PipeChat Digest #4983 - Thursday, December 9, 2004
 
Re:Meeting Interesting people
  by "T.Desiree' Hines" <nicemusica@yahoo.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235
  by "Peter Rodwell" <iof@ctv.es>
Re: derived mutations
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
RE: derived mutations
  by "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com>
"WHAT STRANGERS ARE THESE?" - RICHARD PURVIS
  by <ScottFop@aol.com>
unit organs
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
RE: derived mutations
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
Re: unit organs
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
RE: derived mutations
  by "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com>
RE: derived mutations
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
widor's "bach's memento"
  by <BlueeyedBear@aol.com>
RE: derived mutations
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
re derived
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235
  by "Robert Lind" <lindr@core.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re:Meeting Interesting people From: "T.Desiree' Hines" <nicemusica@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:16:06 -0800 (PST)       RMB10 wrote:     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?   From TDH:   I was reading last night a review of a recital here in Chicagoland where = the player, familiar to many, was not more than adaquate. He did a very = long recital of big pieces. The review was not the best, and stated that = everything was kind of sloppy. As a matter of fact, the new organist I met, Jacob, was there and said it = was not the best he had been to. He heard some big works (ie Sowerby's = Pageant) that, apperantly, not interpreted to well.   It's a feeling of accomplishment when you have learned something that is = at your level in a matter of shorter time that struggle thru something = thats more difficult. I'm guilty of going to pick music thats well above = my level in the past. Yet when coached on choosing something that is less = taxing, the next thing I know is I have added a few pieces to my = repertoire in no time.   This brings to another discussion. I continue to think of my profound = interest in Sacred Music and a place that will assist growth in it. Some = really good conversations I had with one of the clinicians at the = conference in Charlotte were very helpful with this. They informed me tha = a Music Education program would be a good good possibility so many Organ = programs are "performance" degrees. The components to such are ery useful = in Church work.   Does anyone feel that many programs seek to cultivate a different player = over the other?   TDH         --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235 From: "Peter Rodwell" <iof@ctv.es> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 19:24:32 +0100   I must have missed the start of this thread - what was it about, exactly? :) Peter.          
(back) Subject: Re: derived mutations From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:04:10 -0500   I can be agreeably disagreeable. ;)   By the way, I like Artistes. I just rarely use the mutations.   By the by the way, the organ I play (I'd refer to it by name but it = doesn't have one!) on which I disabled the mutation... ya'll might like to know, = I'm using it on Christmas Sunday! Although the stoptab is disconnected, it is =   still available from the crescendo pedal, which I'm using (gasp!) during = an interlude. I just want a lot of noise for a few seconds, as much as I can =   get. ;)   Andy     On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:01:35 -0600, First Christian Church of Casey, = Illinois wrote > Well, Andy, you and will have to agree to disagree agreeably on this > one. I think derived mutations are considerably better than no > mutations. > > 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 >   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: derived mutations From: "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:37:12 -0600     >I can be agreeably disagreeable. ;)   >By the way, I like Artistes. I just rarely use the mutations.   >By the by the way, the organ I play (I'd refer to it by name but it doesn't=20 >have one!) on which I disabled the mutation... ya'll might like to know, >I'm=20 >using it on Christmas Sunday! Although the stoptab is disconnected, it is=20 >still available from the crescendo pedal, which I'm using (gasp!) during an=20 >interlude. I just want a lot of noise for a few seconds, as much as I can=20 >get. ;)   >Andy     I have to wonder if this is based on misunderstanding of use. I would think that a derived mutation--especially from a flute--would be of more use as a color agent in a solo combination rather than in ensemble. Andy, are you talking about derived mutations altogether, or just in chordal ensemble? Likewise, Bob might be using them only in cornets. =20   A flute Nazard, in my opinion, is most usually unpleasant in ensemble, except in very careful registrations on pieces in certain ranges.   Daniel Hancock Springfield, Missouri  
(back) Subject: "WHAT STRANGERS ARE THESE?" - RICHARD PURVIS From: <ScottFop@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:38:34 EST   Hello   Does anyone have an additional copy (or copies) that they would be willing = to sell? Apparently this beautiful Christmas anthem is now out of print, = which to me is a grave injustice to the world of sacred choral music.   As a personal note, I well remember my friend and teacher Tom Hazleton visiting me at one of my parishes about 10-12 years ago. We were doing = that piece and he sat in the balcony and observed. He came down afterward and = coached me on what I SHOULD have done with it. haha Apparently my tempo was not = quite as "grande" as it should have been, and he also showed me some = registration and phrasing tricks, especially in the organ accompaniment, that work = extremely well. Anyway, Tom was Richard Purvis' assistant at Grace Cathedral for several years and knew Dr. Purvis and his style extremely well. It's = little stories and remembrances like that that I love to share and that have played such = an important role in my own musical formation.   Yes- Tom is a thoroughly trained and seasoned classical organist. He is = not just a "pizza parlor" and theatre organist. Many people still do not = realize that, even as well known and loved as Tom is. To my ears, and the ears of =   many of my colleagues and friends, he is one of the finest classical and transcription organists around. I had him assist with the rededication of = the Shrine Kilgen when I was there and he will do likewise when we get our new = instrument here in Memphis.   Any assistance will be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.   -Scott   Scott F. Foppiano Memphis, TN (scottfop@aol.com) Cantantibus organis Caecilia Domino decantabat.  
