PipeChat Digest #3966 - Sunday, September 14, 2003
 
Re: digital instruments
  by "John Foss" <harfo32@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: PipeChat Digest #3964 - 09/14/03
  by "John Foss" <harfo32@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Serious musicians and electronic devices
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
RE: At Least there's one good reason for doing what we're doing.....
  by "John Foss" <harfo32@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: What Makes an Organ so Expensive?
  by <RMaryman@aol.com>
Re: GOD doesn't care; *I* care
  by "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net>
Re: digital instruments XXXIV
  by "Bill" <bill.hauser@cox.net>
Re: PipeChat Digest #3965 - 09/14/03
  by "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net>
Re: Small organs
  by "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "Mike Franch" <mike6514@hotmail.com>
Re: Remembering an AGO meeting
  by "Mike Franch" <mike6514@hotmail.com>
RE: PipeChat Digest #3965 - 09/14/03
  by "Robert Nickel" <rnickel@charter.net>
Re: Question re: 8 little preludes and fugues
  by "Thomas Mohr" <thomasmohr@aon.at>
Re: Another camp heard from...
  by "John & Fran Meyers" <jack-fran1@cox.net>
krebs cycle
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
Re: digital instruments - version 5.0
  by "Bill" <bill.hauser@cox.net>
Re: digital instruments
  by "Russ Greene" <rggreene2@shaw.ca>
 

(back) Subject: Re: digital instruments From: "John Foss" <harfo32@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:25:52 +0100 (BST)   Dear Larry and list, Thank you for your reply to my post on digital instruments, specifically the piano. However you are putting thoughts into my mind which were not there and coming to conclusions which I did not reach.   (Larry Wheelock wrote September 13th "If this line-of-thinking seems perfectly OK to you, then, congratulations, you are truly a person of the digital age, and as a matter of principle you should always endeavor to play a digital instrument when it is more convenient for you.")   I don't endeavour to play a digital instrument whenever it is more convenient, whatever it may be. There is something uniquely beautiful about a fine Steinway, Bechstein or Yamaha Grand Piano which is, I suppose, indefinable, and the same is true of a pipe organ. I am sure Philip was paid a good fee for playing the Yamaha digital - he is, after all, a top line professional pianist - but he is also a man of artistic integrity and would not play on an instrument which he was not satisified with. He is extremely fussy about the pianos he plays, and this was his opinion given to me in private over dinner at the Reform Club in London - so there was no question of his being influenced by any other considerations. I can't see traditional pianos being replaced by digital in general concert use for several reasons. Firstly, tradition. John Maynard Keynes said that it was people's perceptions of the value of stocks and shares that set the price, not the reality. This is also true of digital instruments. Secondly all the major concert halls have got a good concert grand piano, and the world's leading players have their own. Thirdly, a "real" piano looks right, and presentation is an important part of a live concert. And so on ....   Pianists usually have the option of playing a concert instrument, and even the best pianos are affordable for any serious organisation involved in presenting concerts and recitals. This is not true of the organ, and an organist has usually to accept what he is presented with. Apart from my own house organ, I have only given one recital on an electronic instrument when I was asked to play for the dedication of a new electronic (valve) organ some years ago in Watford in England. It was a pretty dreadful instrument, but as one of the Churchwardens was a friend of mine I could hardly say no. There was no other instrument available. I would much have preferred a pipe organ - and in fact I have hardly ever played an electronic organ in a church. I have played some terrible pipe organs, to which I would have preferred a good digital, but we have been down that road before, so we'll leave it there, other than to say that at the moment I am trying to decide between a Yamaha Grand Piano (the real thing) or a new 3 manual digital at about the same price.   So at the end of the day, I think it comes down to cost and portability. Apart from CD's made by Electronic Organ makers, I don't think any organist has recorded on an electronic organ, but pianos and electronic organs are portable, a 4 manual Klais somewhat less so! John Foss     =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D www.johnfoss.gr http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orgofftop/ Topics of the week : With the compliments of Adolf Hitler   ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #3964 - 09/14/03 From: "John Foss" <harfo32@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:39:22 +0100 (BST)   Dear list, My memory may be playing me false on this, but I seem to remember recently reading on the list from a member giving a recital in Paris that Daniel Roth has a digital instrument in his house. Ralph Downes expressed the opinion to me that a good electronic was better than a bad pipe organ, and he would play and practice on one when the occasion called for it.   ameagher@stny.rr.com wrote "You also don't see the best organists in the world i.e. Olivier Latry, Daniel Roth, Naji Hakim..etc playing electric imitations. John Foss     =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D www.johnfoss.gr http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orgofftop/ Topics of the week : With the compliments of Adolf Hitler   ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk  
(back) Subject: Re: Serious musicians and electronic devices From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:43:40 EDT   Yes, Naji Hakin did, in fact, demonstrate a simulated organ at an AGO convention. I wonder who sponsored his trip, and what the nature of his compensation = may, or may not, have been. And I hope that he is not suffering too much playing his Cavaille-Coll on = a daily basis.  
