PipeChat Digest #4982 - Thursday, December 9, 2004
 
En chamade flue pipes
  by "Peter Rodwell" <iof@ctv.es>
Re: En chamade flue pipes
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: NIGHT OF MIRACLES
  by "Staffan Thuringer" <staffan_thuringer@yahoo.com.au>
Baldwin pro 222
  by "David Scambler" <dscambler@bmm.com>
Re: NIGHT OF MIRACLES
  by "Staffan Thuringer" <staffan_thuringer@yahoo.com.au>
Re: Baldwin pro 222
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: Baldwin pro 222
  by "John Vanderlee" <jovanderlee@vassar.edu>
Re: Unit Organs
  by "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au>
Re: Baldwin pro 222
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: Baldwin pro 222
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: the unit workhorse
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
A full Holy Week (etc.)
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: the unit workhorse
  by "Paul Smith" <kipsmith@getgoin.net>
A bit on unit organs
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Baldwin pro 222
  by <OMusic@aol.com>
Re: Unit Organs
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
Re:Meeting Interesting people
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
derived mutations
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net>
Re: Unit Organs
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
 

(back) Subject: En chamade flue pipes From: "Peter Rodwell" <iof@ctv.es> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:24:04 +0100   I expect everyone is familiar with those impressive en chamade reeds of Spanish organs, but I have just come across one with en chamade *flue* pipes. The organ in the Iglesia del Sagrario, in the city of M=E1laga, Spain (builder and date unknown), has the metal pipes of the right hand Flauta 8' en chamade (horizontal) with their mouths pointing downward, presumably to keep dust out.   I don't remember ever hearing of an organ with horizontal en chamade flue pipes (but then there are a lot of things I don't remember these days). Just wondered whether any list members know of any other examples.   The full spec is on our Web site (http://www.intorg.org - do a search for Malaga).   Peter.    
(back) Subject: Re: En chamade flue pipes From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 05:35:22 EST   i remember a Wicks Studio organ with an EC Vox.....back in the 70's i believe.   why not a flute or celeste?   dale laughing and longing for another celeste and a vox and a tremolo that =   does more than fan half of the division  
(back) Subject: Re: NIGHT OF MIRACLES From: "Staffan Thuringer" <staffan_thuringer@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:03:56 +1100 (EST)     "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> wrote:   Is there a source to find these cantatas today, or do you just have to look for old copies? Are they out of print? ----   Dear Daniel and others:   I think they are out of print, but available from many second hand = sources. A Google-search for   john w. peterson singspiration cantata   finds lots of websites that has them for sale. Good luck!   Recently I just 'asked around' and quickly found a church choir (at the = other end of Melbourne) which was willing to lend us a set.   Staffan         --------------------------------- Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.  
(back) Subject: Baldwin pro 222 From: "David Scambler" <dscambler@bmm.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:38:55 +1100   Thank you to all the list members who assisted me on the pros & cons of a = 25 note pedalboard.   I now have the opportunity to buy a Baldwin pro 222 as a practice instrument, complete with 32 pedal notes, but I can find very little information on the virtues or otherwise of this model. Does anyone have = any experience with it?   Apolgies in advance if this is off-topic.   dave    
(back) Subject: Re: NIGHT OF MIRACLES From: "Staffan Thuringer" <staffan_thuringer@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:39:05 +1100 (EST)     On 08 Dec 2004 20:51:34 -0500 Alan Freed wrote: >How on earth do you do it? And how do you fetch an =B3audience=B2 for = it? Aren=B9t they pretty busy TOO=8Bwith liturgies four or five times during that week? Who on earth needs MORE? And WHY?   Dear Alan (did you ancestors spell your family name "Frid"? (means = "peace')   We might be lucky. The choir is reasonably competent. We practize once a = week, Thursday 7.30 pm - 8. 30 or 8.40, and sing an anthem every Sunday at = 11 am. Twice a year (Mid December and Palm Sunday) the Sunday service = consists of mainly the cantata, reduced amounts of hymns etc. Most of the = music we sing has been sung by the choir before, long before I arrived at = the scene 11 years ago. I do a bit of advertising about the cantata = events, so there are usually a few more people than normally (maybe 50?).   I also run 'A pleasant Sunday Afternoon' four times a year, where the = congregation gets to sing all those hymns that have been purged out of the = new hymn books. People love it, we get between 70 and 100 people for = these.   Staffan       --------------------------------- Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.  