(back) Subject: unit organs From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:52:48 -0800   Well, let's see ... if you did something like this:   1. Open Diapason 8' 2. Octave 8' (sic) 3. Fifteenth 4' (sic)   4. Chimney Flute 8' 5. Gedeckt 16'   6. Quint 10 2/3' 7. Tierce 3 1/5'   8. Trumpet 16' 9. Oboe 8'   10. Gemshorn 8' 11. Gemshorn Celeste 8'   12. Bourdon 16' (wood)   GREAT   10. Gemshorn 16 (1-12 from 5) 1. Open Diapason 8 10. Gemshorn 8 4. Chimney Flute 8 6. Double Nazard 5 1/3 2. Octave 4 5. Gedeckt 4 10. Gemshorn 4 7. Double Tierce 3 1/5 6. Nazard 2 2/3 3. Fifteenth 2 4. Chimney Flute 2 7. Tierce 1 3/5 8. Trumpet 16 8. Trumpet 8 Clarinet 8 [synthetic -- 5 (8') + 6 (2 2/3') + 7 (1 3/5') + 9 ('8)]   SWELL   5. Gedeckt 16 2. Open Diapason 8 5. Gedeckt 8 10. Gemshorn 8 11. Gemshorn Celeste 8 3. Octave 4 4. Chimney Flute 4 10. Gemshorn 4 11. Gemshorn Celeste 4 6. Nazard 2 2/3 2. Fifteenth 2 5. Gedeckt 2 7. Tierce 1 3/5 6. Larigot 1 1/3 4. Chimney Flute 1 8. Trumpet 8 9. Oboe 8 8. Clarion 4   PEDAL   Resultant 32 (1-12 12 (16) + 6 (10 2/3); rest 12 an octave lower) 12. Bourdon 16 5. Gedeckt 16 6. Quint 10 2/3 2. Octave 8 12. Bourdon 8 5. Gedeckt 8 10. Gemshorn 8 6. Octave Quint 5 1/3 3. Octave 4 12. Bourdon 4 12. Bourdon 2 8. Trumpet 16 8. Trumpet 8 8. Clarion 4 9. Oboe 4   Sw/Gt 16-8-4 (mostly for the strings) Sw/Sw 16-4 (mostly for the strings) Sw/Ped 8 Gt/Ped 8   All enclosed; two boxes; reeds and strings in inner box, speaking into outer box   It wouldn't play everything, but it WOULD play a service; most of the unifying and duplexing is gapped so that most stops don't speak at adjacent pitches. There ARE a couple of questionable things, but I'm thinking of height in the chambers and the expense of full-length 16's. That's a LOTTA organ out of 12 ranks (grin).   Cheers,   Bud                    
(back) Subject: RE: derived mutations From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:13:29 -0500   I have a pretty thorough understanding of registration. Really I'm referring to both ways. In the case where I disconnected the stop from my =   church's organ, it was being used (by other organists) in ensembles of course (hymn playing). It sounded bad in solo combinations too.   On the other hand, when playing the Austin that fooled me (sort of) I was using a standard 5 rank cornet as a solo. The nazard and tierce were derived from a string of some sort (its been a while since I've played = that organ). It was very discouraging because I thought it was a real cornet that just sounded bad, and it had me thinking that mutations must be bad. =   At the time I was very accustomed to derived ones but had little = experience with independent ones. Fortunately, playing the old Nutting I often refer =   to here, which has a twelth and a seventeenth as part of its principal chorus, I love them now! What a difference! They worked great in the ensemble (it was just one manual and not divided, so solo combinations = were not really possible). Sounded nice and reedy. It even added a = "reediness" to the pedal. Since then I've played a lot of organs with independent mutations and with derived ones. Flute versions (nazard and tierces) seem =   less successful in ensembles than principal versions, but still sound beautiful in solo combinations. The best cornets sound like one voice, rather than multiple ranks, but the derived ones never do.   It is true that the other organists were misusing it. This is even more true for the suboctave coupler, which actually does have useful purposes. =   But I've found it better to live without it than risk having it used = wrong. But as far as the fake nasard... using it with full organ to make as much noise as possible for a very short duration is the only use I've found = yet. I realize not all of them are as bad as mine. They come in degrees of badness!   Again, I didn't really mean to stir up a controversy here. I'm not _that_ =   worried about it. But if I were a builder, it is one of the few things I would not allow on any organ that had my name on it, no matter how much = the organist wanted it. As an organist, its one of the few things (perhaps = only thing) I almost always refuse to use. I'm all for extensions, borrows, = even digital basses, you name it! I'm all for mutations too of course. They = are just about the cheapest stops available and beautiful when done right, and =   nearly essential for some music (I say nearly because I'm convinced almost =   nothing is "essential" for an organist clever with registration)... so = why fake them?   