PipeChat Digest #2896 - Tuesday, June 11, 2002
 
RE:
  by "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com>
Re: Lutheran Hymnals (was New Missouri Synod Hymnal)
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
Re: Digitally Sampled vs Real Time
  by <cdkrug@worldnet.att.net>
Re: Digital Samples vs Real Time
  by <cdkrug@worldnet.att.net>
RE: More  thoughts on digital tone
  by "Nance, Daryel" <DNance@svdp-edu.org>
Re: Digitally Sampled vs Real Time
  by "G. Deboer" <gdeboer@bluemarble.net>
Re: More  thoughts on digital tone
  by "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net>
Re: More  thoughts on organ tone
  by "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net>
Re: Lutheran Hymnals (was New Missouri Synod Hymnal)
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
LCMS Hymnal
  by "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net>
So many questions, so little time . . .
  by "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com>
Re: More  thoughts on digital tone
  by "Richard Jordan" <mail@gesangbuch.org>
 

(back) Subject: RE: From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 18:11:51 -0500   This is a multi-part message in MIME format.   ------=3D_NextPart_000_000B_01C21173.7D036180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Has anyone seen or played a Cantor organ? Glenda Sutton gksjd85@direcway.com   ------=3D_NextPart_000_000B_01C21173.7D036180 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <html xmlns:v=3D3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =3D xmlns:o=3D3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =3D xmlns:w=3D3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =3D xmlns=3D3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">   <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D3D"text/html; =3D charset=3D3Dus-ascii">     <meta name=3D3DProgId content=3D3DWord.Document> <meta name=3D3DGenerator content=3D3D"Microsoft Word 10"> <meta name=3D3DOriginator content=3D3D"Microsoft Word 10"> <link rel=3D3DFile-List href=3D3D"cid:filelist.xml@01C21173.5D415870"> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:DoNotRelyOnCSS/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:SpellingState>Clean</w:SpellingState> <w:GrammarState>Clean</w:GrammarState> <w:DocumentKind>DocumentEmail</w:DocumentKind> <w:EnvelopeVis/> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> <style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Footlight MT Light"; panose-1:2 4 6 2 6 3 10 2 3 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Colonna MT"; panose-1:4 2 8 5 6 2 2 3 2 3; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:decorative; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} p.MsoEnvelopeReturn, li.MsoEnvelopeReturn, div.MsoEnvelopeReturn {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Footlight MT Light"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p.MsoAutoSig, li.MsoAutoSig, div.MsoAutoSig {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} span.EmailStyle18 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-ansi-font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Arial; mso-ascii-font-family:Arial; mso-hansi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; color:blue; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; text-decoration:none; text-underline:none; text-decoration:none; text-line-through:none;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> <!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */=3D20 table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D3D"edit" spidmax=3D3D"1026" /> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D3D"edit"> <o:idmap v:ext=3D3D"edit" data=3D3D"1" /> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> </head>   <body bgcolor=3D3Dwhite lang=3D3DEN-US link=3D3Dblue vlink=3D3Dblue =3D style=3D3D'tab-interval:.5in'>   <div class=3D3DSection1>   <p class=3D3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3D3 color=3D3Dblue = face=3D3DArial><span =3D style=3D3D'font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Has anyone seen or played a Cantor = =3D organ?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>   <p class=3D3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3D3 color=3D3Dblue = face=3D3DArial><span =3D style=3D3D'font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>   <div>   <p class=3D3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D3D3 color=3D3Dblue face=3D3D"Colonna = =3D MT"><span style=3D3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Colonna =3D MT";color:blue;mso-no-proof:yes'>Glenda Sutton<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>   <p class=3D3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D3D3 color=3D3Dblue face=3D3D"Colonna = =3D MT"><span style=3D3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Colonna =3D MT";color:blue;mso-no-proof:yes'>gksjd85@direcway.com<o:p></o:p></span></= =3D font></p>   </div>   <p class=3D3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3D3 color=3D3Dblue = face=3D3DArial><span =3D style=3D3D'font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>   <p class=3D3DMsoNormal style=3D3D'margin-left:.5in'><font size=3D3D3 =3D face=3D3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D3D'font-size:12.0pt'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>   </div>   </body>   </html>   ------=3D_NextPart_000_000B_01C21173.7D036180--      