(back) Subject: Re: Baldwin pro 222 From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 07:47:07 EST   dave,   never knew the Pro222 to have 32 pedals.   it was grand for its time, measuring up nicely with the Lowrey's and = Yamaha's of the day.   It would be better than nothing and if you have ANY interest at all in = "other stuff", it will be fun.   good luck.   new small AGO models from all current manufacturers are under 10grand in = case anyone else was wondering.   dale in florida, a Lowrey guy who sold AGAINST the Pro222 and then for Baldwin later..........ain't it always the way.  
(back) Subject: Re: Baldwin pro 222 From: "John Vanderlee" <jovanderlee@vassar.edu> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 08:17:51 -0800   >Thank you to all the list members who assisted me on the pros & cons of a = 25 >note pedalboard. > >I now have the opportunity to buy a Baldwin pro 222 as a practice >instrument, complete with 32 pedal notes, but I can find very little >information on the virtues or otherwise of this model. Does anyone have = any >experience with it? > >Apolgies in advance if this is off-topic. > >dave >   If that is the one that sits on a Pedestal - it was Baldwin's answer the the Hammond X - series: X66, X 77, which as far as i'm concerned was the last good splash Hammond made. While the Baldwin was pretty neat, I dont think it was quite as good. It has 32 pedals so my wife liked it for "church" practice and it has a lot of "do-dads" The technology was pretty low tech, for nowadays anyhow. some of the age related failings involved capacitors and FET transistors that got leaky. Besides the one now stored in my garage, there is one that a friend has which has been more or less restored, and is VERY available. And yes, the sound sytem is in a separate cabinet 5ft long with leslie like tremulants. It can sound very impressive.   John V  
(back) Subject: Re: Unit Organs From: "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 21:42:02 +0800   Well Andy, in theory you may be correct in what you say about mutations = and extended ranks, but in actual fact providing the design is good and the voicing correct you can't really tell the difference. How many people,including most organists, can tell whether a 1 1/3' pitch note = played in the right hand is in or out of tune unless the tuning is very bad? It = is hard enough to tune 1 foot pitch in the top half anyway. The Dodd organ of =   1910 (enlarged in the 1960s by the same firm) sounds magnificent in a very =   friendly acoustic. Here is the Great stoplist: Violone 16, Open Diap. 8, Melodic Diapason 8, Clarabel 8, Gedact 8, = Dulciana 8, Principal 4,Gamba 4, Har. Flute 4, 12th 2 & 2/3 (from Gamba), Super Octave 2, Gamba 2, Gamba 1 & 3/5, Mixture, (4 reeds). All the mutations come from the Gamba and the organ sounds magnificent. Now there is nothing =   wrong with my ear. Like most of my family my pitch is practically perfect.   The borrowed pitches including mutations are on all of the organs built by =   Paul F. Hufner. They are very musical small instruments built in direct competition with electronic organs. There are 30 of them all but three in this state. Regarding bad organ playing, of course in the hands of a bad organist any instrument can sound atrocious but I am not a bad player and = I use the derived stops with the greatest of care and the organ under those circumstances NEVER sounds bad. The acoustic in my church used to be quite good but a zealous Parish = Council put in far too much carpet so that the acoustic when empty is rather good but when the church is full it is absolutely DEAD!. You cannot generalize about organs and say that goes for one in one church =   goes for all. It depends on design and voicing in the first place and acousti of the building in the second place.   You are welcome to come and try it. I think you would have a big surprise. Bob Elms.     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:04 AM Subject: Re: Unit Organs     > I'm ok with all of my rules being broken (that's why I listed them as > preferences). I have no problem believing that my rules could be broken > successfully. Only exception being the use of mutations derived from > unison > stops. I do not believe this could possibly be successful (unless = you're > talking about a pedal resultant, in which I'd still disagree but less > strongly). If you think yours is successful, I'd almost be willing to > travel to Australia just to hear it and find out how on earth they did > it! :) I sure _wish_ it could be done! Do you have excellent > accoustics? > This can hide most evils. > > Its not really a generalization. It is a fact in all cases that a > mutation > borrowed from a unison rank is out of tune. I suppose one could debate > just > how important it is to be in tune. Ah... unless you are talking about a > mutation borrowed from an undulant. I've seen that done on a couple of > occasions. Sort of works. Here, the unison pitch is out of tune = instead > of > the mutation. > > Andy    
(back) Subject: Re: Baldwin pro 222 From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 09:20:44 -0500     > >new small AGO models from all current manufacturers are under 10grand in >case anyone else was wondering. > >dale in florida,     Dale,   I seriously wonder about your claim here. Most entry-level AGO console electronic instruments have retail prices of over $10,000 now. That is US =   dollars.   Even the European stuff now is going to get pricey, if it isn't already so. The Euro has appreciated about 30% in the last year, year and a half against the greenback. Just a matter of time before prices go up the same =   distance as the devaluation.   Arie V.  