Andy       On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:37:12 -0600, Daniel Hancock wrote > >I can be agreeably disagreeable. ;) > > >By the way, I like Artistes. I just rarely use the mutations. > > >By the by the way, the organ I play (I'd refer to it by name but it > doesn't > >have one!) on which I disabled the mutation... ya'll might like to > know, >I'm > >using it on Christmas Sunday! Although the stoptab is disconnected, it > is > >still available from the crescendo pedal, which I'm using (gasp!) > during an > >interlude. I just want a lot of noise for a few seconds, as much as I > can > >get. ;) > > >Andy > > I have to wonder if this is based on misunderstanding of use. I > would think that a derived mutation--especially from a flute--would > be of more use as a color agent in a solo combination rather than in > ensemble. Andy, are you talking about derived mutations altogether, > or just in chordal ensemble? Likewise, Bob might be using them > only in cornets. > > A flute Nazard, in my opinion, is most usually unpleasant in > ensemble, except in very careful registrations on pieces in certain = ranges. > > Daniel Hancock > Springfield, Missouri >   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: unit organs From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:18:55 -0500   That's actually pretty close to what I would do with 12 ranks, if there = was money and space for all the large basses. I'd do a few things = differently, but looks pretty sensible at a glance. Andy   On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:52:48 -0800, Liquescent wrote > Well, let's see ... if you did something like this: > > 1. Open Diapason 8' > 2. Octave 8' (sic) > 3. Fifteenth 4' (sic) > > 4. Chimney Flute 8' > 5. Gedeckt 16' > > 6. Quint 10 2/3' > 7. Tierce 3 1/5' > > 8. Trumpet 16' > 9. Oboe 8' > > 10. Gemshorn 8' > 11. Gemshorn Celeste 8' > > 12. Bourdon 16' (wood) > > GREAT > > 10. Gemshorn 16 (1-12 from 5) > 1. Open Diapason 8 > 10. Gemshorn 8 > 4. Chimney Flute 8 > 6. Double Nazard 5 1/3 > 2. Octave 4 > 5. Gedeckt 4 > 10. Gemshorn 4 > 7. Double Tierce 3 1/5 > 6. Nazard 2 2/3 > 3. Fifteenth 2 > 4. Chimney Flute 2 > 7. Tierce 1 3/5 > 8. Trumpet 16 > 8. Trumpet 8 > Clarinet 8 [synthetic -- 5 (8') + 6 (2 2/3') + 7 (1 3/5') + 9 > ('8)] > > SWELL > > 5. Gedeckt 16 > 2. Open Diapason 8 > 5. Gedeckt 8 > 10. Gemshorn 8 > 11. Gemshorn Celeste 8 > 3. Octave 4 > 4. Chimney Flute 4 > 10. Gemshorn 4 > 11. Gemshorn Celeste 4 > 6. Nazard 2 2/3 > 2. Fifteenth 2 > 5. Gedeckt 2 > 7. Tierce 1 3/5 > 6. Larigot 1 1/3 > 4. Chimney Flute 1 > 8. Trumpet 8 > 9. Oboe 8 > 8. Clarion 4 > > PEDAL > > Resultant 32 (1-12 12 (16) + 6 (10 2/3); rest 12 an octave lower) > 12. Bourdon 16 > 5. Gedeckt 16 > 6. Quint 10 2/3 > 2. Octave 8 > 12. Bourdon 8 > 5. Gedeckt 8 > 10. Gemshorn 8 > 6. Octave Quint 5 1/3 > 3. Octave 4 > 12. Bourdon 4 > 12. Bourdon 2 > 8. Trumpet 16 > 8. Trumpet 8 > 8. Clarion 4 > 9. Oboe 4 > > Sw/Gt 16-8-4 (mostly for the strings) > Sw/Sw 16-4 (mostly for the strings) > Sw/Ped 8 > Gt/Ped 8 > > All enclosed; two boxes; reeds and strings in inner box, speaking > into outer box > > It wouldn't play everything, but it WOULD play a service; most of > the unifying and duplexing is gapped so that most stops don't speak > at adjacent pitches. There ARE a couple of questionable things, but > I'm thinking of height in the chambers and the expense of full- > length 16's. That's a LOTTA organ out of 12 ranks (grin). > > Cheers, > > Bud > > ****************************************************************** > "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>       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: derived mutations From: "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:19:09 -0600   >I have a pretty thorough understanding of registration. Really I'm=20 >referring to both ways. In the case where I disconnected the stop from my=20 church's organ, it was being used (by other organists) in ensembles of=20 course (hymn playing). It sounded bad in solo combinations too.     >Again, I didn't really mean to stir up a controversy here. I'm not _that_=20 >worried about it. But if I were a builder, it is one of the few things I=20 would not allow on any organ that had my name on it, no matter how much the=20 organist wanted it. As an organist, its one of the few things (perhaps only=20 thing) I almost always refuse to use. I'm all for extensions, borrows, even=20 digital basses, you name it! I'm all for mutations too of course. They are=20 just about the cheapest stops available and beautiful when done right, and=20 nearly essential for some music (I say nearly because I'm convinced almost=20 nothing is "essential" for an organist clever with registration)... so why=20 fake them?   >Andy =20       I agree with you more than you might suspect! I just thought that this topic was based on different understandings, but I didn't mean anyone's understanding of registration was diminished...   Daniel Hancock    
(back) Subject: RE: derived mutations From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:39:48 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Somewhere, if I can find it, I have quite a complex schematic for a typical Compton extension organ and the voicing methods/scales he used.   However, for starters, I can tell you that, although it makes the Celeste rank something of a compromise, the Tierces were taken from it.   All Quint registers above 8ft pitch would be derived from one or two seperate ranks, specifically designated for the purpose, with the Unison ranks in Mixtures derived from a variety of sources.   Of course, this means that all the Diapason, Salicional, Dulciana and Quint ranks have to gel, because they are freely used for the derived Mixtures and Cornets; often at very high pitch and upwards of V "ranks" a time.   Also, the various components of the Mixtures and Cornets (The Cornets simply being Tierce Mixtures) could often be switched out at the console using ventils, thereby producing variable Mixtures.   I'll see if I can find the relevant tome, and somehow produce it as a readable post.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK           __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com    
(back) Subject: widor's "bach's memento" From: <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:44:25 EST   can anyone fill me in on the background of "bach's memento" by c.m. widor?   scot  
(back) Subject: RE: derived mutations From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:13:39 -0500   Fair enough. :) Andy   > > I agree with you more than you might suspect! I just thought that this > topic was based on different understandings, but I didn't mean anyone's > understanding of registration was diminished... > > Daniel Hancock     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 derived From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:26:11 EST   At a church in Cincinnati, i was privileged to oversee a 36 rank pipe = organ built. And yes, i used analog sounds for 12 stops. Sorry, but that is how = it was.   However, to the point,   The GT 8' Spitz flute was used as a 51/3 on the pedal........... i thought when i saw it how weird and why and what the heck are they thinking. Used it often and it worked well, of course it was pedal so it wasn't sticking out like a solo stop.   we turned the SW two stop Sesqui into a Tertian on the Positiv. worked grandly. we used the upper octaves of GT Principals to finish off a rather large mixture in the pedal. We pulled several pipes that were not part of the = real rank itself, and NO ONE KNOWS>>>>>>>>NO ONE>>>>>>>>>>>>not even the builders.   Derivation is good if carefully done and sinisterly used. Or not.   16 years later the organ still kicks butt Sunday after Sunday.   dale in Florida kicking the Austin butt nothing happens.  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235 From: "Robert Lind" <lindr@core.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 17:14:45 -0600   Yes, indeed, what was it about, exactly? Some people on digest mode spew = out endless, meaningless, numbers in their subject lines, and I hope now that you can see just how meaningless your posting was. Didn't some other curmudgeon mention this very thing a few days back? :-)   Robert Lind (suffering from in-digest-shun)   ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Rodwell <iof@ctv.es> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 12:24 PM Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #4979234598472345235     > I must have missed the start of this thread - what was > it about, exactly? :) > Peter.