(back) Subject: Re: Lutheran Hymnals (was New Missouri Synod Hymnal) From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 20:09:29 -0500       Alan Freed responded to my message with cogent comments. I wish, however, = to clarify one point of my original message. Where I wrote:   > > The Scandinavian Lutherans were not so pietistic as to totally break > > relationships with the churches in their countries of origin, however, = nor did > > they disallow organ music in worship.   I should have said, "The first and second generation American Lutheran, of Scandinavian descent were not so pietistic..."   I think the group to which Alan referred,   > Except in Sweden, where they formed the Swedish Mission Covenant Church.   has a counterpart in the organization I know to have been once styled in = the U.S., as the "Swedish Covenant Church", the operator of North Park College, in = Chicago. Though I'm not certain, the name of the organization may have been = restyled in the interest of greater inclusiveness.   ns    
(back) Subject: Re: Digitally Sampled vs Real Time From: <cdkrug@worldnet.att.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:23:21 -0400   On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 02:04:39PM -0400, Wurlibird1@aol.com wrote: > Dick Meckstroth asks: > > > >What are strings of software? << > > Computer code, Dick.   In Computer Speak, a "string" is a group of characters, all of which belong to an alphabet. If you look at the headers for this message, you'll notice that the "alphabet" I'm using is US-ASCII.   "Realtime" is an overused word. In my line of work, Realtime means, "If you don't do THIS within 50us of THAT, the device will explode."   Yes, really.   The definition used by Johanas is a good bit less stringent than mine, I'm guessing.   From the descriptions, it sounds to me like Johanas is doing what's usually called "Realtime modeling synthesis," rather than sampling.   Allen, Rogers, etc pull a pipe out of their collection and record it digitally. If you're THAT interested, Rick Lyons has written the standard text, "Understanding Digital Signal Processing."   In realtime modeling, you generally have different digital approximations of various parts of the sound. The specifics would probably be considered trade secrets.   When a note is played, the computer generates the sound from the approximations. The specific technique is most likely ALSO a trade secret, but anyone who's familiar with the technology could probably come up with something similar. The biggest difficulty is making something that "Plays right," to a skilled artist, meaning you have to find a skilled artist willing to help, which can be a tall order.   I've a Yamaha portable digital piano with similar technology. At the time it was made, it was superior to any sampled instrument made, and certainly more than Good Enough for club dates where there's amplification, guitars, and, frankly, copious quantities of alchohol.   Cheers     Charles -- Engages cloaking device.      
(back) Subject: Re: Digital Samples vs Real Time From: <cdkrug@worldnet.att.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:41:59 -0400   On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 01:34:07PM -0400, Arie Vandenberg wrote: > If one is to fully do justice in trying to reproduce a pipe organ the > sampling route here is what is needed. >   My . . how 1980's . . .   Were you designing this twenty years ago, then yeah, you're right.   Memory is cheap. When you talk about the size of the sample set, this is the days where you can't even BUY a hard drive smaller than 40GB.   DAC's are cheap. 16-bit 96MHz parts are commodities nowadays.   Actually, the tough part is NONE of what you're talking about . .all THAT stuff you can get off the shelf.   And, frankly, I don't think that even using that many DAC's is the answer.   The problem with any sampled set of pipes is that it's individual samples of pipes sounding individually under controlled conditions.   Dunno about you, but most of the time, I'm playing more than one note at a time, under questionable conditions. Heck, I even use more than one stop at a time.   What you DON'T get, and what no one in the Digital Sampling world seems to notice, is that the sound of the Principle 8 4 ranks sounding together is quite distinct from simply adding them up.   THAT's what I notice.   Now just send that lil' ol inferior digital to ME. Tell ya what. I'll haul it away for you. No charge.    
