill. For those unfamiliar with the program, Roy creates woodworking projects with old fashioned tools of all different and interesting types. Roy's presentation is quite delightful, a mix of education, humor, and a bit of bumbling. Today's project was a "Walnut Krumhorn". Basically it was a kind of curved recorder looking body, complete with finger holes, but it was sounded through the use of a rather oboe looking internal double reed. This got me to thinking about organ pipes, and the use of the term "free reed". I know the term refers to a shallot-less reed, but wondered if it is on the same order as an oboe reed, or simply a single reed that vibrates in the center of the winsdstream without touching either side of its opening. This is possibly a very elementary question, but alas, my education is still in that stage I'm afraid.   Thanks in advance Mike                  
(back) Subject: Re: Traditional wedding marches From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 12:14:35 EDT     --part1_11a.13c8616f.2a62fd6b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 7/14/02 11:27:59 AM Atlantic Daylight Time, = kzrev@rr1.net writes: > I really can't understand why anyone would want to use either piece > > there are so many things which are so much better > > and that do not convey such negative connotations   Trumpet Voluntary, among other things was used to Charles and Diana..... =   not a particularly happy connotation!   Bruce in the Muttestery   with the Baskerbeagles at <A = HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/brucon502">HowlingAcres</A> = http://members.tripod.com/brucon502 .... need extra money??? visit http://www.visionsuccess.com/BC2053 enjoy shopping?? visit www.freestoreclub.com/go/BDawg   --part1_11a.13c8616f.2a62fd6b_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">In a message dated 7/14/02 11:27:59 AM Atlantic = Daylight Time, kzrev@rr1.net writes: <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I really can't = understand why anyone would want to use either piece<BR> <BR> there are so many things which are so much better<BR> <BR> and that do not convey such negative connotations</BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> Trumpet Voluntary, among other things was used to Charles and = Diana.....&nbsp;&nbsp; not a particularly happy connotation!<BR> <BR> Bruce in the Muttestery <BR> <BR> with the Baskerbeagles at&nbsp; <A = HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/brucon502">HowlingAcres</A>&nbsp;&nbsp; = http://members.tripod.com/brucon502<BR> ....&nbsp; need extra money???&nbsp;&nbsp; visit&nbsp;&nbsp; = http://www.visionsuccess.com/BC2053<BR> enjoy shopping??&nbsp;&nbsp; visit&nbsp; www.freestoreclub.com/go/BDawg = <BR> </FONT></HTML> --part1_11a.13c8616f.2a62fd6b_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: A loverly wedding From: "Russ Greene" <rggreene2@shaw.ca> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 13:00:09 -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.   --Boundary_(ID_IujpioQg/EmC7m3uPNHIbg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable   > In a message dated 7/14/02 12:40:01 AM Atlantic Daylight Time, > mail@gesangbuch.org writes: >> I really can't understand why anyone would want to use either piece >> there are so many things which are so much better >> and that do not convey such negative connotations >>=3D20   These pieces appear to have negative connotations only to musicians, not apparently to brides who continue to ask for them.   In our culture, the origins of these pieces are largely forgotten, the general public considering them only as =3DB3Here Comes the Bride=3DB2 and = the =3DB3Wedding March=3DB2 and never even thinking that these pieces were = originally written for some other purpose.   And for the most part, if you convey your negative concerns about the suitability of these pieces, which literally have been played at weddings for generations, to the average bride, her reaction is not to nod with understanding but rather to look at you funny.   Russ Greene (Who isn=3DB9t that fond of these pieces after all these years either by = the way)   --Boundary_(ID_IujpioQg/EmC7m3uPNHIbg) Content-type: text/html; charset=3DISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT   <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Re: A loverly wedding</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">In a message dated 7/14/02 12:40:01 AM = Atlantic Daylight Time, <FONT = COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><U>mail@gesangbuch.org</U></FONT> writes: <BR> </FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">I really can't understand why = anyone would want to use either piece<BR> there are so many things which are so much better<BR> and that do not convey such negative connotations<BR> <BR> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Arial"><BR> These pieces appear to have negative connotations only to musicians, not = apparently to brides who continue to ask for them.