PipeChat Digest #3962 - Saturday, September 13, 2003
 
Re: Remembering an AGO meeting
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
RE: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle)
  by "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com>
Question for PipeChat People
  by "Fran Walker" <fwalker@northwestern.edu>
Re: Question for PipeChat People
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: Question for PipeChat People
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
RE: Out of the closet!
  by "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au>
Re: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle)
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Organists' Service Playing Honoraria & Feeling Good About Sharing
  by <ProOrgo53@aol.com>
Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief
  by "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net>
Re: Remembering an AGO meeting
  by "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net>
RE: here we go, yet again
  by "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net>
RE: here we go, yet again
  by "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net>
Re: Question for PipeChat People
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au>
Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
RE: here we go, yet again
  by "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net>
On a unrelated note...
  by "Bigaquarium" <Bigaquarium@netzero.net>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Remembering an AGO meeting From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:04:58 -0400   On 9/13/03 5:55 PM, "Stephen Best" <sbest@borg.com> wrote:   > We went to a large Catholic church to hear a new Rodger digital/pipe > combination. As part of the program, we had a quiz: one of our members > played various excerpts on individual stops. We sat with paper = scorecard in > hand, having only to note whether the example was played on electronics = or > pipes. There must have been about 35 people present, virtually all of = whom > were organists. JUST ONE person got it all correct! A whole lot missed = half. > Kind of frightening to those of us (myself included) who really do = prefer > pipes.   Very interesting indeed. And it sounds reasonably "fair." Not a very = large sample, of course. And I'd want to know whether the "samples" played = were, say, a hymn stanza, or 20 seconds of a Bach fugue, or 30 seconds of Dupre, or a D-major scale. I'd like to see that experiment done again, a dozen times, with different "people" listening, etc. You're reporting that 3% scored 100% (I'm willing to call that "luck"); and a whole lot were fooled half the time. (In which direction did their misjudgments run? Like, = were the pipes so bad that people thought they were digital, or were the = digital stops so good that people thought they were pipes? Is that am important distinction?)   In short, not enough data to write a paper on. But it should be done = again, with better controls and all that; it might be very interesting inDEED.   While I've got you on the line: In 1963 I visited a reasonably modern = LCMS church in Utica, with a decent west-end instrument--quite possibly a Schlicker. Can you identify it? Organist's name, I think, was Beverly. It's an idle curiosity to fill in crumbling memory.   Alan              
(back) Subject: RE: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle) From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:01:12 -0500   The arguments below compare apples and oranges - pianists in a classical recital venue vs. church organists. Also, I apparently don't inhabit the same world Gregory does. In many churches in the deep South, the pianos are old beat-up rode hard and put up wet uprights and seldom in tune. Many church pianists play gospel or dumbed-down editions of music. Many of the church pianists are not classically trained and play no classical music at church; finger substitution - what is that to them?     The hopes of a church's getting a fine piano are much closer than those of obtaining a fine organ, pipe or electronic. There are still churches where the church musician, more often a pianist than an organist, is not paid at all. So there is little difference in the working conditions between church pianists and church organists, except that obtaining good quality instruments is generally cheaper.     There are excellent arguments in favor of Bud's position, but this particular dog doesn't hunt. The answer to your question is: myriad. And I for one would rather find a pianist who leaves the pedals alone - someone should install an electric charge to that right pedal to electrocute one who is too fond of it!     Glenda Sutton   gksjd85@direcway.com     -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of Gfc234@aol.com Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 2:10 PM To: pipechat@pipechat.org Subject: Re: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle)     In a message dated 9/13/2003 7:30:45 AM Central Daylight Time, bobelms@westnet.com.au writes:   How many serious classical pianists play digital pianos in >concert? >   I think the real question should be: How many pianists can get away with holding church jobs on the organ with out ever touching a pedal, making one finger substitution, or playing one piece of literature. The answer to one of these questions is the bass coupler that Allen puts on its organs.     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 gfc234@aol.com <http://gfc234@aol.com/>      