(back) Subject: RE: At Least there's one good reason for doing what we're doing..... From: "John Foss" <harfo32@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:55:39 +0100 (BST)   Yes - and research has shown that learning and performing music stimulates a part of the brain called Broca's area, dealing with memory, language processing and organisation. In most people, it loses volume as they get older, but a study has found that this did not happen as much in the musicians studied, who were found to have on average 15% more brain than ordinary mortals. This phenomenon is also related to the length of time you have been learning music. My guess is that most members of this list started music at a youg age, and should therefore benefit from this effect! John Foss   =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D www.johnfoss.gr http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orgofftop/ Topics of the week : With the compliments of Adolf Hitler   ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk  
(back) Subject: Re: What Makes an Organ so Expensive? From: <RMaryman@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:23:18 EDT   In a message dated 9/14/2003 11:23:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, effarbee@verizon.net writes:     > One very simple, yet complex, answer: > > The beast is labor intensive. Labor has become one of > the most expensive commodities on the American market. > > The cost of living continues to spiral upwards, and > we have to pay people reasonable wages to keep them. > > F. Richard Burt >   Mr Burt is correct, but it inn't only the labor that is expensive. it the matherials also. As the availability of suitable materials (lumber is sufiiciently high quality, Leather specifically processed to exacting = thicknesses and tanned for longevity, various metal alloys) becomes more scarce, price = goes UP (business 101 - supply and demand). NPR had a recent report on how the U. = S. Gov't bought up hugh quantites of plywood and OSB and other lumber = products, driving up the cost of homebuilding because the demands of the marketplace = for these goods and the limited production capacity of the producers of these products.   Clear (knot free) Pine and Poplar, cabinet Grade Oak, Walnut and Cherry, = all woods used in pipe organ building are all in short supply and priced accordingly. One pipe organ builder (that I know of, there are probably = others as well) has his own sawmill and kiln-drying operation. (Start with logs, end up = with casework and wooden pipe ranks).   It's just plain expensive.   Having said that, it is also an INVESTMENT. One that, properly built and maintained, will FAR outlast the best that current digital technology has = to offer, and will not be out-dated a year from now when the digit-builders = release the newest upgrades.   Rick in VA    
(back) Subject: Re: GOD doesn't care; *I* care From: "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:36:29 -0400   Thank you, Jonathan. Not only has Naji Hakim performed on it, he has = recorded on it, and the CD is absolutely stunning. I have played it, too, and it = sounds better in person than on the recording. And actually, Bud, a lot of serious = musicians play electronic "substitutes" on a regular basis.   In case y'all are starting to wonder, I don't work for Allen.   -WG     > "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@adelphia.net> wrote > > uhhh... > > Bad example > > Seem to remember Naji HAKIM playing > the Allen Cavaille-Coll clone at AGO National in Seattle... > > Might wanna check them facts > > <grin> > > From: <ameagher@stny.rr.com> > > > (5) As I said earlier, no OTHER serious musicians play an electronic > > substitute. > > You also don't see the best organists in the world i.e. Olivier Latry, > Daniel Roth, Naji Hakim..etc playing electric imitations.    
(back) Subject: Re: digital instruments XXXIV From: "Bill" <bill.hauser@cox.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:36:06 -0500   ----- Original Message -----=20 From: F Richard Burt=20 To: PipeChat=20 Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2003 9:09 AM Subject: Re: digital instruments     Artists are professionals (we hope). They charge to=20 play the organ; digital or pipe. =20 =20 For that matter, how many artists (professional types)=20 insist on performing on any organ for which there is=20 no fee?   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Mr. Burt,   I guess I should have included a snip of the post I was originally = responding to in my reply that you refer to above.   I was not questioning the appropriateness of a fee for giving a recital = in my original post, nor was I implying there was anything unusual about = an exchange of monies for such services, or that a musician should offer = their services for free.   Rather, I was speaking to the subject of concert pianists who are paid = by manufacturers to play their particular brand of digital instrument, = and their opinions in the digital/natural debate.   The point is that artists who are paid by corporations to play their = brand of digital instrument---whether organ or piano---are not generally = as unbiased when it comes to the digital/natural debate in pianos and = organs, as those who are not paid by a manufacturer to do so.   That was my only point. Artists who are paid to promote a specific brand = and type of instrument will give a predictable opinion in this debate = when asked. It's almost like asking a funeral director his opinion on = the topic of burial/cremation.   Hope that's SOMEWHAT clearer.          
