PipeChat Digest #3955 - Friday, September 12, 2003 Re: Tubulars in S. New England by "Bigaquarium" <Bigaquarium@netzero.net> LeTourneau in Columbus, Georgia by "Glenda" <email@example.com> RE: Trinity's new organ by "Emmons, Paul" <PEMMONS@wcupa.edu> Re: Trinity's new organ by <Keys4bach@aol.com> here we go, yet again by <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: here we go, yet again by "Jeff White" <email@example.com> Re: here we go, yet again by "Alan Freed" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: here we go, yet again by <Gfc234@aol.com> SOUND, *not* SIZE by <email@example.com> Re: Christmas piano/organ duet by "leora holcomb" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: here we go, yet again by "Noel Stoutenburg" <email@example.com> Re: here we go, yet again by <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> seduced by a digital by "james nerstheimer" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: seduced by a digital by "Noel Stoutenburg" <email@example.com> Re: here we go, yet again by "leora holcomb" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Organs by "Bigaquarium" <Bigaquarium@netzero.net> Re: here we go, yet again by <email@example.com> Felix Hell & John Balka: New CD Releases by "William T. Van Pelt" <firstname.lastname@example.org> IRC tonight by <email@example.com> Re: IRC tonight by "David Scribner" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
(back) Subject: Re: Tubulars in S. New England From: "Bigaquarium" <Bigaquarium@netzero.net> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 06:54:20 -0400 > > Thanks for the info, Worcester is a hop skip and jump away from = here... Do > > you think they'd think I'm a wacko if I asked them about their pipe organ? > > (C: > > > Of course. Even if you didn't. (Gee, I hope you're not a = hypersensitive > guy; I'm just kidding.) Heheh, I am wacko, I just wanted to know if they'd notice it. (C: = -Nate "The Apprentice"
(back) Subject: LeTourneau in Columbus, Georgia From: "Glenda" <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 06:55:01 -0500 We talked about this recent installation some time back, but I was wondering if anyone could point me to where in Columbus it is located and who I would contact about seeing it? Many thanks. Glenda Sutton firstname.lastname@example.org
(back) Subject: RE: Trinity's new organ From: "Emmons, Paul" <PEMMONS@wcupa.edu> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:38:25 -0400 > My guess is that there would be very, very few takers at this price. True, but silicon is cheap. Like many electronic products today, when = the production goes up, the price goes down. I remember when a = "Betamax" video cassette machine was considered the ne plus ultra rich = man's toy, and had a few pangs of guilt when I splurged on one myself, = on sale, several years later for a whole $250. That was about the time = I also splurged on an IBM XT clone computer for $4200 (also on sale), = which was the most expensive computer I ever bought. My latest set me = back about 1/7 that much while being a couple thousand times more = powerful. And many DVD players are disposable items: costing less to = replace to repair. (Not that I approve of throw-away you-name-it... but = that's the hard-nosed economic fact). Like you, I am ambivalent about this initiative of Trinity Church, Wall = Street. On the one hand, I do not rejoice to see electronic organs = promoted or encouraged in any way. Furthermore, the same guy who wrote = some twenty years ago that "silicon is cheap" went on to say, "iron is = expensive." In terms of electronic organs, the "iron" is the = loudspeaker system. Excellent speakers will always be necessary for a = good result. They are the output devices; and like most output devices, = they depend on their physical dimensions and contain moving parts. = Hence they will always be costly, and they will always deteriorate over = time. Given an imperfect speaker sytem, technological improvements in = other areas, however radical, can have only a limited effect on either = quality or cost reduction.=20 On the other hand, some congregations are unable to afford pipe organs. = This is nothing new: a hundred years ago, such congregations might make = do with reed organs. Today, for those that can't, praise bands are = waiting in the wings if they are not already center-stage. Perhaps = nowadays small churches that buy, and install in a relatively permanent = manner, devices that at least make a serious effort to imitate a pipe = organ, ought to be congratulated for their interest in maintaining a = traditional music program. If so, then perhaps we can also smile upon = Trinity Church's effort to make lemonade out of a lemon of a situation = (referring to the the aftermath of 9/11) by underwriting research and = development that will eventually redound to the benefit of smaller = congregations with such a desire.
