PipeChat Digest #4676 - Friday, August 6, 2004
 
frivolity
  by "Gene Ostenkamp" <go467500@quixnet.net>
Re: frivolity
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Most Difficult Bach
  by "Higgins, Floyd (GSP)" <fhiggins@gspinc.com>
Re: Most Difficult Bach
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: frivolity
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Real versus Digital!
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
Re: Use of a Stentorphon[e]
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net>
Re: frivolity
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
RE: Real versus Digital!
  by "Milo R. Shepherd" <mrstwin2@cox.net>
"experienced" pipe organs
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: Informal survey - most difficult Bach
  by <PMMGBOB@aol.com>
Re: Use of a Stentorphon[e]
  by "Erik Johnson" <the_maitre@hotmail.com>
Thanks for cracking my nuts (X-posted)
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Dale Wood favorite
  by <OMusic@aol.com>
Re: Qualified ELCA Organists
  by <Swedish5702@aol.com>
Re: Qualified ELCA Organists
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
Re: OHS Buffalo - Second (Very) Full Day, 7-16-04
  by "Hans-Friedrich Hell" <Hell-Concerts@t-online.de>
 

(back) Subject: frivolity From: "Gene Ostenkamp" <go467500@quixnet.net> Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 02:29:07 -0400   .. Subject: frivolity   I can relate to what Bud said about the cost of education, the = "UN-Christian" attitudes of churches in their dealings with musicians, = etc. I am doing this for a living. Often the attitude is all the = organist "does" is show up and play. For those who volunteer to do this = maybe this is true. But for those of us serious about what we do, there = is quite a bit of work involved in order for us to do things right and = well. =20   But to shed a ray of hope, I am finding that, alas, some younger people = are growing weary of CCM and "Folk" celebrations and are finding renewed = (or is it "new"?) interest in traditional organ led celebrations. = Perhaps because organ classics as well as "traditional" hymnody have = stood the test of time. =20   I am in a RC Church and must balance between "Contemporary" and = "Traditional" hymnody to "keep everybody happy." But interestingly, = students in my children's choir much prefer traditional music. One = student (c. 5th grade) calls the music in the "contemporary" hymnal "a = bunch of garbage." I have used both types of music with the childrens = choir, and they dive into the classical, "traditional" music with joy, = but are much less enthusiastic about the "contemporary" stuff. The past = few years I have had the children chanting Gregorian chant IN LATIN and = they LOVE it. Their parents, however, are a different story.   I do not presently teach organ, but have 5 students who are very = interested in playing the organ. They all take piano lessons elsewhere. = One plays well enough that I let her play during the same Mass that = the children's choir sang. She is too small to reach the pedals, but = played a simple Bach piece quite well on the manuals (which I registered = for her). It was very well recieved. I now have 4 others practicing = their little hearts out to be "good enough" to play the organ, too. I = gave the first one a Purcell Trumpet piece and showed her how to use two = manuals. Her mother has brought her by several times during the week to = practice on the organ. =20   I hope this trend continues. Perhaps there is hope for the future.   Gene Ostenkamp Cincinnati, OH   Subject: frivolity From: "Raymond H. Clark" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:04:27 -0700   From time to time, I contribute what I think are reasonably on-topic=20 articles regarding this or that about the ORGAN ... well, mostly they=20 get ignored, or they get torn to bits (that's fine ... I suppose that IS =   a species of discussion), so we might as WELL tell jokes or argue about=20 politics or theology, since it seems that very few people want to engage =   in a SERIOUS discussion about organ literature, organ-building,=20 registration, articulation, acoustics, or anything else relating to the=20 art of the ORGAN.   When somebody says to me "I don't CARE what the primary sources, the=20 composer's prefaces, the extant instruments, contemporary commentaries,=20 or whatever indicate; I'm going to do whatever I FEEL like," I have=20 difficulty regarding such a person as a serious musician.   