(back) Subject: Question for PipeChat People From: "Fran Walker" <fwalker@northwestern.edu> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:30:53 -0700   Dear PipeChat People,   I recently purchased Lionel Rogg's 12 CD set of Bach's complete organ works. Absent from the set, however, are the 8 Little Preludes & Fugues. I emailed Mr. Rogg to ask about this and he emailed back that = they were not composed by Bach. Is he right? Anyone know who the real = composer is?   Fran Walker   ************************************************** Fran Walker (fwalker@northwestern.edu) Organist, NS Methodist Church Glencoe, IL **************************************************      
(back) Subject: Re: Question for PipeChat People From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:52:23 -0500   Fran Walker wrote:   > Dear PipeChat People, > > I recently purchased Lionel Rogg's 12 CD set of Bach's complete organ > works. Absent from the set, however, are the 8 Little Preludes & > Fugues. I emailed Mr. Rogg to ask about this and he emailed back that > they were not composed by Bach. Is he right? Anyone know who the > real composer is?   The scholarly consensus for the best part of a century has been that the 8 Little Preludes and Fugues, though from the "school of Bach", are unlikely to have been written by the Great Man himself. Various suggestions have been made as to their actual authorship, and I think about the most widely touted suggestion is that they may have been composed by Bach's pupil Johann Ludwig Krebs.   John Speller      
(back) Subject: Re: Question for PipeChat People From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:51:52 EDT   Fran, They may be composed by one of his students (maybe krebs???) or children. =   Mr. Rogg also leaves out other works of doubtful authenticity. I have = this box set too and just love the Silbermann on there-the plenum has that gritty = and rich sound-despite its newer additions (the pedal reed). His playing is = great for the most part, but the pedal is way too legato at times (and manual = too), and the way he phrases certain fugue subjects is comical. Being a = Chicagoan, I am sure you know David Schrader, his recordings and performances of Bach = are the best I've ever heard. Next up is Hans Fagius, then Marie Claire (the = new one). 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 gfc234@aol.com    
(back) Subject: RE: Out of the closet! From: "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 08:06:58 +0800   Well, Bud, all I can say is you are extremely fortunate. Don't come to Australia because you would be permanently unemployed. Not even a Cathedral could match your requirements.   I have played for church services for more than 70 years in several different churches but not one paid a salary. I had a small honorarium in one but that didn't last. In all that time I have played for the love of it and have been happy to do so.   Bob Elms.       ---- >OK, y'all force me to come out. > >I AM a PROFESSIONAL CHURCH MUSICIAN who DOES expect the Church to provide the following for me, IF they want my services ... > > >AS A PROFESSIONAL MUSICIAN< > >WITH A CONSERVATORY DEGREE< > >WHO EARNS HIS LIVING DOING CHURCH MUSIC< > >Please re-read the above a couple of times if you didn't grasp the >meaning the first time around. > >(1) A living wage, based on my education, experience, and skill, and >the cost of living in the area >(2) Medical, dental, and optical insurance, paid by the CHURCH, NOT >by me >(3) A retirement plan that will allow me to live in something other >than a refrigerator box on Skid Row when I retire >(4) An office with a computer and a SECRETARY >(5) A decent PIPE ORGAN >(6) A choir that can SING and READ MUSIC, in which at least three >singers on each part are present every Sunday >(7) a clergy-person with an IQ *exceeding* that of pond-scum, who can > > (a) assemble a declarative sentence > (b) preach a 10-minute sermon and make his/her point > (c) carry a tune, if the liturgy requires it > (d) isn't threatened by another PROFESSIONAL on staff > (e) TREATS me as a professional > (f) didn't major in Ignorance and minor in Arrogance in seminary > >I'm not PRIMARILY in church music because of God, or my faith, or >anything else; I happen to LIKE church music; I CHOOSE to make my >LIVING >doing church music; that does NOT, I repeat does NOT absolve the >Church >of competing in the larger marketplace for my skills. Nor does it >absolve the Church of adhering to the values of social justice and a >just wage that they trumpet from the pulpit on behalf of just about >everybody BUT their OWN employees. > >    