(back) Subject: RE: More thoughts on digital tone From: "Nance, Daryel" <DNance@svdp-edu.org> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 20:48:39 -0500   Wow, Robert, what a magnificent post, oozing with the maturity of sage wisdom.   In high school (1960-64) I was fortunate enough to study on a Joseph Whitford 1961(?) Aeolian-Skinner (at Church of the Incarnation in Dallas). Ever since (26 years) I've worked on only instruments with "slim-bodied pipes and their squeaky ensembles and the keydesk smack up against the = organ so that most of the sound whizzes over your head" (well, except for three years on a '50's Cassavant at Christ the King in Dallas also). I've said time and time again over those years, while confronted with the primary = job objective at my employment of service playing (and inspiring the faithful = to put money in the collection plate), ...if I could've had just one celeste, guys, in 54 ranks, just one, pleeeeze, that's all I would ask (25 of the = 54 ranks are in mixtures and a mounted cornet). ;->   Admittedly, I am very blest to work on this instrument(Rieger, 1974), its just that it was not engineered to be an instrument that was going to be emminently useful primarily for service playing in an American church market. And for an instrument to be engineered for service playing is not an invalid artistic musical goal.   Yes, the Biggs Flentrop recordings were truely delightful to 1960's ears. = I used to own then on open reel tape, ...boy, does that go back a ways!   Peace and blessings, Daryel       Daryel Nance St.Vincent de Paul Church, Houston mailto:dnance@svdp-edu.org www.dompaulbenoit.com ; www.church-organist.com ; www.daryeln.com ; www.ruah.info   "...the only ones among you who will really be happy are those who sought and found how to serve." Albert Schwietzer         -----Original Message----- From: Robert Lind [mailto:Robert_Lind@cch.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 1:45 PM To: PipeChat Subject: Re: More thoughts on digital tone     I should keep my mouth shut and stay out of this, and perhaps after I've written it, I'll simply destroy the e-mail.   This whole area is incredibly subjective. Even within the same person over a period of time, one's views change and one's hearing mechanism changes and "worsens" as old age creeps in.   At 17 I went to college, having studied during my last three years in high school on a wonderful E.M. Skinner. Somehow upon attending organ recitals in the Chicago area starting in = 1957, my ear soon craved brilliance: mixtures were in and fat-scaled flues and reeds were out. I used to laugh at organ maintenance guys (probably in = their 50s) who lamented over the thin-scaled sounds that were taking over.   In 1959, I studied Sowerby works with the composer on his instrument at St. James, Chicago. I had the good grace = (and tons of respect) not to argue--I did it Leo's way. Whatever his registrations and thoughts on what worked in his pieces I went along with = it 100%. The next year I became his assistant, and I registered all = non-Sowerby works on that undistinguished 1920 Austin MY way. For full plenum in a Baroque work it seems to me now that I probably pared down the 8' flue = sound to one manual flute all by itself. I used to turn that organ upside down = and inside out in trying to get something decent out of it. And you can bet = that recordings of Biggs on his famous Flentrop had something to do with it. = The difference between the way Sowerby and I registered must have been close = to comical. I was always trying to eliminate mud, thickness, wooliness, opacity; he was using the full tonal spectrum in the manner the instrument was "meant" to be played.   In 1963 I demonstrated Saville electronic organs and was intrigued with what they were up to. Bob Saville would ask = me in the shop to listen to various examples of reeds and other stops. When I didn't prefer the sound HE wanted me to like best, he'd say "but the oscilloscope shows that this is right on track." I'd fire back: "But my = ear tells me that you've a long way to go."   By 1965 I was enamored of the Schlicker at Church of the Ascension, Chicago, and felt that the Noehren organ at St. Richard's, Chicago, was too aggressive and screechy. Serving in the Army Band program in Germany 1967-69 and getting around to instruments of = various kinds in several countries, I found out that that Schlicker wasn't so hot after all.   In 1978 I suddenly had to find an organbuilder because an angel gave my Lutheran church in Northfield, IL, a healthy sum for an organ. By this time I rather fancied a Noack in a = convent in a Chicago suburb. After much looking and listening (the then-student = John Paul Buzard even submitted a proposal), I narrowed my choices to an EP Casavant or a Wilhelm tracker. I went with Wilhelm. It was the Lutheran thing to do, after all.   Today I'm not so sure. Church music is much more eclectic. And by now I hanker after a more well-rounded organ with pistons, swell shades, a celeste, a 32' reed--and, if I can find it--lots = of 8' flues. Yep, I'm now siding with those old guys I laughed at all those decades ago. This is gross oversimplification, of course. They and I probably would never agree on the QUALITY of sound emanating from various kinds of principals/diapasons and what ideal to strive for.   But I'm oh so tired of certain builders' (they shall remain nameless) slim-bodied pipes and their squeaky ensembles and the keydesk smack up against the organ so that most of the sound = whizzes over your head and what's left may take your ears off, and of mechanical stop action and of instruments that are so different from that 1920 Austin but in their own way are every bit as unremittingly unmusical as the old klunkers built back in some unenlightened past.   