If someone chooses to play "just for fun" (and for free) in a village=20 church, that is, of course, their right and privilege, though it drives=20 the standards and the salaries down for those of us who ARE professional =   musicians and make our LIVING playing the organ.   But don't come after ME with swords, staves and weapons because *I*=20 insist upon a living wage, medical benefits, disability insurance, and=20 retirement benefits.   By the time you count private lessons, travel time, the purchase of a=20 practice piano and organ, assembling a library, the cost of a=20 conservatory education, etc., my musical education probably cost right=20 around $100K US in 2004 dollars. I think it's reasonable to expect to=20 recoup that, though goodness KNOWS I never became WEALTHY as a full-time =   church musician; in retirement I have had to continue to work as a music =   engraver to attempt to make ends meet.   No, after fifty years in the business, I WOULDN'T advise ANYBODY to go=20 into church music, unless you married a fortune, or inherited one.=20 Churches are the MOST UN-christian, demanding, capricious, downright=20 HATEFUL employers I have EVER dealt with, and during most of my career I =   worked a second job in the newspaper/graphics/typesetting industry, so I =   HAVE worked outside the field. I would LOVE to see OSHA and the trade=20 unions turned loose on the churches ... they'd shut them down in a=20 HEARTBEAT, and rightly so.   Ah well, I'm out of it now. Let the younger generation deal with=20 electronic organs and CCM.   Cheers (?),   Bud        
(back) Subject: Re: frivolity From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:23:30 -0400   On 8/6/04 2:29 AM, "Gene Ostenkamp" <go467500@quixnet.net> wrote:   > students in my children's choir much prefer traditional music. One stude= nt > (c. 5th grade) calls the music in the "contemporary" hymnal "a bunch of > garbage." I have used both types of music with the childrens choir, and = they > dive into the classical, "traditional" music with joy, but are much less > enthusiastic about the "contemporary" stuff. The past few years I have h= ad > the children chanting Gregorian chant IN LATIN and they LOVE it.   I have VERY little experience with LITTLE kids, but your story is one I=B9ve heard over and over from the teens and those in their twenties. And I=B9ve heard it second-hand from a wide variety of other congregations. Their (former hippy?) parents just can=B9t UNDERSTAND it! (Well, it IS amazing!)   Alan  
(back) Subject: Most Difficult Bach From: "Higgins, Floyd (GSP)" <fhiggins@gspinc.com> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:26:05 -0400   For sheer cerebral torture, I vote for some of the larger fugues from the Art of Fugue, played on open score in clefs.   I don't claim ever to have done this, but I have observed it done by Dr. Jeffrey Smith, the new Canon Director of Music at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco when we were in school together.   As a side note, I would like to put in my two cents worth that Jeffrey is one of the finest musicians I've ever known and hope you all get a chance = to hear him play at some point.   Floyd Higgins South Church, Hartford, CT    
(back) Subject: Re: Most Difficult Bach From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 12:43:50 -0700   The Triple Fugue in the middle is fun to play in the Walcha edition, but it's a BEAR.   Bud   Higgins, Floyd (GSP) wrote:   > For sheer cerebral torture, I vote for some of the larger fugues from = the > Art of Fugue, played on open score in clefs. > > I don't claim ever to have done this, but I have observed it done by Dr. > Jeffrey Smith, the new Canon Director of Music at Grace Cathedral in San > Francisco when we were in school together. > > As a side note, I would like to put in my two cents worth that Jeffrey = is > one of the finest musicians I've ever known and hope you all get a = chance to > hear him play at some point. > > Floyd Higgins > South Church, Hartford, CT > > > ****************************************************************** > "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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org> > >      
