PipeChat Digest #5006 - Thursday, December 16, 2004
 
RE: MP3 Files
  by "Scott Montgomery" <montre1978@yahoo.com>
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "Stephen Best" <stevebest@usadatanet.net>
Re: But I Would Not Have You To Be Ignorant, Brethren
  by "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net>
Re: Ahrend
  by "John Seboldt" <rohrwerk@seboldt.net>
Re: Conditor vs. Creator
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
RE: Bourne Street.
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: Women's organ shoes
  by "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net>
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
Re: Willis and yet more Willis
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Ahrend & Brunzema
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "Alicia Zeilenga" <azeilenga@theatreorgans.com>
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
 

(back) Subject: RE: MP3 Files From: "Scott Montgomery" <montre1978@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:06:26 -0800 (PST)   I study with Dana Robinson at the University of Illinois. I have also = studied with Mike Keeley, Mike Farris biefly while he was here, and many = piano professors here.     Glenda <gksjd85@direcway.com> wrote:   Cool, Scot. Who are your teachers?     Glenda Sutton   gksjd85@direcway.com       -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of = Scott Montgomery Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 7:38 AM To: PipeChat Subject: MP3 Files     For those of you that are interested, I have put last Thursday's recital = up on my web page. Some files are large, and may take a few minutes to = load up.         Thanks, let me know if there are any problems.         To see them, go to www.scottmontgomerymusic.net/listeningpage.htm                 Scott Montgomery 619 W Church St Champaign, IL 61820 217-390-0158 www.ScottMontgomeryMusic.net  
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "Stephen Best" <stevebest@usadatanet.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:56:16 -0500   Could not copy the message to the digest, there was no plain text part
(back) Subject: Re: But I Would Not Have You To Be Ignorant, Brethren From: "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:17:17 -0600   Yes he did. "No Greater Love". The "other" Methodist church in my home town did it every year and I played in their orchestra. Sweeping orchestrations - extremely dramatic trial scene - heart-wrenching stuff. Very high drama. Leave the congregation weeping tears of guilt and joy at the same time...   And for all you can say about slurpy Peterson - 30+ years later, I can still remember the presentation of the Holy Week story (it goes from Palm Sunday to Easter) - and I can still hum the melodies.   As far as that goes, it does meet the basic criteria of church music - it is accessible and it presents the message/text in an effective, memorable way.   Some people are reached by Bach, and some people are reached by schlock.   Randolph Runyon wrote: > > On Dec 14, 2004, at 10:07 AM, F. Richard Burt wrote: > >> Margo: >> >> In 1961 or 1962 I sang in one of the Peterson contatas (Night of >> Miracles ?) at the Northway Baptist Church in Dallas. Peterson >> was par for their course in cantatas at that time. >> >> > > I wonder if Peterson composed an equivalent Passion Cantata? > > Randy Runyon > > > ****************************************************************** > "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> > >     -- Dr. Margo Dillard Organist, FUMC, Lewisville, TX Musical Feast Choral Society Dillard Piano & Organ Studio    
(back) Subject: Re: Ahrend From: "John Seboldt" <rohrwerk@seboldt.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:14:41 -0600   On 12/15/2004 3:19:35 PM, PipeChat (pipechat@pipechat.org) wrote: >I've never been able to quite understand who Ahrend & >Brunzema were, where they were from and whether these >is a connection between Jurgen Ahrend and the console >name of Ahrend & Brunzema. > >Now, at least, I have learned something about Brunzema >and the Casavant connection. Of course, that doesn't >mean a thing in the UK, for we don't have a single >Casavant organ so far as I am aware. > >What I do know, is that there is a connection with the >Sweelinck organ in Amsterdam, and I once played a >really good neo-baroque organ in an RC church in >Amsterdam.....the name of St.Thomas springs to mind, >but I could be wrong since it was 25 years ago. > >That new organ was by Ahrend & Brunzema, and in the >spacious acoustic, I liked it very much indeed. > >Details anyone? > >Regards, > >Colin Mitchell