(back) Subject: Re: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle) From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:09:21 EDT   Gregory does. In many churches in the deep South, the pianos are old beat-u= p=20 rode hard and put up wet uprights and seldom in tune. Many church pianists=20 play gospel or dumbed-down editions of music. Many of the church pianists a= re=20 not classically trained and play no classical music at church; finger=20 substitution =E2=80=93 what is that to them? =20   I wasn't speaking about the South, or Gospel music in particular. The=20 problem is that these unqulaified people often eat up jobs at fairly affluen= t=20 parishes with pipe organs, and work for a FRACTION of the cost that a profes= sional=20 demands. That takes our professional pay scale, education, and thousands of= =20 hours and dollars of studying, practicing, and devalues it completely. I've= =20 played auditions where afterwords, they say, "wow..........."-then we start=20= to=20 talk money...they expect like 10-15 hours of work for 200 dollars. I pull o= ut=20 the AGO salary guide and they say, well...mrs. so an so did it for ten years= at=20 fifty dollars a week. We can just go and get her etc.... I'm sure everyone=20 can relate.=20 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 gfc234@aol.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:19:01 -0400   On 9/13/03 8:06 PM, "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au> wrote:   > I have played for church services for more than 70 years in several = different > churches but not one paid a salary. I had a small honorarium in one but = that > didn't last. In all that time I have played for the love of it and have = been > happy to do so.   Bob Elms, that is unquestionably fantastic. And, in your case, it's much too late to DO anything about it. But don't you feel that the time SHOULD come when your successors should be paid SOME reasonable salary for their work? Our organist works like CRAZY (in a tiny New York parish)--he's highly skilled, and his compositions are published. We could never pay = him what he's worth, but we do our best, and see that he has medical insurance (including wife and kids) and a pension plan. It just seems RIGHT to me.   Do Aussie parishes pay the janitor and the secretary?   No?   Alan www.stlukesnyc.org for photos of him, details of the organ, etc.    
(back) Subject: Re: Organists' Service Playing Honoraria & Feeling Good About Sharing From: <ProOrgo53@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:22:35 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/2003 7:08:02 PM Central Daylight Time, bobelms@westnet.com.au writes: I have played for church services for more than 70 years in several different churches but not one paid a salary. I had a small honorarium in one but that didn't last. In all that time I have played for the love of it and have been happy to do so.   Bob Elms. Greetings, Bob! Your note has prompted, within me, a question about religious denomination =   customs on a world-wide basis. Both my wife's and my family are members = of a denomination which has a world-wide presence but thrives on volunteerism = (yes, member plumbers donate their work to the church, etc.) Lacking many = sellable skills and with an education which emphasized music education and church = music (at the Master's degree level, plus AGO certification), I have "strayed" = from the fold of my church membership and worked for other church denominations =   throughout my career which are accustomed to paying for the services of = music professionals. When opportunity presents itself, I honor requests to play = "from my love of the LORD and the LORD's people and my own church" without renumeration, but received much verbal appreciation and an occasional loaf = of freshly baked bread or box of cookies. Neither the bread nor the cookies pay our water, lights, fuel or rent/house payment, but there is great satisfaction = in helping to support the ongoing work of Kingdom building, whether for a = church that recognizes the worth of persons and their distinctive gifts, callings, = skills and education or for those which do not necessarily express appreciation = in the form of bankable assets.   It is a dilema, to be sure; our children sometimes suffer the wonderment = of "why is Daddy working at one church if our family belongs to another?" = Not an easy question to answer, is it?   Dale G. Rider Independence, MO USA    
(back) Subject: Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief From: "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:31:15 -0400   You guys are way behind the game in the Hammond arena. Hammond-Suzuki and = several other manufacturers have made a bunch of junk over the years, but = the current crop of digital tonewheel organs are excellent. Hammond = Suzuki has just released a new digital B3 that is literally perfect, and = the Voce V3/V5 and its derivatives are almost as good. Two or three years = ago what you are saying was true, but not now.   -WG   Bud wrote:   > And Hammond purists on the HamTech list do exactly THAT (chuckle). They > are having NONE of the electronic synthesizers. And, having played > (gasp!) a digital Hammond-Suzuki, I can attest to the fact that they > DONT'T sound like a classic tonewheeler, despite all the vibrato and > key-click and attack adjustments possible.   And Gregory wrote:   > Yes, Hammond was bought by Suzuki and is now producing junk. The guts = of the > instrument are now a computer-its close to the real thing-but not quite. = The > casework is also VERY poor compared to the original thing. The good = hammonds > are b3's c3's and a100s-and there is a genre of music (jazz organ) that > requires these instruments-and NO substitutes. > > Gregory Ceurvorst    