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #3965 - 09/14/03 From: "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:48:02 -0400   Your wish is my command, Victoria. I guess this falls under "related = topics". -WG     > <Myosotis51@aol.com> wrote: > > Hello walterg@nauticom.net, > > In reference to your comment: > > This is really not the place to be discussing Hammond. > There are many other lists for that, to which I > subscribe, and I would be happy to read your > Hammond-related opinions there. > > ~~~~~~~~~ > Walter, you need to look at the PipeChat footer again: > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > > </A>Please let the list owners quash inappropriate threads - they WILL = do so if > necessary! > > Thanks, > Victoria    
(back) Subject: Re: Small organs From: "Walter Greenwood" <walterg@nauticom.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:53:44 -0400   Figure $10,000 to $15,000 per rank, if you want it done well. Looks like = a very nice little instrument, but I can think of a lot of music I can't play on it, = at least not as intended by the composers thereof. A lot of literature demands three = manuals. A very few pieces I have attempted have you playing on four simultaneously. = (Tournemire, if I remember correctly.)   -WG   > <Rscottcopeland@aol.com> wrote: > > I'm greatly encouraged that the pipe vs digital debate hasn't yet got to = the > usual slanging match which it usually does but I will throw this into = the > ring, for what it's worth. There is an excellent little organ near me = with the > following specification: > > ...[spec removed for brevity] > > Now - there is nothing that in all honesty which can't be played on this > organ. The Diapason and the Flute are enclosed in one chamber, and the = string and > the trumpet in the other. There are only four ranks of pipes but the = organ > sounds fantastic. > How much would this cost to build today? > Richard Scott-Copeland    
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "Mike Franch" <mike6514@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:52:48 -0500   < It never ceases to amaze me that the church hierarchy has no problem > giving the plumber or carpenter the going rate for their services,   >flowers/cake/decorations/photographer/etc. cost at a wedding (and expect = to >be paid for before >hand).   That's because they HOLD THEIR GROUND. If the church doesn't agree to want =   they want, the church does not receive the service. If you agree to less than what you deserve, then you will be treated LESS. HOLD YOUR GROUND! If =   you want the job more than they want to give it to you, that's an = imbalance of power. If they want to find someone else, so be it. If the market is saturated with qualified people, then you have some competition. But = always hold your ground, and be prepared to walk with a place to walk to. This is =   common sense. The days are long gone where people stayed in a job or = career for a long time. THe organist industry is not different than any other industry. (As my previous email concluded.)   Mike Franch in Madison, WI   _________________________________________________________________ Fast, faster, fastest: Upgrade to Cable or DSL today! https://broadband.msn.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Remembering an AGO meeting From: "Mike Franch" <mike6514@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:03:51 -0500   he was an installer for Austin and had been putting in pipe organs for = many years.   This is because INSTALLERS never hear the instrument. They just go from church to churh installing organs, which are not being played yet. They're =   being installed.   Guys, am I right on this one or not?   Mike Franch in Madison, WI   _________________________________________________________________ Compare Cable, DSL or Satellite plans: As low as $29.95. https://broadband.msn.com    
(back) Subject: RE: PipeChat Digest #3965 - 09/14/03 From: "Robert Nickel" <rnickel@charter.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:08:44 -0500   Thank you to the person who wrote the message quoted below. I have = recently rejoined this list after a multi-year hiatus. It didn't take long to refresh my memory about why I left the first time. This back-and-forth = junk reminds me of some of the snobs in my local AGO chapter. I get tired of = it.   Bob Nickel   >>>>>>>>The last couple of days I've had 70+ messages more than usual due = to this digital/pipe... well, I'll call it a discussion. Those of us on the list for any length of time have seen these same discussions ad infinitum. I kinda don't like 'em... the list is, after all, called PIPEchat for a reason. However, be that as it may.    