<BR> <BR> In our culture, the origins of these pieces are largely forgotten, the = general public considering them only as &#8220;Here Comes the Bride&#8221; = and the &#8220;Wedding March&#8221; and never even thinking that these = pieces were originally written for some other purpose.<BR> <BR> And for the most part, if you convey your negative concerns &nbsp;about = the suitability of these pieces, which literally have been played at = weddings for generations, to the average bride, her reaction is not to nod = with understanding but rather to look at you funny.<BR> <BR> Russ Greene<BR> (Who isn&#8217;t that fond of these pieces after all these years either by = the way)</FONT> </BODY> </HTML>     --Boundary_(ID_IujpioQg/EmC7m3uPNHIbg)--  
(back) Subject: Re: Traditional wedding marches From: <DrB88@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:04:52 -0400   Thank you, Dennis... I agree completely. "Better" is in the eye (ear) of = the beholder also, to at least some extent.   There may be more esoteric materials available, even music with greater = substance; but at those moments in the wedding service, festivity as well = as a connection with past ceremonies often supercedes. The "traditional" = music has been eschewed for so long now by many musicians that it almost = has become "new" again. It works well functionally, and does not bear = negative connotations for many. I am happy to use it upon request.   In some cases issues like this simply justify the perception there often = is of those of us in the music profession as being "stuffy" and unable to = relate to those for whom we play and to whom we minister. In a world (and = a church) that is regarding the organ less and less, it seems crucial (for = our own good!) to be sensitive to some of these sorts of things and be = willing to "give" a little.   David Brackley Chicago   *************** > > The obvious reason is that for the vast majority of people there are no > negative connotations........it's simply the music they've always heard > at weddings. > > Dennis Steckley > > Ich liebe meine Katzen >  
(back) Subject: Re: Traditional wedding marches From: <DrB88@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:04:56 -0400   Thank you, Dennis... I agree completely. "Better" is in the eye (ear) of = the beholder also, to at least some extent.   There may be more esoteric materials available, even music with greater = substance; but at those moments in the wedding service, festivity as well = as a connection with past ceremonies often supercedes. The "traditional" = music has been eschewed for so long now by many musicians that it almost = has become "new" again. It works well functionally, and does not bear = negative connotations for many. I am happy to use it upon request.   In some cases issues like this simply justify the perception there often = is of those of us in the music profession as being "stuffy" and unable to = relate to those for whom we play and to whom we minister. In a world (and = a church) that is regarding the organ less and less, it seems crucial (for = our own good!) to be sensitive to some of these sorts of things and be = willing to "give" a little.   David Brackley Chicago   *************** > > The obvious reason is that for the vast majority of people there are no > negative connotations........it's simply the music they've always heard > at weddings. > > Dennis Steckley > > Ich liebe meine Katzen >  
(back) Subject: Re: A loverly wedding From: "Paul Opel" <popel@sover.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 13:22:39 -0500   I was subbing at a church in Proctor, VT, where they started up a CD = during communion- for a bit of a change, the pastor said. It was rather poor music, something from the Weston Priory with a trumpet solo over a vaguely Latin accompaniment, certainly nothing that was beyond the reach of the choir. That was bad enough, but when the song ran out and people were = still coming to the communion table, the minister asked me to fill, which I did-no problem-until the next song on the CD started up. No one had = thought to turn the machine off after the song. I was incensed- to be cut off by a recording in the middle of a piece was a bit much to take. The minister = had a hard time understanding why I was upset when I told him that if they = ever did that to me again, I would walk right out of the service. I've had to complain about taped music at a wedding at anopther church where I was the regular organist. First, blank looks from the minister, until I asked him how he would take to a couple asking him if instead of his giving the benediction, they would rather have Billy Graham on tape. After some flustered exclamations on the order of "That's a different kind of thing altogethe", he started to understand.   Paul     At 5:16 PM -0500 7/13/2, Jerrell Kautz wrote: > UGH!!!! <runs screaming from the room> Tape Accompaniment- When >they start this up at ANY church I go to I promptly rise and LEAVE. = I'd >rather hear the WORST old granny accompany on an out of tune piano than >Karaoke. >*********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** > >On 7/13/2002 at 6:09 PM Cremona502@cs.com wrote: > >Today I played a wedding that was really a fun occasion. Both >families were wonderful and I met some really great people. > >As a hint of what happened.... >it took place in a Missouri Synod Lutheran Church >it included the use of taped accompaniment     http://www.sover.net/~popel      