(back) Subject: Re: Remembering an AGO meeting From: "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:37:06 -0400   About 12 years ago, after playing a service on a 1985 Allen, a middle-aged = fellow came up to me to compliment me on the sound of the "pipe" organ. I = thanked him and explained that it was not. He received this news with = great surprise and told me he was an installer for Austin and had been = putting in pipe organs for many years. An anomaly, perhaps, but it really = happened - I was there. I can't explain it. Perhaps his hearing wasn't = what it used to be. Now with a 2003 Allen I would have no trouble at all believing that an expert could be fooled, but the organ in = question is now 20 year old technology.   -WG   > "Stephen Best" <sbest@borg.com> wrote: > > The digital vs. pipe debate will never end -- but James's thought > recalled a recent AGO meeting that was revealing. We went to a large > Catholic church to hear a new Rodger digital/pipe combination. As part > of the program, we had a quiz: one of our members played various > excerpts on individual stops. We sat with paper scorecard in hand, > having only to note whether the example was played on electronics or > pipes. There must have been about 35 people present, virtually all of > whom were organists. JUST ONE person got it all correct! A whole lot > missed half. Kind of frightening to those of us (myself included) who > really do prefer pipes. > > Steve Best in Utica, NY > > james nerstheimer wrote: > > > After hearing what I heard last week as I spent four hours lost in > > digital delight, I'm convinced that no one will be able to tell which > > ranks are which when we're done. I'm not going to tell anyone which > > ones are which--they're going to have to guess when they come to = visit.    
(back) Subject: RE: here we go, yet again From: "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:52:04 -0500   > However, too often, I have seen large electronic specifications in small > spaces because of organist fanatasies, and the money spent could have > bought a decent used pipe organ, or even a smaller but better grade of > electronic. I'm afraid that too many bad organs exist because organists > don't know the difference.   Oooh...this is a new angle on this discussion which is interesting. Ok, let's pose this question...I'm curious about something. Suppose a church has the desire to get a pipe organ (leaving electronics out). Is there = any reason to not pursue a brand new instrument over a previously owned? Or, creating an instrument from a variety of used parts? Does this method = lend to saving money, or is it just as costly?   And let's ask yet one more question, and Sebastian may have already = answered this once, but my 36-yr old memory doesn't always hold well. What makes a new pipe organ so darned expensive?? Can't be the "computer" components = of the combination action, relays, etc....those prices are always falling. = Is it because of the customization work?   Jeff    
(back) Subject: RE: here we go, yet again From: "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:54:38 -0500   I'm not going to argue the point of what can be done with two ranks...because I'm sure it can be quite lovely. What I will argue is the inability to play "A Mighty Fortress" on Reformation Sunday at = fortissimo--- full to mixture plus reeds. :) (Or is that a sign of being spoiled by having those ranks available??)   Jeff   re: "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."   True!!! .....this is one of the most profound observations that has come across the discussion group. I once had the priviledge of "blowing away" my organ professor at NTSU = by playing the Bach little G minor on a solitary 8' Gedackt. When I turned around, he was sitting on the floor uttering "...it works!"   Peace and blessings, Daryel   I    
(back) Subject: Re: Question for PipeChat People From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:48:04 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   For Bach I think I will stick with Michel Chapuis or Ton Koopman.   The latter is a brilliant scholar who adds NOTHING which isn't absolutely researched as historically acceptable.....there is much to learn in what seem like spontaneous gestures.   Michel Chapuis just played Bach in the most unaffected manner, but always with great panache and involvement.   Also, in addition, I would suggest that the old Biggs recordings are magnificent examples of Bach performance, as too are the complete set by Peter Hurford.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- Gfc234@aol.com wrote: > Being a Chicagoan, > I am sure you know David Schrader, his recordings > and performances of Bach are > the best I've ever heard   __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 08:58:22 +0800   That is easy to answer, Alan. In most cases - No!   