(back) Subject: Re: frivolity From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 12:50:44 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   Alan, it's what I have maintained all along. The "pop" movement was instigated by fading, middle age church-goers with nothing new to say.   Their ridiculous attempts to "entertain" the "young people" have, quite rightly, back-fired.   Musically, the investment in "pop" across the globe, is nothing short of astronomical, and no church could ever afford it, even if they could match the professionalism of "the industry."   In the "pop" orientated churches, we simply witness a greater number of the old and the very young. When a church attracts the 20-45 year age group, I will know that they are doing something interesting.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK           > On 8/6/04 2:29 AM, "Gene Ostenkamp" > <go467500@quixnet.net> wrote: > > > students in my children's choir much prefer > traditional music.     __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail  
(back) Subject: Re: Real versus Digital! From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:50:28 -0400   I did say that I didn't want to stir up the eternal conflict between pipes =   and electronic organs, - but never-the-less managed to do so!   Having carefully watched the improvements made in the digital instruments over the past several decades, they are much better than they ever were. All the same, I am in no doubt at all that digital instruments are not pipe organs!   Having said that, the improvements shown on the Marshall and Ogletree Epiphany Opus One are still well worth a hearing. I am very much aware that the recording engineer can make the best of the sounds that he has to =   work with, that's his job, - after all, I have made many recordings of organs and choirs over the years, both here in Canada and back home in = London.   It is his job to recreate the best he can, and there are many ways of = doing this, - I have even placed microphones inside the organ, and there is always the so-called sweet spot in any room where the microphones do their =   best, - it is even quite permissible to have the organist register the instrument for a specific sound, - all this is well within the = capabilities of any recording engineer.   I have closely listened to this recording from Trinity Church New York City, and it bears repeating that in my view it is an outstanding instrument. The unfortunate thing is that some of my fellow listers are = so much against anything that isn't pipes that they close their ears to anything other than a pipe organ.   To my almost eighty year old ears, it is well worth a listen, - but I said =   that right at the outset! Come on guys, give it a try, you might like it!   Bob Conway    
(back) Subject: Re: Use of a Stentorphon[e] From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:49:57 -0500   That sounds good. You might try this too. I always think they sound especially fine played against the full Swell with box shut, then opening and closing the box to create a seathing mass of throttled power while the Stentorphone soars above. I would second what Seb Gluck says about them = not being "woofy," "honking," or "hooting" -- principally what their leather lips makes them is "singing" and "bright".   John Speller   ----- Original Message ----- From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 8:07 AM Subject: Re: Use of a Stentorphon[e]     > One of my favorite uses for the Stentorphon[e] is in transcription, > especially in works by Elgar (Nimrod, the trio sections from a couple of the > Marches, et cetera). It is also a very fine, soaring line for use in the "b" section > of the Mendelssohn War March of the Priests. > At Temple Emanu-El, it can sometimes be heard during meditations as = a > broad solo voice accompanied by nearly three dozen ranks of strings with the 32' > Grand Open Bass sitting beneath them. Since it is in the main section = of the > Solo Organ, it also has a V-rank Grand Chorus mixture of immense scale that > goes with it. The "secondary" chorus in that division is the leathered-lipped 8' > Violoncello, 4' Fugara, and V-rank Harmonics with flat 21st, which can = be > added to the five other main diapason choruses for English anthem work (yes, we > occasionally do the Parry "I Was Glad," amongst others). > While those who have never heard one, or a good one, often label > Stentorphon[e]s "woofy," "honking," or "hooting," they are actually = grand and very w > arm stops when properly voiced.      