UK   A few details from a fuzzy memory... the combined name, Ahrend and Brunzema, was well known for some time as builders and restorers. They = were moving toward a more historic understanding of the North German baroque = (as opposed to the 1-inch wind, un-nicked, completely open-toe anomaly) as early as the 1960's. I remember Harald Vogel demonstrating a medium-size instrument in Hannover from about 1964, citing it as remarkable for its time period. Brunzema's move to Casavant led to some fine instruments with =   a more truly "North German" sound. A small one that we all raved about was =   at Maternity of Mary Church, St. Paul, Minnesota - his priorities in a smaller instrument were interestingly weighted toward a big ensemble and rounder tone (about 1974)   Gt: 16(bourdon) 88432Mix8 Brustwerk: 842Terzian8(regal) Pedal: 16(bourdon)8pr4pr16Pos8Tr   Not eclectic, but far from screamy neoclassic - full-length wood Posaune = in the Pedal, and those reeds more truly Schnitger-ish with leathered = shallots.   Rumor had it that after some disastrous experiences, he left the electro-pneumatic designs alone, putting his personal stamp only on the trackers. They tended toward all-mechanical stop actions, with perhaps an enclosed Swell... mostly equal-tempered, but some with other tunings depending on the client.   One Brunzema Casavant that accomodates a wider range of repertoire is the one at Dordt College, Sioux Center, Iowa - a college of Dutch Reformed background - see http://homepages.dordt.edu/~hduitman/music/keyboard.html = . The spec may look like something Schnitger would have built in Holland, = but the overall warmth of the foundations, and the "Hobo" in the enclosed "Bovenwerk" makes those lyrical Franck moments surprisingly effective.   And of course, the younger partner Ahrend he left behind in Loga bei Leer, =   Ostfriesland, has become the premier purveyor of more historically-based restorations of North German landmarks like the Jakobikirche in Hamburg.   John Seboldt Milwaukee, WI    
(back) Subject: Re: Conditor vs. Creator From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 06:45:28 -0800   There was a "humanist" revision of the Breviary sometime during the Renaissance; the Office Hymns were re-written in "classical" Latin, and many odd pagan images inserted from the pre-Christian Roman poets, etc.   I can't get to my books right now, but I believe "Conditor" is the ancient form as contained in the Benedictine Antiphonale Monasticum, which didn't admit any of the Renaissance revisions. It has mi do mi sol la la fa sol as the opening phrase.   The new Hymnarium from Solesmes has "reconciled" these differences, and for the first time ever, the secular and monastic hymn texts agree. I haven't seen it yet, but one would hope they returned to the more ancient usage.   So ... Conditor is neither the "protestant" nor the "Sarum" form, but the CORRECT form (chuckle).   Cheers,   Bud   P.S. - Anglicans aren't protestants   SWF12262@aol.com wrote:   > Anyone up for a really obscure trivia question? Many Protestant = churches > sing an Advent hymn to the tune Conditor Alme Siderum, while most Roman =   > Catholic sources use the tune Creator Alme Siderum. The tunes are = identical, save > for one note. Creator: mi do mi sol SOL la fa sol. Conditor: mi do mi = sol LA > la fa sol. I have not had the opportunity to compare the texts and = sources, > but suspect that the "conditor variant" in the chant might be Sarum = usage, > an English variant in the heritage or interpretation of the chant. = After all > these years working RC, that one note throws me now every time I sing = it in > the Protestant form! Whatever the historical reason might be, isn't it =   > interesting that this chant has survived from the seventh century with = only one > variant note! > > Steve Folkers (Presbypiscometholic) > Steven Weyand Folkers > Director of Music > St. Lambert Church > Skokie, IL USA >    
(back) Subject: RE: Bourne Street. From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 04:05:30 +1300   >Plus, and I am very surprised that you got this wrong, the organ wasn't moved and rebuilt by Willis in 1913, but by your favourite builder, Lewis. Lewis added the third manual and its stops. And radically altered the = tonal balance of the organ.   Maybe that's why I liked the organ, if Lewis had a go at it? Lewis over Walker sounds good to me! Anyway, the history I was quoting comes from the official parish history, and it clearly states Willis, not Lewis. I wonder if the parish records, which presumably the writer of the history relied upon, has it wrong? Sometimes this happens.   >No I don't think you sounded pompous. Just a little desperate in having publicly praised an organ from a builder you don't like.   I'm unapologetic, to be honest. I was responding to your claim that the organ is a Willis, not a Walker. I responded "Not so" and you have not proved that it is a Willis, nor refuted the Walker original.   I think of, as a parallel, the 1910 organ in Sacred Heart RC in Timaru, = NZ, long held to be a Hobday, but I never felt it really was despite the = label. I discovered a few years ago that in fact Hobday's 1910 work added the = reeds and some other stops but in fact the big bulk of the flues is by Gray & Davidson from 1848. It doesn't SOUND like a Hobday, in other words, = because it really isn't.   In the UK in 1992, I went to the church in Selborne and tried the wee = organ there. The Vicar told me I was wrong when I told him it was a great = example of TCLewis tone, that it was an H&H. Well, we argued back and forth, me being a country bumpkin who had no idea what I was talking about, etc. and he quoting the parish history and common knowledge". He eventually went, = an hour later, to get the parish records and discovered it is indeed a Lewis. He became friendly and wondered how I knew: the answer from me was the pipework and casework looked like Lewis and in fact sounded like it.   So, I'm now curious about your claim of Bourne Street having Lewis in = 1913, and not Willis. Where is your info from? How much re-voicing did Willis do in 1928, and how much Walker/Willis remains? I can't imagine Willis of = that time making a radical difference to either Walker or Lewis. Are there any records of what was actually done?   >IF you ever come back to London, I will take you in hand and re-educate your ears and ideas. (grin)   Oh, please do. And I'd have a host of instruments I'd want to visit, and we'd talk till we dropped, totally exhausted from swopping yarns and stories. Sounds terrific, but finance precludes...... If I want the same time as between my 1st and 2nd visits to London, though, it'll be 2014 and I'll be 74!   Really, honestly, not wanting to sound gritty, Ross      
(back) Subject: Re: Women's organ shoes From: "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:05:52 -0600   But, if they have no laces or straps, what will keep them securely on your feet when you go flying about the pedalboard? Could be awkward if the heel flops about... But then I am one of those people with tiny feet - narrow, in particular. If my shoes aren't tied or strapped on, I walk out of them. Unless they are very narrow, I can't even walk in pumps - can't imagine playing in them.   Glenda wrote: > Thanks, Steve, but I'm a bit more fashion conscious than that. I was > wondering if it was a faux pas for women to wear "organ pumps" (i.e., > sans straps). > > Glenda Sutton > gksjd85@direcway.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of > Stephen Best > > For the durability reasons you mention, some of my female students buy > men's organ shoes. The only problem that occurs is when there isn't a > man's size small enough for a woman with tiny feet. > > > > > ****************************************************************** > "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> > >     -- Dr. Margo Dillard Organist, FUMC, Lewisville, TX Musical Feast Choral Society Dillard Piano & Organ Studio    
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:26:19 -0500   I figure if you can pull it off, why not? If I tried playing without the organ shoes I'd screw up all over the place. Although I guess if I practiced with the street shoes, I could play with them. I have to stick with what I'm used to. If its any consolation, the one time I went to = Lord & Taylor in Philadelphia (actually I've been twice, but the first time someone else was playing) Peter Conte was wearing boat shoes, and doing quite well! I don't know if he always does that, but he did that day.   Personally, I'd probably sooner go shoeless than wear street shoes, but = that wouldn't go very far at solving your problem unless you were wearing = slip-on- and-off street shoes.   