(back) Subject: Re: Trinity's new organ From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:43:24 EDT In a message dated 9/12/2003 1:39:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, PEMMONS@wcupa.edu writes: > Perhaps nowadays small churches that buy, and install in a relatively > permanent manner, devices that at least make a serious effort to imitate = a pipe > organ, ought to be congratulated for their interest in maintaining a > traditional music program. Well, well Hall a freaking lu JAH! someone bless you has figured it out at least as i have figured it out he says sheepishly. I can play real music on an AGO organ of any make, style or size, but have = not figured out how to play the T&F we have been discussing on 2 guitars, = a sax and a tambourine. Those that can get real SHOULD get real and settle for nothing less. As to = the rest.... A hale and hearty AMEN from dale in Florida
(back) Subject: here we go, yet again From: <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:40:30 -0700 Almost ANY church that can afford an AGO console electronic substitute can afford a pipe organ. Here's the thing: no, you probably CAN'T play the big repertoire on a small pipe organ, but how many village organists DO? A prelude, offertory, and postlude from one of the Lorenz organ mags, three hymns, and MAYBE an anthem do NOT require 75 speaking stops (grin). ORGANISTS and their "dream-lists", as much as PRICES, are responsible for the proliferation of electronic substitutes. How is it that village organists managed on 2m/ped reed organs and small pipe organs for centuries? Organs such as: SW 8' Stopped Diapason 8' Salicional 4' Harmonic Flute Tremulant GT 8' Open Diapason 8' Melodia or Dulciana 4' Octave Sw/Gt 8 Sw/Gt 4 PED 16' Bourdon Sw/Ped 8 Gt/Ped 8 Go PLAY one of the lovely 19th century examples, such as are heard regularly at OHS conventions, rather than saying, "oh, but it doesn't have X, Y, or Z; and I simply MUST have X, Y, Z, AND four manuals" (chuckle). An historical example of a small organ that CAN play a LOT of music: Dom Paul Benoit's Cavaille-Coll organ at Clerveaux Abbey in Luxembourg: 1st manual - Grand Orgue 16' Bourdon 8' Montre 8' Flute harmonique 8' Bourdon 4' Prestant 2nd manual - Positif 8' Salicional 8' Cor de nuit 4' Flute douce 2 2/3' Nazard 2' Flautino 8' Cromorne 3rd manual - R=E9cit 8' Flute 8' Gambe 8' Voix c=E9leste 4' Flute octaviante IV Plein-jeu 8' Trompette 8' Hautbois P=E9dale 16' Soubasse 8' Basse which could be compacted even further to: G.O. 16' Bourdon 8' Montre 8' Harmonic Flute 8' Gambe 4' Prestant Plein Jeu V 8' Trompette Recit 8' Bourdon 8' Salicional 8' Voix Celeste 4' Flute Octaviante 2 2/3 Cornet III 8' Hautbois Pedale 16' Soubasse 8' Montre (transmission) 8' Flute (transmission) 8' Trompette (transmission) Now ... stare at the original C-C stoplist ... and use your IMAGINATION. Bourdon 16 + Flute Harmonique 8' played up an octave yields flutes 8-4; Recit Hautbois + Flute 4' yields Cor Anglais; GO or Recit Flute 8' + Po. Nazard yields Quintadena; PO Salicional + Nazard is another possible Quintadena; GO Bourdon 16', Montre 8, Prestant 4' played up an octave yields a respectable 4' plenum; and on and on and on. Imagination IS required; but I'd rather have half-a-dozen EXQUISITELY-VOICED ranks of pipes with INTEGRITY than $700K worth of electronic substitute which still lacks ... how did the organist of Trinity Wall Street put it? "Suchness." SCALING, VOICING, PLACEMENT, AND ACOUSTICS are what MATTER. A small organ in a west gallery in a reverberant church can do MIRACULOUS things. I played a VERY small Johnson (I think it was) in a VERY big RC church in Elyria, OH, that supported congregational singing just FINE, thank you very much (grin). The scaling and voicing of these 19th century instruments is not an alchemist's secret ... there are plenty of examples extant. I'm still waiting for someone to make an historically-informed version of one of = them. Cheers, Bud