(back) Subject: Re: frivolity From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:23:54 -0400   On 8/6/04 2:29 AM, "Gene Ostenkamp" <go467500@quixnet.net> wrote:   > Subject: frivolity   Gene, I=B9m too dumb to be sure, but I think your clock is broke. Maybe running about half a day fast?   Alan, easily confused  
(back) Subject: RE: Real versus Digital! From: "Milo R. Shepherd" <mrstwin2@cox.net> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:30:23 -0400   Bob,   I think your thinking shows that you have an open mind and are willing to look at all types of instruments. Granted in the past the electronic = organs left alot to be desired and even now, Allen organ leaves alot to be = desired but at least there are some, including Rodgers, that realize even though a digital organ isn't a pipe, the more it sounds like a pipe organ the = better for churches that can't afford a pipe organ. Not everyone is rich and can afford the best, sometimes you just have to compromise and get the best = you can afford.   Milo   ************* I did say that I didn't want to stir up the eternal conflict between pipes and electronic organs, - but never-the-less managed to do so!   Having carefully watched the improvements made in the digital instruments over the past several decades, they are much better than they ever were. All the same, I am in no doubt at all that digital instruments are not pipe organs!   Having said that, the improvements shown on the Marshall and Ogletree Epiphany Opus One are still well worth a hearing. I am very much aware that the recording engineer can make the best of the sounds that he has to work with, that's his job, - after all, I have made many recordings of organs and choirs over the years, both here in Canada and back home in London.   It is his job to recreate the best he can, and there are many ways of = doing this, - I have even placed microphones inside the organ, and there is always the so-called sweet spot in any room where the microphones do their best, - it is even quite permissible to have the organist register the instrument for a specific sound, - all this is well within the = capabilities of any recording engineer.   I have closely listened to this recording from Trinity Church New York City, and it bears repeating that in my view it is an outstanding instrument. The unfortunate thing is that some of my fellow listers are = so much against anything that isn't pipes that they close their ears to anything other than a pipe organ.   To my almost eighty year old ears, it is well worth a listen, - but I said that right at the outset! Come on guys, give it a try, you might like it!   Bob Conway    
(back) Subject: "experienced" pipe organs From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:01:18 -0700   There are one-manual tracker pipe organs on Organ Clearing House (and elsewhere ... I know of an orphan one in Northern California) that will serve the AVERAGE church and the AVERAGE organist WELL for the better part of a hundred years without major repairs, once they're restored.   There is virtually NEVER a reason to settle for an electronic substitute, other than ORGANISTS.   The instrument in question has a disposition of:   MANUAL (stops divide at middle b/c) - 56 notes   (unenclosed)   16' Bourdon (tenor c) - metal chimney flute 8' Open Diapason (facade)   (enclosed)   8' Melodia 8' Viola 8' Dulciana 4' Octave 4' Flute 2 2/3' Twelfth 2' Fifteenth   Manual Super-Coupler   PEDAL - 27 notes   16 Bourdon - stopped wood, generous scale Manual to Pedal Coupler   Composition Pedals: piano, mezzo, forte   There's NOTHING that's required for the AVERAGE sized, AVERAGE church service ... RC, Anglican, Lutheran, OR Protestant ... that can't be played on that organ.   Or, if you prefer two manuals, there are several of THOSE in the 6-10 stop range.   If you WANT a pipe organ, contact a REPUTABLE builder who's willing to work with "experienced" organs and find out what's out there FIRST. You may be surprised.   The Roosevelt that Sebasian Gluck rescued isn't small, but once restored, it would give a luscious sound that you'll have a hard time getting for twice the money in a new three-manual organ.   Given the quality of workmanship, I'm simply nonplussed that some of these LARGE churches refuse to look at some of the MONUMENTS of late 19th century and early 20th century organ-building that are in danger of going to the scrap-heap: the Medinah Temple Austin in Chicago, the portion of the Memphis Kimball still available, the San Francisco Austin, the Emmanuel Church Casavant in Boston, etc. etc. etc.   