I have been secretary of my local church for 32 years. My honorarium is $200 a year to cover stamps, phone calls etc. I am provided with a line for FAX and email. I am not complaining. UI had an outside job in Education and this is my church and I work for it. Religion in the US seems to be big business to us. There is just no money for big organs or big staffs in most churches here. Some of the larger churches in the big cities do much better since, having been there from the beginning, they can have holdings of commercial property which allows them to employ staff and pay salaraies, but that is not the case with 95% of our churches.   Incidentally someone in one of today's posts gave the stoplist of a small two manual organ, which should be able to be afforded. That organ would cost $160 000 here, compared with $10 000 to $40 000 for a good electronic. It is not even in the same ball park.   As for even "one rank" being adequate as someone claimed, one of our local churches has a two manual four rank organ of 1890 vintage. There is nothing wrong with the sound, but the small number of stops is very limiting. I guess the claim of its adequacy is very easy to make by someone who does not have to play an organ of that size!!! Sit at your 100+ (or 200+) ranks and tell us to love our four ranks???   Incidentally in Australia the Government medical scheme can take care of most problems though many people prefer to have private medical insurance.   Bob Elms.   ---- Original Message ---- F >Do Aussie parishes pay the janitor and the secretary? >Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:58:31 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/2003 7:30:33 PM Central Daylight Time, walterg@nauticom.net writes: Hammond Suzuki has just released a new digital B3 that is literally = perfect, IT IS NOT LITERALLY PERFECT-The case is cheap crap, the percussion is not quite right, and the chorus/vibrato is TERRIBLE.   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 gfc234@aol.com    
(back) Subject: RE: here we go, yet again From: "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:08:49 -0500   Honestly? The 27-rank baroque. However, it's not because of the organ. It's a younger congregation in a suburban area with much potential for growth. The handbell choir was non-existent and the vocal choir needed to = be worked with. The minister is a dream to work with (based on a lot of the horror stories I've heard). The 34-rank organ I mention was in an inner city neighborhood, requiring a security guard to protect our cars at = night, in a dying congregation, made up primarily of elderly people, and I felt = in my heart that I'd achieved as much as I possibly could with the people I = was working with and wanted to leave there with good memories in my heart and mind. Notice, how little I discussed the organs. That goes without = saying based on all the hot air I've spent on this list in the last 24 hours.   Now...do I want more ranks on the Zimmer? Of course!!! Can I get them right now?? NO. The church will not prioritize them that highly at this time yet. Because they're barbaric? NO. Because the church suffered two major splits and now have a mortgage to pay that 1,000 members could do well, but now is being shouldered by 400. We've had just about every A/C unit die this summer due to age and storms, and they were not cheap to replace. We're trying to improve our image by fundraising to get a = digital sign for outside the building (proven by many churches to draw people in). Will I ever get those ranks? Sure! OR, I could get a digital swell division put in, saving space and money. Is that preferable to me? No.   I miss having strings, I miss having the super and sub couplers I used to have. But, I make do and make it sound good. :)   Blessings! Jeff     > -----Original Message----- > From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of > Alan Freed > Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:52 PM > To: PipeChat > Subject: Re: here we go, yet again > > > On 9/12/03 11:43 PM, "Jeff White" <reedstop@charter.net> wrote: > > > Of course, I came off of playing a 34-rank Romantic > organ...down to a 27 rank > > baroque. > > On balance, and all other things being equal (which, of course, they are > not), which one would you prefer to stick with for the next ten years? > > (Maybe there is NOT a possible answer. I hope I don't have a = preconceived > answer!) > > Alan > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >    
(back) Subject: On a unrelated note... From: "Bigaquarium" <Bigaquarium@netzero.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 21:00:03 -0400     > The building, is spectacular and although a funeral chapel has become > popular as a wedding venue as well. Photographs and the specification > of the organ can be seen on our website at     There is a beautiful little Hall organ in Bristol, CT in the cemetery chapel there. It is a 2 manual instrument and both divisions are enclosed together. That chapel is a hot spot for weddings now too! (C: If anyone ever is in that area be sure to check out the organ! The chapel is beautiful and there is a nice deal of reverberation present.   = -Nate   "The Apprentice"