(back) Subject: Re: Question re: 8 little preludes and fugues From: "Thomas Mohr" <thomasmohr@aon.at> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:48:33 +0200   That is indeed a very strange effect among specifically organ students. = During studying these pieces (especially when struggling with the pedals and the articulation) the pupil's energy metabolism reaches quite hight levels - therefore the 8 littles act as sort of a Coenzyme stimulating the Krebs cycle. However, similarly to addicting substances, the effect vanishes = with continued use - to the point it is undetectable in competent organists :-) =       =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D Subject: Re: Question re: 8 little preludes and fugues From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:24:16 EDT   The Eight Little Preludes and Fugures are now suspected by scholars to be part of the Krebs Cycle, but how these little organ pieces help move = carbon dioxide out of the ketogluterate stage and transform the molecule into the =   succinyl CoA phase remains unknown. -- DI Thomas Mohr Institute of Cancer Research - Vienna University Borschkegasse 8a A-1090 Vienna Austria Tel ++43 (1) 4277 65160 Fax ++43 (1) 4277 65196    
(back) Subject: Re: Another camp heard from... From: "John & Fran Meyers" <jack-fran1@cox.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 11:37:46 -0700   Really enjoyed all the pages this site led to, so put it in my Favorites. Question: I tried downloading a couple of the MIDI files; they show on the disk when I put it in the PSR-300, but there was no sound. I guess that means it is not compatible. I can play them on the computer, but they had that icky midi synthesizer sound one gets on the computer. Fran ----- Original Message ----- From: "noel jones" <gedeckt@usit.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2003 8:18 AM Subject: Another camp heard from...     > A good friend of mine runs a daily service that emails a link to an = organ file > that he has prepared for listening using a (horrors!) virtual organ... > > He includes notes about the music...an easy way to enlarge your appreciation for > the vast repertoire of our instrument. > > Today's message: > > > > J. P. Sweelinck: Echo Fantasia 4 (Ionian--C Major) > > The actual echo section comprises less than a page of this 6-page score, > Sequences and repeated notes and scalar passages comprrise the rest, > much like a keyboard improvisation. Virtual organ set from 1766 Schmidt > organ in Peruc, Czech Republic - Samples by Jiri Zurek > http://www.clavmon.cz/sonus/ > > http://www.virtuallybaroque.com/track574.htm [6 minutes, 48 seconds] > > -- > James Pressler > "Subscribe to or unsubscribe from music lists" =95 > http://www.virtuallybaroque.com/daily.htm > Keep up with the Phantom Organist's latest tracks =95 > http://www.phantorg.net > > > noel jones > > > > > "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: krebs cycle From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:44:06 EDT   In a message dated 9/14/2003 11:24:51 AM Central Daylight Time, TubaMagna@aol.com writes: Krebs Cycle In biology, a part of cellular divisios is called the Krebs cycle-how = ironic.   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: digital instruments - version 5.0 From: "Bill" <bill.hauser@cox.net> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:12:28 -0500   ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Larry Wheelock=20 To: PipeChat=20 Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:25 PM Subject: Re: digital instruments=20     And while we're at it, where are the digital harps? ...the idea of a = digital instrument that would almost fit in your briefcase is quite = appealing. ~ Given time, I'm sure we could come up with digital Tubae and = Contras-Bass which would be much more convenient and cheaper, and maybe = 'cellos too.=20 ~ ...either you must admit that the organ inherently somehow lacks equal = standing with any of these other instruments, and so does not matter as = much, or, you should be equally bothered by its replacement with a = substitute.   Personally, between these two, I can find no middle ground.       I believe there IS a middle ground.   The other instruments you mention do not benefit nearly as much as the = organ when it comes to digitization. Therefore, every instrument must be = looked at on an individual basis when it comes to the question of = whether or not to digitize, electrify or electricute <g> it.   The fact that a digital organ can take up 1/50 the space of a = medium-large pipe organ, while retaining close to the same playing = attributes for the organist, is a huge benefit to many customers. = Granted, the matter of sound is another issue.   Reducing the size of a harp even by 1/2 would make it unplayable by the = harpist. Digitizing a harp to reduce its weight while retaining its size = might be an option, but the speakers needed to reproduce its lowest = notes might require external speakers, which would be more bothersome = (if not more cumersome) than the original acoustic harp.   And, as complex a sound as an individual organ pipe produces---including = its opening and closing, it would seem to me that sampling and = reproducing the sound of a harp's plucked string (with its varying = waveform characteristics based on how aggressively the string is = plucked) would be a more complicated process than for that of an organ's = pipe---or a piano string, for that matter.   Some instruments lend themselvs to digitization, and others do not. I = don't see where there would be much benefit to digitizing orchestral = instruments. Not for the same reasons that organs and pianos have been = digitized. In that sense, there IS a middle ground, where some = instruments benefit from digitization, while others don't.   A digital instrument must have some physical resemblence to the original = (as most digital pianos and organs do), or the player will not be able = to play it in the same fashion. Now if we're talking about reducing the = size of a harp to fit in a briefcase, then we're changing how the = instrument is played, and that is a whole nother big debate. One that = I'm SURE would be off-topic.        
(back) Subject: Re: digital instruments From: "Russ Greene" <rggreene2@shaw.ca> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:25:19 -0500   Companies such as Steinway have paid their concert artists for many years as well. Do you wonder whether Horowitz would have chosen to perform on a Steinway without a contractual arrangement? I don't suppose we will know.   Russ           On Sunday, September 14, 2003, at 09:09 AM, F Richard Burt wrote:   > Hello, Bill: > > You wrote: > >> Digital organ companies pay artists... > > * * * > >> I wonder how many of them would choose to perform >> on a digital instrument if they weren't receiving >> a fee specifically to do so. I don't suppose we >> will know.