So--what is the tonal ideal? I doubt that you'll ever get two people to agree.   Robert Lind in the Chicago suburbs         lab <labeaty@panix.com> 06/11/2002 11:33 AM Please respond to PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> TMore thoughts on digital tone     Hello, all.   I've been following the recent back and forth discussion on digital sampling and the tonal "ideal."   I think the issue here is one of what is a tonal "ideal" and this is by its own nature a question of aesthetics and not science. To remove this from the digital domain and put it into pipe organ terms, how much agreement would we get on an idealized pipe organ sound?   I am reminded of an acquaintance who asserts that the Flentrop sound is simply the "best" organ sound. I like that sound and always remember the Biggs recordings on the Busch-Resinger organ in Cambridge, MA. But would the Flentrop sound be "ideal" for a Baptist church in say Arkansas?   I don't think it would support their idea of what church music and organ sound are supposed to be. "supposed to be" meaning from their perspective which is equally valid as say a Missouri Lutheran church in Minnesota. Presumably in the latter case, the Flentrop sound is more suitable.   My point here is that the issue of taste and preference is the same for digital instruments, no matter which particular technology a given company may use. Some organists just simply prefer or like the Allen sound better than anything else. Others prefer Galanti and as we've seen in recent postings, some others prefer Johannus or Musicom systems.   The relative "better" or "worse" of this argument cannot be determined empirically because in fact it is purely a matter of taste, preference, and ultimately one's aesthetic sensibilities.   Pardon the length of this posting but let me conclude with this comparison of sampled vs. synthesized digital sound provided to me by a very experienced organ technician.   Says he: Digitally sampled sound is somewhat like a black and white photograph in that it captures the sound in a more or less original form.   Digitally synthesized sound is more like an artist's rendering of the photograph in that it offers the same image but in an interpretive manner.   I don't know how accurate this may be, but think it's an interesting concept.         "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: Digitally Sampled vs Real Time From: "G. Deboer" <gdeboer@bluemarble.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:11:41 -0500   Johannus uses exclusively complete pipe samples, that is, samples that = also include the attack or chiff, the pure pipe sound and then the decay.   ----- Original Message ----- From: <cdkrug@worldnet.att.net> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 8:23 PM Subject: Re: Digitally Sampled vs Real Time     > On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 02:04:39PM -0400, Wurlibird1@aol.com wrote: > > Dick Meckstroth asks: > > > > > > >What are strings of software? << > > > > Computer code, Dick. > > In Computer Speak, a "string" is a group of characters, all of which > belong to an alphabet. If you look at the headers for this message, > you'll notice that the "alphabet" I'm using is US-ASCII. > > "Realtime" is an overused word. In my line of work, Realtime means, "If > you don't do THIS within 50us of THAT, the device will explode." > > Yes, really. > > The definition used by Johanas is a good bit less stringent than mine, > I'm guessing. > > >From the descriptions, it sounds to me like Johanas is doing what's > usually called "Realtime modeling synthesis," rather than sampling. > > Allen, Rogers, etc pull a pipe out of their collection and record it > digitally. If you're THAT interested, Rick Lyons has written the > standard text, "Understanding Digital Signal Processing." > > In realtime modeling, you generally have different digital > approximations of various parts of the sound. The specifics would > probably be considered trade secrets. > > When a note is played, the computer generates the sound from the > approximations. The specific technique is most likely ALSO a trade > secret, but anyone who's familiar with the technology could probably > come up with something similar. The biggest difficulty is making > something that "Plays right," to a skilled artist, meaning you have to > find a skilled artist willing to help, which can be a tall order. > > I've a Yamaha portable digital piano with similar technology. At the > time it was made, it was superior to any sampled instrument made, and > certainly more than Good Enough for club dates where there's > amplification, guitars, and, frankly, copious quantities of alchohol. > > Cheers > > > Charles > -- > Engages cloaking device. > > > > "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: More thoughts on digital tone From: "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:45:41 -0500   Yeah, but they could just add the Leslie speaker to top it off   Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 3:27 PM Subject: Re: More thoughts on digital tone     > Well, Joe, your day will be decidedly unmade when the Arkansas Baptists > begin buying digitally sampled Nichols & Simpson organs. This is where > imitation is hardly the sincerest form of flattery. > > Now I will go wash my mouth out with soap. > > I am reminded of how much I regret that a horrible New Jersey church = fire > has delayed our chance to have a Nichols & Simpson organ here in the > Northeast, something to which we had looked forward. I am so glad it is > still on track, albeit on a long siding. > > If you're not coming to OHS in Chicago, I know you are sending us at = least > two of your best employees! > > Cheers, > > Malcolm > www.mander-organs.