(back) Subject: Re: Baldwin pro 222 From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:19:58 EST   No Doubt Arie,     but it can happen and it they are out there.   i would sell an entry level AGO at 9995.00 every day of the week even if = it cost me 6000.00.............LOL     dale  
(back) Subject: Re: the unit workhorse From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:35:23 EST   I really enjoyed this thread, especially the Norton Funeral Home Wicks. I think we must readily admit that this was indeed a magnificent find. This is the workhorse organ that thousands of churches with small spaces and congregations bought. Most of us have spent our entire careers playing and enjoying them. This particular model seems to have struck a chord. It's attractive, compact and yes most of the list would covet having one in their home. Stretch tuning in electronic organs was designed to add warmth. I mention this only in passing, but the upshot of my comment is that equal = temperment is now unequal. I tried an experiment on a unit organ of tuning it in Valotti well temper. Result: the derived mutations ceased being as out of tune as before, and the ensambles warmed up enhansing the tone. this mild change made all the difference in the world, all keys playable as Bach envisioned and the mutations derived sounded really decent. Most, however bow at the anti music altar of equal temperment. Get outside the box for a while and learn the truth. Unit organs benefit from this tuning treatment and will improve their sound all around. An already adorable sound just got better because of this little adjustment and the intervals sound better too. Once you hear the difference, you'll say to yourself, "What ever was I thinking before." The instrument will sing more beautifully than ever before. Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235 From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:40:46 EST       subject headings, please  
(back) Subject: A full Holy Week (etc.) From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 10:43:10 -0500   On 12/9/04 7:39 AM, "Staffan Thuringer" <staffan_thuringer@yahoo.com.au> wrote:   > Dear Alan (did you ancestors spell your family name "Frid"? (means "peace= ') >=20 > We might be lucky. The choir is reasonably competent. We practize once a > week, Thursday 7.30 pm - 8. 30 or 8.40, and sing an anthem every Sunday a= t 11 > am. Twice a year (Mid December and Palm Sunday) the Sunday service consis= ts of > mainly the cantata, reduced amounts of hymns etc.   Well, I think you might indeed be lucky. If it works, ENJOY! (Though I=B9d miss the reading of the Passion on Palm Sunday.)   As for our family name: We were of the peasant class, and thus did not HAV= E a family name. Just baptismal name + patronymic (=B3Pehrs-son=B2 [Peterson]). But as the custom was, when a lad turned 18 he was conscripted, and took an =B3army name=B2=8Busually of =B3macho=B2 character. One of my great-grandfathers chose =B3Ek=B2 (=B3oak=B2). But on my father=B9s father=B9s side, my great-grandfather was a =B3peacenik,=B2 and chose =B3Frid.=B2 Like many (but not all) he =B3kept=B2 that as a family name upon discharge; so when he came to America, the Immigratio= n folks spelt it that way it sounded: =B3Freed.=B2 (I=B9ve seen the parish record that shows the pastor writing in the new name in neat Swedish script on the page.) =20   Alan  
(back) Subject: Re: the unit workhorse From: "Paul Smith" <kipsmith@getgoin.net> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 09:43:17 -0600   I would like to follow up on your comments and experiment with "Valotti = well temper" on my church's Moller, which contains a few unit ranks. Do = I need to buy a new electronic tuner to make the change, or can I find = instructions to use my old Conn StroboTuner, with corrections, to set = the tempered octave. I have actually used and enjoyed the availability = of the unit Nazard 2 2/3' in creating solo sounds, but I would be happy = to find a way to improve it. Tell us more about how to apply slightly = different temperaments. = Thanks, Kip in Missouri ----- Original Message -----=20 From: RonSeverin@aol.com=20 To: pipechat@pipechat.org=20 Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:35 AM Subject: Re: the unit workhorse     I really enjoyed this thread, especially the Norton Funeral Home = Wicks. I think we must readily admit that this was indeed a magnificent find. This is the workhorse organ that thousands of churches with small spaces and congregations bought. Most of us have spent our entire careers playing and enjoying them. This particular model seems to have struck a chord. It's attractive, compact and yes most of the list = would covet having one in their home.=20   Stretch tuning in electronic organs was designed to add warmth. I = mention this only in passing, but the upshot of my comment is that equal = temperment is now unequal. I tried an experiment on a unit organ of tuning it in Valotti well temper. Result: the derived mutations ceased being as out of tune as before, and the ensambles warmed up enhansing the tone. this mild change made all the difference in the world, all keys = playable as Bach envisioned and the mutations derived sounded really decent.   Most, however bow at the anti music altar of equal temperment. Get outside the box for a while and learn the truth. Unit organs benefit from this tuning treatment and will improve their sound all around. An already adorable sound just got better because of this little adjustment and the intervals sound better too. Once you hear the difference, you'll say to yourself, "What ever was I thinking before." The instrument will sing more beautifully than ever before.   Ron Severin