(back) Subject: RE: Krumhorn From: "Andrew Mead" <mead@eagle.ca> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:44:58 -0400   The free reed stops I've seen on Casavants (almost always Cor' Anglais) = have an arrangement where the reed is fixed to a shallot and instead of the = reed contacting the shallot face it passes through the opening and then returns without striking the shallot. There is an Aeoline/Casavant hybrid in Toronto with a Clarinet presumably built by Aeolian. It consists of a resonator with boot but no block. = Inside the boot is a regular dime-a-dozen melodeon reed soldered onto a tilted plate-- upside down of course. The tuning is accomplished by adjusting the height of the resonator cap. I have no explanation for why the plate is tilted. The sound is quite good to my ears and I wonder why I've seen only one example of it. It's very reliable and stays in tune longer than the fricative reeds in the organ. The only reason I've had to open one was to account for the fact that the clarinet rank I was trying to tune had no tuning wires!!       AjM   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of = Mike Gettelman Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 11:17 AM To: Pipechat Subject: Krumhorn   Good day, While TV channel surfing this morning, stumbled onto a PBS station playing an old favorite program of mine, "The Woodwright Shop" with Roy Underhill. For those unfamiliar with the program, Roy creates woodworking projects with old fashioned tools of all different and interesting types. Roy's presentation is quite delightful, a mix of education, humor, and a bit of bumbling. Today's project was a "Walnut Krumhorn". Basically it was a kind of curved recorder looking body, complete with finger holes, but it was sounded through the use of a rather oboe looking internal double reed. This got me to thinking about organ pipes, and the use of the term "free reed". I know the term refers to a shallot-less reed, but wondered if it is on the same order as an oboe reed, or simply a single reed that vibrates in the center of the winsdstream without touching either side of its opening. This is possibly a very elementary question, but alas, my education is still in that stage I'm afraid.   Thanks in advance 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      
(back) Subject: Re: Traditional wedding marches From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 15:05:12 -0400   On 7/14/02 10:26 AM, "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net> wrote:   > The obvious reason is that for the vast majority of people there are no > negative connotations........it's simply the music they've always heard > at weddings. >=20 > Dennis Steckley >=20 Which, of course, for some people is more than adequate reason not to use them. Does "clich=E9" take an acute accent or grave?   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: A loverly wedding From: "Richard Jordan" <mail@gesangbuch.org> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:11:53 -0500   At 07:21 AM 7/14/02 -0400, you wrote: >Times have changed. > What joy and fun. Why in hell not!   I suppose the answer to that question depends on what a wedding is, if a wedding is a worship service, (and I believe it is) then the focus is on God alone and with good reason, for if it is a worship service, and God tells us in no undertain termns that he is a jealous God, and given his power and might, it would seem wise not to make him jealous, and that all the honor and glory are to God alone. That would then seem the best reason why not to use secular music, especially music whose focus is on something other than God alone.   I would also add, that as orgainists are often the chief music educator in many places it is incumbant on them to educate people on good music, custom, and at least in some measure, theology especially as it relates to church music   If a wedding is not a worship service, then I suppose almost anything goes   I do enjoy secular music as well, but would prefer if it kept to its place I do however understand the temptation       Regards, Richard Jordan   http://www.Lutheran-Hymnal.com http://www.OnJordansBanks.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Traditional wedding marches From: <DudelK@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 15:32:49 EDT   In a message dated 7/14/02 3:06:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time,=20 acfreed0904@earthlink.net writes:   << Which, of course, for some people is more than adequate reason not to use them. Does "clich=E9" take an acute accent or grave? >> Applying that line, after 30 or 40 years haven't the Trumpet Voluntary and=20 Trumpet Tune and the Mouret Rondeau and Jesu Joy and the Water Music and suc= h=20 attained similar cliche status at weddings? Ditto the Widor Toccata for=20 Easter and so much else that is now considered "traditional" for certain=20 holidays and feasts? And most of these have no more "religious" connotations= =20 than the Wagner and Mendelssohn wedding marches.=20    