Andy   On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:40:40 EST, SWF12262 wrote > Dear Pipechatters, > > At the risk of being ostracized by the serious organ community, I'll > pose the question -- am I the only organist who plays in "street" > shoes? The only time I wear my venerable organ shoes is when I > play someone else's instrument, and that as a courtesy. There are > two reasons for this. #1. I am up and down, around and about so > much on a Sunday morning that my thin-soled organ shoes would be > worn out in a month! Typical weekend -- up to the balcony on > Saturday, brief rehearsal with the cantor, then down to the > sacristy to meet with the priest, back to the balcony -- prelude, > processional, kyrie, gloria, psalm, alleluia; do head count of the > nave, then off to the rectory for a quick coffee (so nice of them > to provide a speaker there so I know when I need to be back!) -- up > the stairs again; offertory, sanctus and remainder of the Mass. > Sunday is worse -- like Saturday for the 8 a.m. then off to the > choir room; lead choir into church, etc. Lots of on and off bench, > up and down stairs, plenty of backing and forthing! Then like > Saturday again for the Noon. > #2. I'm afflicted with flat feet, and have to wear rather substantial > leather orthotics in my shoes. There's no way I can fit these and > my feet into the organ shoes, and the thick leather of the > corrective adaptive devices would render the thin soles of the > organ shoes useless. Standing or walking in organ shoes sans > orthotics is more or less painful, depending on how recently the > calluses have been removed. This being said, I am quite capable of > playing intricate pedal passages with great sensitivity in my Allen > Edmond oxfords! I regularly practice in Rockports with rubber > soles (only difference is they don't slide as well as leather soles) > . I've even practiced in hiking boots [many years ago] which > actually made my pedaling much more precise and responsive! > [hmmmm....maybe I should try mittens on the manuals!] I like my > organ shoes, but having to change every time I walk the stairs from > the balcony [lots of ouches otherwise] would have me changing shoes > at least ten times on a Sunday morning! Am I unique, or are there > others who pedal with whatever is on their feet? > > Pedal solos anyone? > Steve       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: Willis and yet more Willis From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:27:23 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   That's an interesting set of comments from Alan Taylor.   I defer to his better knowledge of the Westminster Cathedral organ. I guess I have heard it in the wrong hands.   I think we both agree on the essential Willis character of St.Paul's, with the Mander additions blended successfully.   Southwark IS wonderful....agreed.   Festival Hall? Am I alone in actually admiring this instrument? In THAT dreadful hall, anything which is voiced "baroke" and sounds half musical, has got to be good. The pedal reeds are a travesty of good taste and a triumph of gallic peasantry.....rip 'em out, I say.   We both obviously agree on the Abbey organ. It is a blunderbus of an instrument, ill-suited to the building and too big by half   The Albert Hall is the Albert Hall.....a BIG sound, but for what?   It's a classic example of an organ butchered by another builder who has a quite different outloook on organ tone. The Harrison pipework never worked well alongside the Fr.Willis ranks, but at least Mander have done the best they can and given the beast proper lungs at last.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK --- alantaylor1 <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> wrote:   > > St Paul's cathedral, London, organ has certainly > grown since 1870.   I can say > that I loathe the organ > in the Festival Hall.   I do measure the organ of > Westminster Abbey against that of > Westminster Cathedral. I would start again and build > a brand new organ at > the abbey.       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Ahrend & Brunzema From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:34:03 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Thanks to Arie for that......I feel that a riddle has now been solved. I was totally puzzled by a Brunzema working in Canada, and an Ahrend working alone in Europe. Now it makes perfect sense.   I had assumed that were not many organ-builders called Ahrend, and of course, his restoration work is the stuff of legend.   I think the splendid new organ I played in Amsterdam, would be a few years old when I played it, and it really is a very, very good instrument   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- Arie Vandenberg <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> wrote:   > Colin, > > Jurgen Ahrend and Gerhard Brunzema were in business > together for maybe 15 > to 20 years. They may have been among the first to > go into sympathetic > organ restoration of old baroque organs, and > together did some new organs > in typical German baroque style.     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "Alicia Zeilenga" <azeilenga@theatreorgans.