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: "Jeff White" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:01:51 -0400 Bud I'm not disputing your first sentence, but I will ask this question: why would I want just three ranks per division on a affordable pipe organ when I could have 75 "ranks" on an electronic for the same price (in THEORY)? I think that's the point that was being made. Of course, if you plan ahead, you can always design a pipe organ to be expandable for the future, given the right space and architecture. No shame in working up to 75 ranks over the years. However, that very small spec you gave would not work in a Lutheran church with a decent music program. It's ok if all you do is play hymns and liturgy and SOME literature (ie the "village organist.") I'm having enough trouble being creative with 27 ranks! Regards, Jeff On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:40:30 -0700 email@example.com wrote: >Almost ANY church that can afford an AGO console >electronic substitute can afford a pipe organ. > >Here's the thing: no, you probably CAN'T play the big >repertoire on a small pipe organ, but how many village >organists DO? > >A prelude, offertory, and postlude from one of the Lorenz >organ mags, three hymns, and MAYBE an anthem do NOT >require 75 speaking stops (grin).
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: "Alan Freed" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:16:21 -0400 On 9/12/03 4:01 PM, "Jeff White" <email@example.com> wrote: > I'm having enough trouble being creative with 27 ranks! Jeff, how does that fit with what somebody told me (correctly?) fifty = years ago, to the effect that it takes a lot MORE "creativity" to work with a dozen or two ranks than with four or five dozen? Alan
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:19:25 EDT It is a shame that people use stops and ranks to "make" music. Now I = don't know about you guys, but I call that playing around with registrations A = good organist can make 2 ranks sound the most wonderful music in the world. = Once the music is happening, enhance it with however many ranks you have. Gregory Ceurvorst M.M. Organ Performance Northwestern University Director of Music and Organist St. Peter's U.C.C. Frankfort, IL 847.332.2788 home 708.243.2549 mobile firstname.lastname@example.org
(back) Subject: SOUND, *not* SIZE From: <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:45:27 -0700 Jeff White wrote: > Bud I'm not disputing your first sentence, but I will ask this > question: why would I want just three ranks per division on a > affordable pipe organ when I could have 75 "ranks" on an electronic for > the same price (in THEORY)? Um, just *maybe* PERHAPS because of the SOUND? (grin) > I think that's the point that was being made. Of course, if you plan > ahead, you can always design a pipe organ to be expandable for the > future, given the right space and architecture. No shame in working up > to 75 ranks over the years. However, that very small spec you gave > would not work in a Lutheran church with a decent music program. It's ok = > if all you do is play hymns and liturgy and SOME literature (ie the > "village organist.") I'm having enough trouble being creative with 27 > ranks! > > Regards, > Jeff There's a small VERY high Lutheran church in a northern suburb of San Diego that has a FULL choral service every Sunday. The organ: Manual 8' Flute 4' Flute - 12 pipes 2 2/3' Flute - borrowed 2' Flute - 12 pipes 1 3/5' Flute - borrowed 1 1/3' Flute - borrowed 1' Flute - 12 pipes Pedal 16' Bourdon - 12 pipes 8' Flute - manual 4' Flute - manual And that's IT ... no couplers, no tremulant, no expression, no pistons, no crescendo. It plays THEIR service quick handily. It would be a LITTLE more flexible if the manual stops were divided at middle c; they're not. Not what I would design, certainly; but it gets the job done. An organ built by a first-rate MASTER organ-builder, and voiced by a MASTER voicer doesn't NEED 27 stops (chuckle). Now, back to that 7-stop organ ... what exactly WON'T it play? You have two choruses: Great Open Diapason + Octave If you couple the Swell Flutes 8-4 to the Great at 8-4, that gives you Flutes 8-4-2 for a secondary chorus. Keep the box shut until you need it; then throw off the Great Open and Octave and open the box. Cantus firmus: the Great 4' Octave played down an octave is very rich in harmonics; accompanied by the Swell 8' Stopped Diapason it makes a WONDERFUL solo stop for "O Man Bewail." About the only thing you CAN'T get TOO well is a trio registration; but you CAN play a pedal cantus firmus on the Great Octave or Open accompanied by the Swell 8-4 flutes. If it happens to be a model that had the Melodia, rather than the Dulciana, you COULD play trios, thus: Swell - 8' Stopped Diapason - r.h. Great - 8' Melodia - l.h. Pedal - SWELL to Pedal So ... you can play Preludes and Fugues, Chorale-Preludes, and Trios. For slush, you can couple the Salicional at 8-4 to the Great (+ tremulant), + the Great Dulciana, if it's that model (not affected by the tremulant), which gives a nice not-too-much tremulant string sound. What's not generally understood about these old organs (unless you've played one for a period of time) is the amount of harmonic development in the individual stops, and the very gentle crescendo as one goes up the scale ... that goes a LONG way toward compensating for the lack of mixtures ... they're solid in the bass, and bright in the treble. True creativity is in the touch, phrasing, and articulation, and choice of literature to fit the instrument, NOT in manipulating large handfuls of mediocre stops (grin), whether wind-blown OR digital. English cathedral organs should be carefully studied. They accompany a choral service FAR more complex than ANYTHING in the US, except for a handful of churches, and do it with far fewer resources. I wish someone would find that marvelously economical Willis stop-list .... the organ was demolished to make way for a Phelps (I think it was) in one of the collegiate chapels in the UK. There are cathedral, collegiate chapel, and parish church organs in the UK that aren't any larger than that Cavaille-Coll in Clervaux Abbey, and they do it ALL. Cheers, Bud
(back) Subject: Re: Christmas piano/organ duet From: "leora holcomb" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:41:17 -0700 (PDT) The best-liked Christmas piano/organ duet I did in all my years at the = organ was "Jesu, Noel" by Eleanor Whitset and Myra Schubert. It is in a = collection published by Lillenas. By the way, please pray for me. I am = very ill and "sentenced" to a motel for a complete rest. I escaped this = afternoon to read my email, but soon it is back to the motel. Please pray = for Keith, too, who is having to put up with me. Lee Eric McKirdy <email@example.com> wrote:Hello everyone, I am looking for a nice, sacred piano/organ duet for Christmas. It doesn't have to be too easy, but shouldn't be horribly difficult -- my pianist is excellent, but doesn't have much time to practice between now and the end = of the year. Any recommendations? Eric -- nobody's ever going to yell at me about inappropriate subject = lines "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org List: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org Administration: mailto:email@example.com Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:58:36 -0500 Jeff White wrote, in part: > Bud I'm not disputing your first sentence, but I will ask > this question: why would I want just three ranks per > division on a affordable pipe organ when I could have 75 > "ranks" on an electronic for the same price (in THEORY)? leading me to propose that we reframe the question to "Do you go for quality and durability" on the one hand, or size and sizzle on the other?". Consider this. You have some money to use to buy furniture. Is it a better use of your money, to buy a well made table, and couple chair, which with proper care will last for generations, on the one had, or on the other hand to buy a whole set of living room furniture, constructed to standards that are not nearly as high, which will wear out in a few years, be unable to be repaired, and have to be completely replaced. If you purchased the table and chairs the first time, with the money you would use to replace the first set, you can instead purchase a couple of more pieces of high quality furniture, and have more than you had before, instead of just replacing what you had, and having spent the twice the money to have the same thing. Electronic instruments are designed neither to be easily upgraded, nor to have infinite lives, and when they fail, you may not be able to get the parts to repair them, meaning you have to replace the whole thing. Pipe organs are designed in a manner that repair is possible, and with care, will last indefinitely. And if you plan ahead, you can then use the money you would have used to purchase a new electronic to enlarge the pipe organ you already have. To me, the question comes down to one of stewardship. ns
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:01:38 EDT i don't know... i've played some electronic organs that produce a better sound than the 37-r pipe organ i have now.