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "C. Joseph Nichols" <cjn@nicholsandsimpson.com> > To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 3:58 PM > Subject: Re: More thoughts on digital tone > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "lab" <labeaty@panix.com> > > To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 11:33 AM > > Subject: More thoughts on digital tone > > > > > > snip > > > But would the Flentrop sound be "ideal" for a Baptist church in say > > > Arkansas? > > >snip > > > > Thanks, > > > > You made my day!! ( in Arkansas ) > > > > Actually, Baptists (in Arkansas) do buy things other than Nichols & > Simpson > > organs. > > > > C. Joseph Nichols > > Nichols & Simpson, Inc. > > www.nicholsandsimpson.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: More thoughts on organ tone From: "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:49:36 -0500   I wonder what a sampled or a real time organ would sound like with say one speaker/amp per stop per note and bounced off the ceiling, or say put = behind a set of shades, rather than everything coming out of a few speakers en chamade.   Jim H   PS I said sound like, not cost ----- Original Message ----- From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 6:05 PM Subject: Re: More thoughts on organ tone       "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: Lutheran Hymnals (was New Missouri Synod Hymnal) From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 22:31:24 -0400   On 6/11/02 9:09 PM, "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> wrote: > > Alan Freed responded to my message with cogent comments. I wish, = however, to > clarify one point of my original message. Where I wrote: > >>> The Scandinavian Lutherans were not so pietistic as to totally break >>> relationships with the churches in their countries of origin, however, = nor >>> did they disallow organ music in worship. > > I should have said, "The first and second generation American Lutheran, = of > Scandinavian descent were not so pietistic..." > > I think the group to which Alan referred, > >> Except in Sweden, where they formed the Swedish Mission Covenant = Church. > > has a counterpart in the organization I know to have been once styled in = the > U.S., as the "Swedish Covenant Church", the operator of North Park = College, in > Chicago. Though I'm not certain, the name of the organization may have = been > restyled in the interest of greater inclusiveness. > You're quite right, Noel. And I read the name of that group just about = ten days ago, but don't recall what it is now. And my book on it is at = church. I'll check tomorrow, just in the interest of completeness.   And, by the way, Noel, I recall reading in the history of a rural = pietistic Norwegian congregation in southern Minnesota (1860s?) that the "loose" = young folks wanted to get a (pump parlor) organ for the church. The parish council finally allowed them to buy it, and keep it on the front porch of the church. They could bring it in for their meetings, but had to keep it in on the porch otherwise. Funny, but that's the way things were here and there. Eventually, of course, nature took her course, and it became the parish organ.   Alan   P.S.: If you know Jim Lokken in San Francisco, he knows the story in = better detail; I'll cc him on this message.      
(back) Subject: LCMS Hymnal From: "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 22:04:04 -0500   Someone put the address for the PDF files for the new hymnal. I had downloaded them previously but now I cannot find them. Could someone = please repost the address?   Thanks,   Jim    
(back) Subject: So many questions, so little time . . . From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:46:10 -0500   Not to bore you with the organic aspects of my last week, I will plunge in. Can any of you guide me to a music score edition, or if more than one available, the best edition of the following:   (1) Is there a volume or set of volumes of Bohm's works, especially the Praeludia?   (2) Similarly, is there a volume or set of volumes of Sweelinck's works? I heard a version of "All glory be to God on high" with 4 verses today - interesting and pretty characteristic. Heretofore all I've heard that I really liked of his was the "My young life hath an end", and was not terribly interested in the echo fantasia or whatever it is called.   (3) I know that several organists have performed and recorded the following, but is there a printed edition of: (a) Virgil Fox's "Come, Sweet Death"? (b) The "William Tell Overture"?   Because I only speak or read German if sitting on a high window ledge several stories above ground smoking marijuana, I will say only "Dank ou".   Beginning to squirm and itch for an organ of my own,   Glenda Sutton gksjd85@direcway.com          
(back) Subject: Re: More thoughts on digital tone From: "Richard Jordan" <mail@gesangbuch.org> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:52:09 -0500   I was always taught that the reason why and electronic organ can never measure up is no matter what you do with an electronic organ, it will never move the volume of air that the pipes do that, and that this the blend comes from using the whole interior of the church as a mixing chamber, which is rather hard to do with = speakers as they lack the subtlety of the air movement from the pipes   even good mixed samples have a tenddancy towards muddiness so while it may a good sample of a single stop, when mixed with a second stop doesn't seem to behave quite the same as pipe stops mix       Regards, Richard Jordan   http://www.Lutheran-Hymnal.com http://www.OnJordansBanks.com