(back) Subject: A bit on unit organs From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:55:26 EST   If you get to play or hear a unit organ that has been expertly = designed, scaled, voiced, and tonally finished, you will notice that every aspect = has been handled with care, usually because a musician -- an organist -- was intimately involved with all aspects of the work. I know of know modern organbuilder who sets out to build extension organs; they would rather be building in a more traditional mode. However, = building unit organs has enabled some clients to have pipe organs when they thought =   they could not, either for spatial or financial reasons. It has been established over the past decade on organ chat lists that mutations pulled off of unison ranks do not work properly. Good = organbuilders have always known this. The tuning is the first obvious pitfall (physics = prevent them from being in tune, EVER, and no amount of prayer or self-delusion = will actually tune them), and the second stumbling block is tonal balance. = Believe me, pulling a quint out of the weakest rank in the organ to try to fake a mixture is not as clever as one might like to believe. Tierces pulled off of unit stops sound particularly gruesome. The = subtle tonal balance is never there, and the tuning is, of course, incorrect. Those of you who have priced unit instruments know that the greater = the number of ranks, the more cost-effective the instrument becomes. Adding independent mutations (if such stops are important to the design) is not = as much money as one thinks, and the effect of purely-tuned mutations is really = wonderful. When budget, room size, remoteness, or weather considerations make one shy =   away from the inclusion of reeds, a Nazard and Tierce are very useful = adjuncts.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/alexander/alexander.html   ..  
(back) Subject: Re: Baldwin pro 222 From: <OMusic@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:04:17 EST   I bought my Wurlitzer, vintage the 50's, 2 manual with 32 pedals in 1976 = for $500. Even though it has tubes and had the big speaker cabinet (my son = wired it through stereo speakers that sit on top) it is still working and I = haven't had to replace a tube. When I bought it I did replace one. It is a great =   practice organ. I took lessons on one similar, if not the same, in = Detroit in 1955 at the Wurlitzer store while I was working at Grinnell's on Woodward = Ave., from Richard Weismeuller. Lee  
(back) Subject: Re: Unit Organs From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:19:09 -0500   I actually was fooled by a unit mutation once. It was a small 3 manual Austin (a very interesting and successful organ for its size... just 22 ranks counting the 6 or 7 rank antiphonal!). I thought it was just a = badly voiced nazard and tierce (I've never been in the chamber). I found out a couple of years later (after having not played it in a while) that both = are derived from unison ranks. I couldn't tell they were out of tune... but I =   could tell something was amiss, partly because of the tuning, and partly, I'm sure, because the voicing and scaling weren't right because of the derivation.   I think this debate has become like this: One guy says "God told me that tomatoes are a fruit". Well, gosh, how do you argue with that? The only thing you can do is call them a liar. You could also reply "Well, God = told me that tomatoes are a vegetable" (which in effect is calling them a = liar). Well, now what do you do? Unless I fly to Australia, that's where we're stuck. But I have played many, many different organs in many different churches that have attempted to derive mutations from unit ranks. The 2 most successful were Austins, strangely enough, and they still didnt' = quite work. Perhaps yours is the one where someone FINALLY figured out how to = do it. More likely, it sounds ok to you and wouldn't to me. I'm especially convinced of this now that I know it uses a tierce too. I'll take your = word for it that it sounds good to you, and by extension, that it probably therefore sounds good enough to the congregation. I actually didn't = expect this issue to be controversial! :) I won't try to take the controversy = any further. Friends anyway! :) (Oh, and you are likely a much better organist than me, it wouldn't take much for that to be so).   