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:36:06 -0600   I don't think you're the only person. When I first started playing the organ, my professor insisted that I get organmaster shoes, but he admits both by word and example that sometimes street shoes are more comfortable. Whenever I bring up the subject, he either talks about French women playing in spike heels, his father's street shoes that he wore in Germany, or his friend who practiced in tennis shoes.   Alicia Zeilenga     -----Original Message----- From: SWF12262@aol.com To: pipechat@pipechat.org Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:40:40 EST Subject: Re: Organ Shoes   > Dear Pipechatters, > > At the risk of being ostracized by the serious organ community, I'll > pose > the question -- am I the only organist who plays in "street" shoes? > The only > time I wear my venerable organ shoes is when I play someone else's > instrument, > and that as a courtesy. There are two reasons for this. #1. I am up > and > down, around and about so much on a Sunday morning that my thin-soled > organ > shoes would be worn out in a month! Typical weekend -- up to the > balcony on > Saturday, brief rehearsal with the cantor, then down to the sacristy > to meet > with the priest, back to the balcony -- prelude, processional, kyrie, > gloria, > psalm, alleluia; do head count of the nave, then off to the rectory > for a > quick coffee (so nice of them to provide a speaker there so I know > when I need to > be back!) -- up the stairs again; offertory, sanctus and remainder of > the > Mass. Sunday is worse -- like Saturday for the 8 a.m. then off to the > choir > room; lead choir into church, etc. Lots of on and off bench, up and > down > stairs, plenty of backing and forthing! Then like Saturday again for > the Noon. > #2. I'm afflicted with flat feet, and have to wear rather substantial > leather orthotics in my shoes. There's no way I can fit these and my > feet into the > organ shoes, and the thick leather of the corrective adaptive devices > would > render the thin soles of the organ shoes useless. Standing or walking > in > organ shoes sans orthotics is more or less painful, depending on how > recently > the calluses have been removed. This being said, I am quite capable > of playing > intricate pedal passages with great sensitivity in my Allen Edmond > oxfords! > I regularly practice in Rockports with rubber soles (only difference > is they > don't slide as well as leather soles). I've even practiced in hiking > boots > [many years ago] which actually made my pedaling much more precise and > responsive! [hmmmm....maybe I should try mittens on the manuals!] I > like my organ > shoes, but having to change every time I walk the stairs from the > balcony > [lots of ouches otherwise] would have me changing shoes at least ten > times on a > Sunday morning! Am I unique, or are there others who pedal with > whatever is > on their feet? > > Pedal solos anyone? > Steve >      
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:47:38 -0500   When I teach (and the only teaching I do is helping adult pianists get = used to the organ, particularly basic pedal technique for hymn playing) I = insist on specialized organ shoes. The reason I do this is because invariably = what seemed impossible suddenly seems possible with properly fitted organ shoes =   which give so much more confidence to someone trying to learn technique = for the first time. Especially having the ability to slide reliably. I fit = my organ shoes almost like rock-climbing shoes... very tight. It is almost painful to walk in them, but playing feels fine since my weight is off of them. Just like the rock-climbing shoes, the idea is maximizing control = and feel. (Difference being that the rock-climbing shoes hurt even if my = weight _isn't_ on them!!).   Later, if they find street shoes or no shoes works better or just as well, =   fine.   Andy     On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:36:06 -0600, Alicia Zeilenga wrote > I don't think you're the only person. When I first started playing > the organ, my professor insisted that I get organmaster shoes, but > he admits both by word and example that sometimes street shoes are > more comfortable. Whenever I bring up the subject, he either talks > about French women playing in spike heels, his father's street shoes > that he wore in Germany, or his friend who practiced in tennis shoes. > > Alicia Zeilenga       A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service PO Box 111 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)578-3936 Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com