(back) Subject: Re: Krumhorn From: "Tim" <tmbovard@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:32:25 -0400   Hi, Mike!   A "free-reed" organ pipe works exactly as Andrew describes it -- the reed vibrates back and forth thru an opening, without physically contacting its frame (not really a "shallot"), aside from its point of attachment at one end, of course). Pump organ and harmonium reeds operate in the same way. =     The location of the reed within the pipe itself and the method of tuning depends on its maker and usage, and varies accordingly. As Andrew mentions, the Aeolian company used many free-reed clarinet stops. (and = they are generally quite good, if not a bit temperamental when dirty, AFAIK) I've seen small unit organs which use a free-reed bottom octave for the (lone) 16' pedal stop, with the 12 reeds simply located in a plywood box somewhere inside the case. There have been many variations of free-reed usage in organs over the years -- just not particularly wide usage. More stable tuning than 'beating reeds' has often been justification for their use in the past -- difficulty in obtaining the reeds themselves is often the problem with using them now.   Real (mouth blown) oboe reeds are different, I believe, in that there are essentially *two* reeds beating against each other (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!) and I'd imagine the Krumhorn you saw being constructed would have that sort of reed arrangement. (I'd bet it would be a good = deal of a challenge to get that sort of reed to work in an organ pipe...!)   Cheers, all --   Tim     At 11:17 AM 7/14/02 -0400, Mike wrote: <snip> >This got >me to thinking about organ pipes, and the use of the >term "free reed". I know the term refers to a >shallot-less reed, but wondered if it is on the same >order as an oboe reed, or simply a single reed that >vibrates in the center of the winsdstream without >touching either side of its opening.    
(back) Subject: music list From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 15:36:42 -0400   Zion Lutheran Church (ELCA) Hamilton, Ohio July 14, 2002   Prelude: Prelude and Fugue in C George Boehm Solo: Ain=B9t-a That Good News arr. Charles Lloyd, Jr .. Cathy Chambers, soprano . Offertory: Lord Jesus Christ, Turn to Us (trio) J.S. Bach Postlude: Toccata Henri Nibelle   Lutheran Book of Worship, setting 2 Hymns: 719 God Is Here! 712 Listen, God Is Calling 492 O Master, Let Me Walk with You [sic] 731 Precious Lord, Take My Hand     Randy Runyon Music Director Zion Lutheran Church Hamilton, Ohio runyonr@muohio.edu      
(back) Subject: Re: Traditional wedding marches From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 15:47:30 -0400   On 7/14/02 3:32 PM, "DudelK@aol.com" <DudelK@aol.com> wrote:   > In a message dated 7/14/02 3:06:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > acfreed0904@earthlink.net writes: >=20 > << Which, of course, for some people is more than adequate reason not to = use > them. Does "clich=E9" take an acute accent or grave? >>>=20 > Applying that line, after 30 or 40 years haven't the Trumpet Voluntary an= d > Trumpet Tune and the Mouret Rondeau and Jesu Joy and the Water Music and = such > attained similar cliche status at weddings? Ditto the Widor Toccata for > Easter and so much else that is now considered "traditional" for certain > holidays and feasts?   Yes, definitely. And if there were only 100 compositions suitable for wedding processionals in and out, we'd almost HAVE to have clich=E9s at every wedding. But there must be quite a few more than that. How about a congregational hymn? Didn't QE2 use "Praise, My Soul, the King of Heaven"?   > And most of these have no more "religious" connotations > than the Wagner and Mendelssohn wedding marches. >=20 Perhaps. "Many," if not "most." But church musicians have certainly written some fine stuff, too--and I admire their work being used for its intended purpose. Assuming its good, of course.   Alan, who admits nonetheless that there are zillions of brides who don't know the distinction between "OK," "somewhat better," and "stunning." But there are quite a few who do; I won't be a legalist about it: give in on some, but provide leadership where it's welcome. =20