Cheers,   Bud     Milo R. Shepherd wrote:   > Bob, > > I think your thinking shows that you have an open mind and are willing = to > look at all types of instruments. Granted in the past the electronic = organs > left alot to be desired and even now, Allen organ leaves alot to be = desired > but at least there are some, including Rodgers, that realize even though = a > digital organ isn't a pipe, the more it sounds like a pipe organ the = better > for churches that can't afford a pipe organ. Not everyone is rich and = can > afford the best, sometimes you just have to compromise and get the best = you > can afford. > > Milo > > ************* > I did say that I didn't want to stir up the eternal conflict between = pipes > and electronic organs, - but never-the-less managed to do so! > > Having carefully watched the improvements made in the digital = instruments > over the past several decades, they are much better than they ever > were. All the same, I am in no doubt at all that digital instruments = are > not pipe organs! > > Having said that, the improvements shown on the Marshall and Ogletree > Epiphany Opus One are still well worth a hearing. I am very much aware > that the recording engineer can make the best of the sounds that he has = to > work with, that's his job, - after all, I have made many recordings of > organs and choirs over the years, both here in Canada and back home in > London. > > It is his job to recreate the best he can, and there are many ways of = doing > this, - I have even placed microphones inside the organ, and there is > always the so-called sweet spot in any room where the microphones do = their > best, - it is even quite permissible to have the organist register the > instrument for a specific sound, - all this is well within the = capabilities > of any recording engineer. > > I have closely listened to this recording from Trinity Church New York > City, and it bears repeating that in my view it is an outstanding > instrument. The unfortunate thing is that some of my fellow listers are = so > much against anything that isn't pipes that they close their ears to > anything other than a pipe organ. > > To my almost eighty year old ears, it is well worth a listen, - but I = said > that right at the outset! Come on guys, give it a try, you might like = it! > > Bob Conway > > > ****************************************************************** > "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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org> > >      
(back) Subject: Re: Informal survey - most difficult Bach From: <PMMGBOB@aol.com> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 19:32:40 EDT   That Buzard isn't too bad, but, honey, that Willis-Wicks has a REAL Galloping Gertie tremolo!!!!!! ELucas  
(back) Subject: Re: Use of a Stentorphon[e] From: "Erik Johnson" <the_maitre@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:11:14 -0400   1st - I would love to see/ hear / play the organ at Temple Emanu-El = because much of it looks on paper very similar to the instrument I play (Casavant Op. 649 1916 - 4 Man) although smaller than the Temple orgue. Curiosly I would love to hear what Sebastian did with the Solo free reed Cor Anglaise =   on 10" of wind because mine are on the Positif chest on only 2 3/4" of = wind.   Our Stentorphone sounds more like a very round English Diapason. It is comperable in volume to the Grande Orgue Montre 8 (albeit the Stentorphone =   is under expression). I have used it by its self as a solo stop for = English choral music, the Rhosmedre (sp) choral prelude, Solemn Melody, etc. Sometimes to add weight to the 8' Tuba Mirabilis, sometimes with the = Violon Celle 8' as a solo voice with more bite, and (don't laugh) with the 8' Grosse Flute to assimilate the French Horn part of the Pilgrims Chorus of Wagner.   Erik     > One of my favorite uses for the Stentorphon[e] is in transcription, >especially in works by Elgar (Nimrod, the trio sections from a couple of >the >Marches, et cetera). It is also a very fine, soaring line for use in the >"b" section >of the Mendelssohn War March of the Priests. > At Temple Emanu-El, it can sometimes be heard during meditations as = a >broad solo voice accompanied by nearly three dozen ranks of strings with >the 32' >Grand Open Bass sitting beneath them. Since it is in the main section of =   >the >Solo Organ, it also has a V-rank Grand Chorus mixture of immense scale = that >goes with it. The "secondary" chorus in that division is the >leathered-lipped 8' >Violoncello, 4' Fugara, and V-rank Harmonics with flat 21st, which can be >added to the five other main diapason choruses for English anthem work >(yes, we >occasionally do the Parry "I Was Glad," amongst others). > While those who have never heard one, or a good one, often label >Stentorphon[e]s "woofy," "honking," or "hooting," they are actually grand =   >and very w >arm stops when properly voiced. > >Sebastian M. Gluck >New York City >http://www.glucknewyork.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 >List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> >List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org> >      
(back) Subject: Thanks for cracking my nuts (X-posted) From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:02:39 EDT   Dearest esteemed members of PipeChat and PipOrg-L:   I wish to thank, collectively, those of you who sent me both PDFs and = printed copies by post of various scores of "The Dance of the Sugarplum Fairy" = from "The Nutcracker Suite." The different arrangements will all be useful, and = I now realize that I must play at least some of the Clarinet line with my = feet. I gave the piece a test run today, and it sounds wonderful.   As for the person who sent me the charts to the ballad "No Rutabagas for Suzie" from the 1938 Dilbert Klunk musical tragedy "Love Is Like Brain = Damage," I have several questions: Was that a mere clerical error, or was it = intentional? If intentional, what are you implying? That my name is Suzie? That I am to = be denied my choice of produce? That I have brain damage? I think a Congressional inquest is in order...   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/   ..  