(back) Subject: seduced by a digital From: "james nerstheimer" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:06:24 -0500 I find myself these days utterly enchanted and yea, even seduced by a wonderful Allen I played last weekend. Bethlehem Lutheran church in = DeKalb recently installed a new 3-manual Renaissance that is nothing short of stunning. It's giving me some ideas for my own church which already has = 37 ranks. I must admit that Allen's reeds, individually and in choruses, = were the most convincing I have ever heard come from a digital source. Sombody = finally seems to have gotten all the clatter and buzz right. I have been dying for years to have a complete 16-8-4 reed chorus in my Swell. The = 8-4 we have now would make a lovely Trompeta Real and Bajoncillio. I'd put = the digital reeds in the swellbox and mount the 8-4 horizontally atop the = case. Anyone in the area is welcome to drop by and see this instrument. I'd = like some input. I'm convinced it's a diamond in the rough. jim O):^) _________________________________________________________________
(back) Subject: Re: seduced by a digital From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:03:27 -0500 james wrote, in part: > I find myself these days utterly enchanted and yea, even seduced by a > wonderful Allen I played last weekend. Bethlehem Lutheran church in = DeKalb > recently installed a new 3-manual Renaissance that is nothing short of > stunning. It's giving me some ideas for my own church which already has = 37 > ranks... and with proper care, your church will still have the same 37 ranks when Bethlehem LC has replaced their Renaissance a time or two. Which will = have been the better use of money. I suppose if a parish has personality in = which they want to follow the latest, greatest fads, er.... trends in organ = music, perhaps the Allen is the better way to go. If on the other hand, the = parish has a preference for excellence and durability, and careful use of = resources, I just don't see the justification for an electronic. ns
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: "leora holcomb" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:11:44 -0700 (PDT) I thought the Allen at the church I previously was organist sounded as = good as a pipe organ, until I heard it from the middle of the sanctuary. = (Of course, someone else was playing it.) I have not heard ANY digital = organ that sounds LIKE a pipe organ, as it is NOT a pipe organ. We're = mixing oranges and apples. There is a place for both. Lee BlueeyedBear@aol.com wrote:i don't know... i've played some electronic = organs that produce a better sound than the 37-r pipe organ i have now. "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org List: mailto:email@example.com Administration: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:email@example.com --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
(back) Subject: Organs From: "Bigaquarium" <Bigaquarium@netzero.net> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:18:56 -0400 Hi all, You know the old saying. If the organist doesn't like the organ, it's easier to change the organist than the organ. How many instruments have been slaughtered only to have the organists quit (or be fired) shortly thereafter. I can't figure out what would make someone cut pipes down to make harmonics or mixtures. A pipe is designed and built and voiced to be = a particular pipe... If the job seems to require busting out the hack-saw = and shears, there's something wrong. = -Nate "The Apprentice"
(back) Subject: Re: here we go, yet again From: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:23:26 -0700 Um, I can't say this without stepping on some toes, but here goes: The two pipe organ examples cited are less than stellar representations of the organ-builder's art. They weren't great when they were NEW; one had the dubious benefit of a well-known "consultant" whose ideas were straight from Planet He-Wants-WHAT??!! (grin) In the case of Organ #1, the PIPES (and probably most of the mechanism, except for the electro-mechanical relays) of that factory-mass-produced organ are good enough to re-voice and re-use. WONDERS can be accomplished by a MASTER voicer. And whoever told you that Drainpipe Downspout Organ Co.'s pipes "can't be revoiced" either didn't know HOW, or didn't want to BOTHER. It's STILL cheaper by 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of new pipes, and in this