Andy     On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 21:42:02 +0800, bobelms wrote > Well Andy, in theory you may be correct in what you say about > mutations and extended ranks, but in actual fact providing the > design is good and the voicing correct you can't really tell the > difference. How many people,including most organists, can tell > whether a 1 1/3' pitch note played in the right hand is in or out of > tune unless the tuning is very bad? It is hard enough to tune 1 foot > pitch in the top half anyway. The Dodd organ of 1910 (enlarged in > the 1960s by the same firm) sounds magnificent in a very friendly > acoustic. Here is the Great stoplist: Violone 16, Open Diap. 8, > Melodic Diapason 8, Clarabel 8, Gedact 8, Dulciana 8, Principal 4, > Gamba 4, Har. Flute 4, 12th 2 & 2/3 (from Gamba), Super Octave 2, > Gamba 2, Gamba 1 & 3/5, Mixture, (4 reeds). All the mutations come > from the Gamba and the organ sounds magnificent. Now there is > nothing wrong with my ear. Like most of my family my pitch is > practically perfect. > > The borrowed pitches including mutations are on all of the organs > built by Paul F. Hufner. They are very musical small instruments > built in direct competition with electronic organs. There are 30 of > them all but three in this state. Regarding bad organ playing, of > course in the hands of a bad organist any instrument can sound > atrocious but I am not a bad player and I use the derived stops with > the greatest of care and the organ under those circumstances NEVER > sounds bad. The acoustic in my church used to be quite good but a > zealous Parish Council put in far too much carpet so that the > acoustic when empty is rather good but when the church is full it is > absolutely DEAD!. You cannot generalize about organs and say that > goes for one in one church goes for all. It depends on design and > voicing in the first place and acousti of the building in the second > place. > > You are welcome to come and try it. I think you would have a big = surprise. > Bob Elms. >     A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service PO Box 111 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)578-3936 Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com  
(back) Subject: Re:Meeting Interesting people From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:53:11 EST   >Another thing he (the person I met) mentioned is why do some organists = put a value of >ones talent on WHAT they play rather than HOW they play? For example, is an organist >who plays the Bach G Minor Prelude and Fugue (535 = I believe) of less worthiness than >someone who plays the "Wedge"? While = they are two pieces of different levels, we got to >talking about why some players use = this as criteria to judge a players worth. Yes, >someone who can play the more difficult works will be able to get to more competitions, >etc . However, = does that make the person playing the works of a lesser scale a bad >player?     The literature played is not the criteria I use to judge a person's playing...it's HOW it's played. I would much rather hear someone do a = masterful job on an easier piece than just slaughter a big work, but when going to a = recital, too often we hear butcher jobs done on the masterworks. What does that = say to the public?   We've all slopped through works at one time or another for various = reasons. However, when all that one wants to play are big works, but they can't, = but yet they continue to do so in public, I would judge them as a poor player. = When one plays the smaller Bach works, and does them well and musically, I = would say that they are probably a good player and know their limitations. = There's nothing wrong with knowing what you can and can't do.   Not everyone is up to playing the works of Lizst, Durufle, or the big = Bach works. Some players may only be able to accomplish mastering the smaller = Bach Preludes and Fugues, the smaller French Romantic works. The key is = knowing what you can play with authority and to do it with musicality. I wouldn't = judge anyone playing in church if they were playing smaller scale works, = however, I would expect more of someone who was on the "concert circuit." Maybe it's = a double standard, but for someone to be performing concerts, they should be =   able to whip off big masterworks.   Monty Bennett  
(back) Subject: derived mutations From: "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:01:35 -0600   Well, Andy, you and will have to agree to disagree agreeably on this one. I think derived mutations are considerably better than no mutations. =20   I owned a 1936 M=F6ller Artiste, three ranks, with a derived 2 2/3; it = was lovely, and I wouldn't have wanted to do without it. In fact, the whole instrument was lovely, despite the cracks people like to make about them. It had a conical diapason to die for.........sweet, warm, strong, yet not overpowering. Never heard one that sounded any better!   If the one you play doesn't sound good, so be it. Some do.   Dennis Steckley   "Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened."--Dr. Seuss        
(back) Subject: Re: Unit Organs From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:01:05 EST   I've seen some interesting unification where a rank will be unified to = play at 8 and 2 or 16 and 4 with a different rank providing the middle rank. = The voicers have to be very careful with how the rank is scaled so the top of = the rank doesn't get so big that it over powers the chorus, but when it's done =   properly, it's quite effective, and you don't have the problem of missing = notes, like you do with an 8-4 unification when playing chords. Of course, it = all comes down to the voicer's skill--so it can be really successful or really = dismal if not done properly. Small organs are the hardest to build--people don't =   understand that. It's so much easier to build a big organ because nothing = has to do more than one job, in small organs everything has to do double or = triple duty, and it's even more complicated when the organ is highly unified. = God bless the good voicers!   Monty Bennett