(back) Subject: Re: Dale Wood favorite From: <OMusic@aol.com> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:30:59 EDT   I have resisted answering these posts, as I have been playing works of = Dale Wood for years and did the "Pisgah" on my senior recital in 1973. I have = most of his books and love the arrangements. Aria on "Jewels" is beautiful. = There are many arrangements on "Break Bread Together," but his is one of the = best. Some of the arrangements are more difficult than can be sightread, which means I have to work to learn them, but it is worth it. Lee  
(back) Subject: Re: Qualified ELCA Organists From: <Swedish5702@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 00:34:23 EDT   Alan:   Thank You for your remarks. This past weekend while driving from my base location in PA. to Boston I looked for a local ELCA church and found a = wonderful one in Old Saybrook, CT.   St. Paul's is a growing and thriving congregation and their pastor is Swedish. OH BOY! Having a fellow pastor who is also Swedish helps my = Swedish ego.   If I had made it to Boston, I would have attended Church Of The Covenant where I sang both with the choir and did solo work back in 1068-9. It is a =   combined Presby and UCC congregation. Plus, that wonderful and huge old = Welte-Tripp instrument...recently totally restored and the stainded glass Tiffany = windows. Woof! LOL!   Best, Craig  
(back) Subject: Re: Qualified ELCA Organists From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:49:51 -0400   At 12:34 AM 8/6/2004, Craig wrote:   >If I had made it to Boston, I would have attended Church Of The Covenant >where I sang both with the choir and did solo work back in 1068-9. It is = a >combined Presby and UCC congregation. Plus, that wonderful and huge old >Welte-Tripp instrument...recently totally restored and the stainded glass =   >Tiffany windows. Woof! LOL!   Bob Conway notes;   I don't suppose that there was too much repertoire, other than Chant back in those days. 1068-9 was a bit on the barren side for singers, - not vintage years at all!   Bob    
(back) Subject: Re: OHS Buffalo - Second (Very) Full Day, 7-16-04 From: "Hans-Friedrich Hell" <Hell-Concerts@t-online.de> Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 08:07:14 +0200   Malcolm Wechsler wrote: about:   > >Felix Hell, Westminster Presbyterian Church, Buffalo >Friday, July 16th, 4:10 p.m. > > >   rgunther@cantv.net wrote on July 30:   QUOTE   Westminster Presbyterian Church houses two A/S organs, one in the Holmes Chapel and one in the church itself. I won't tell much about A/S, other people have done that before, and what is told is true. Two recitals demonstrated us the eclecticism of A/S organs: Lorez Maycher in the Holmes Chapel with a barroque to modern repertoire, and the brilliant recital by Felix Hell demonstrated the excelleny of these organs for late romantics, specially Max Reger. Felix himself made a step forward in his artistic career as I could notice. Specially the Chorale Nr 02 by Cesar Franck and Franz Liszt's "Ad Nos" showed a matured interpretation.   UNQUOTE   This must have been tow different venues. HAns-Friedrich Hell