case, you're going to have GOOD zinc basses from the 1950s, before the "zinc crisis" which caused the facade of Organ #2 to need replacing in something like 20 years (!). Organ #2: you have my sympathy (grin). NEITHER the pipework NOR the mechanism is cause for much of anything but consternation, though again, a MASTER voicer could do SOMETHING, IF he could be convinced to come within a country mile of the beast (chuckle). MASTER builders and MASTER voicers (rightly) do not want their names associated with attempts at sow's-ear-to-silk-purse alchemy attempts. There has to be SOMETHING there to BEGIN with ... pipes or mechanism. Notice I keep saying MASTER builders and MASTER voicers. There are a handful in this country, and a handful abroad. They should be sought out, their livings endowed, built comfortable homes, their children sent to school, servants furnished, and CODDLED, for they are a NATIONAL TREASURE. (1) John Brombaugh, and just about anybody descended from him in that "line" ... forgive me if I don't list them all, because I'll surely leave SOMEBODY out. (2) A. Thompson Allen and Co. -- Mr. Ernest M. Skinner's shop crew reincarnated. (3) Nichols and Simpson, who seem to have sprung full-blown from the sea on a pipe-metal clam-shell stamped "Property of G.D.H." (grin). There are others ... that's only a sampling. Now, here's another point: if the church WON'T rip out the Aunt Minnie Ostrich-Feather Deep Pile Double Pad Memorial Wall-To-Wall Abomination, then you're probably wasting your money. Ditto boards of directors who won't consent to siliconing/epoxying everything in the place that doesn't MOVE. After the organ and organ-case itself, the ROOM is the third-most-important component of the instrument. There's one bestrangulated organ in San Diego in a church where the Vestry REFUSED to allow the tonal openings to be enlarged by one centimeter when the new organ was installed. The result: an organ that is never heard in balance OR in tune, as the Swell needs a roadmap to get out into the chancel, never MIND the nave ... ditto any natural flow of air. Oh, and the Positiv is around the corner in the BELL TOWER. Chancel organs that face inward, unless the chancel is VERY high and VERY wide, need all the help they can get. Ultimately, you get what you pay for. As Noel remarked, it comes down to a matter of stewardship. Cheers, Bud BlueeyedBear@aol.com wrote: > i don't know... i've played some electronic organs that produce a = better > sound than the 37-r pipe organ i have now. > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:email@example.com > Administration: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:email@example.com > > > -- =FFWPC=BF
(back) Subject: Felix Hell & John Balka: New CD Releases From: "William T. Van Pelt" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:27:11 -0400 Felix Hell's new CD recorded on the 110-rank Schoenstein completed in 1998 at First-Plymouth Congregational Church in Lincoln, Nebraska, is now available at http://www.ohscatalog.org. The organ is recored like never before by audio guru Keith Johnson and it is released on the audiophile label Reference Recordings. Another newly released Reference Recording available from OHS, first released in 1986 on OHS member Charles Swisher's CD label, features John Balka playing the 1970 Ruffati 4m of 89 ranks at St. Mary's Cathedral in = San Francisco. This CD is one of the great organ showpieces of all time, with great playing by Balka and incredibly detailled recording, yet with good room acoustics, by Johnson. Bill
(back) Subject: IRC tonight From: <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:37:22 -0700 9 p.m. US Eastern Daylight Time. Directions: http://www.pipechat.org/irc.html If you need help with setup on a PC, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org For help on a MAC: email@example.com though he may be enroute from Sarasota today. Is there another MAC user in the house who knows ircle? Cheers, Bud
(back) Subject: Re: IRC tonight From: "David Scribner" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:42:19 -0500 At 4:37 PM -0700 9/12/03, email@example.com wrote: > >For help on a MAC: > >firstname.lastname@example.org > >though he may be enroute from Sarasota today. > >Is there another MAC user in the house who knows ircle? Actually, David got back from Sarasota yesterday and will be on tonight. There are still folks down in Sarasota that might join in however. David