PipeChat Digest #5026 - Wednesday, December 22, 2004
 
Fwd: Celestes - E.M.S. speaks .... I saved this about 2 years ago
  by "Mattcinnj" <mattcinnj@yahoo.com>
RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)
  by "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk>
RE: Celestes - E.M.S. speaks .... I saved this about 2 years ago
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare
  by "Thomas Mohr" <thomasmohr@aon.at>
RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: Looking for a Kimball Viole D'Orchestra
  by "Jim Filsinger" <kimballl@yahoo.com>
Re: Celestes - E.M.S. speaks .... I saved this about 2 years ago
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Karn pianos
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare
  by <BlueeyedBear@aol.com>
Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare
  by "Stephen Best" <stevebest@usadatanet.net>
Re: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)
  by "Paul Smith" <kipsmith@getgoin.net>
Re: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)
  by "Paul Smith" <kipsmith@getgoin.net>
A new life for Aeolian-Skinner 1006A
  by "Ned Benson" <nbenson@stjohnschurch.org>
RE: Karn pianos
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
piano bass
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, IL" <kzrev@rr1.net>
RE: piano bass
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
RE: 32' sound in speakers
  by "Garrison Johnson" <johnco18@comcast.net>
Re: piano bass
  by <RMaryman@aol.com>
Re:  Organists Worst Nightmare
  by "Kenneth Potter" <swell_shades@yahoo.com>
 

(back) Subject: Fwd: Celestes - E.M.S. speaks .... I saved this about 2 years ago From: "Mattcinnj" <mattcinnj@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:16:14 -0800 (PST)   Hi Again, It's Matt ........................ this is a 2 year old email I saved for = reference.       In *The Composition of the Organ* (page 210) Ernest Skinner has specific guidance about celeste ranks. Some excerpts:   The celeste and the rank with which it's intended to beat should be separated on the windchest "-- by at least two or three stops --" in order to prevent tuning problems caused by the pipes drawing each other, a tendency most troublesome in the 8' octave. This principle is less important with very narrow-scale ranks, such as Dulcets, which are less inclined to draw. Skinner advises a celeste being set one beat per second sharp at middle C. A temperament is then set on this rank from that reference. This will give 2 beats per second at c2, four at c3 and eight at c4. He also advises that a celeste gives a better effect tuned sharp than flat.   In practice, I have found that this approach is almost always effective. Some musicians prefer keen-toned string celestes tuned sharper than Skinner suggests, and this can produce a lovely shimmer, especially played in chords. However, in these faster celestes, the trebles often need to be slowed down slightly to prevent a nasty "squalling" effect, particularly when the division is affected by a 4' coupler. If an organ has only one celeste, it should be relatively *Skinner-esque*, that is, slow, in order to be most useful. Also, some musicians feel that an Unda Maris or Flute Celeste should be tuned flat. This can sound very well -- except that when the organist in search of "maximum celestialness" uses both sets of celestes at once, a confusing blur of indefinite pitch can result.   Perhaps the most admired celeste effect Skinner ever created is his *Flute Celeste II*, composed of fairly narrow scaled, narrow mouthed pipes, almost always tapered except in early examples. He writes that "Flute Celeste" "-- is a misnomer" and that the stop "-- is intended to represent the effect of the muted strings of the orchestra." I've encountered several organs which have displaced Skinner instruments, in which the Flute Celeste II are almost the only pipes retained. But -- there's more: Skinner used two stops called *Unda Maris.* The 8' version is typically a single soft rank, designed for use with the Aeoline or Dulciana. But the 4' *Unda Maris II* is a two-rank stop of soft, narrow-scaled pipes, located on the same toeboard (despite his previous advice about celestes) and designed for use with the Flute Celeste II. In the only example I have examined, the two ranks have different toe lengths, thereby preventing the mouths of a given note being at the same level. When these two celestes, of different tone color, are used together, it's easy to agree with Skinner's claim that it is "-- the most beautiful tonal combination possible to the organ." (*Composition of the Organ*, p. 308)         --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
(back) Subject: RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!) From: "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:24:31 -0000   As Ross will at once concede, the real masters of Celeste tuning were The Willis's. TC Lewis himself would often remark that he owed all he knew to the years he spent sitting at the feet of the Willis's. (grin)   Alan London   > properly tuned Voix celeste should increase in "nervousness" as you ascend the scale.   Why? I think we've had this debate before.   The great masters like TCLewis always tuned their Celestes to create = exactly the same number of beats to every note of the scale.   It's certainly easier, and quicker, to tune a Celeste the other way - = merely get the bottom octave right and then tune the Celeste in octaves on = itself. The Celeste will sound far far better if the Celeste is always tuned to = the parent rank. I only know one organ tuner who does not do it this way, and = I had to threaten to sack him from the church's tuning unless he'd do as I directed. When I spoke to the man who had trained him, he assured me that = he had been trained correctly but had clearly not bothered with what he was taught.   That is the British, and therefore NZ, tradition anyway.   Ross     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.4 - Release Date: 22/12/2004    
(back) Subject: RE: Celestes - E.M.S. speaks .... I saved this about 2 years ago From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:43:56 +1300   >When these two celestes, of different tone color, are used together, it's easy to agree with Skinner's claim that it is "-- the most beautiful tonal combination possible to the organ."   Really? I'm sure I'm not the only organ enthusiast who would find a Diapason/Principal chorus to be far more beautiful than a double celeste.   Ross    
(back) Subject: Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare From: "Thomas Mohr" <thomasmohr@aon.at> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:56:53 +0100   Thanks for shring this with us. Now I feel far better about my last = mistake with Boellmann's Suite Gothique. -- DI Thomas Mohr Institute for Cancer Research Medical University of Vienna Borschkegasse 8a A-1090 Vienna   ++43 1 4277 65160  
(back) Subject: RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!) From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:06:13 +1300   >As Ross will at once concede, the real masters of Celeste tuning were The Willis's. TC Lewis himself would often remark that he owed all he knew to the years he spent sitting at the feet of the Willis's. (grin)   Alan, I cannot concede this, as I don't know whether Willis tuned the Celeste to beat the same all the way up, or whether he tuned the rank in octaves on itself. Does anyone know for certain, i.e. not just based on = how Willis organs sound today, possibly having been altered to different = tuning over the last century and more?   What I do know, though, is that Bonavia-Hunt described those who tune Celestes perfect to themselves did so in the mistaken belief that this is = a cheap way of providing a soft stop, albeit only to TenC, which could be = used on its own.   Browsing through a heap of texts on this topic, I get the impression that the USA tradition tends to be different from the British. Barnes, for example, says the parent rank and the Celeste should be of the same scale, where I know from many examinations and much reading that this is not so = in British-built organs. Mind you, Barnes also says that some Celestes can be used with profit in full organ, so I wouldn't take his word on anything, = not even to know what a diapason chorus is.   Anyway, Willis learned far more from Schulze voicing of flues than he did from Willis, whatever he may have said. In his attempt to sound more like Schulze, Lewis did not create the awful Full Organ sounds that Willis did, dependent on reeds, but rather full-blooded Diapason work.   Ross        
(back) Subject: RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!) From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:13:40 +1300     >Anyway, Willis learned far more from Schulze voicing of flues than he did from Willis, whatever he may have said.   Apologies for my typo. I was trying to write that Lewis learned his kind = of Diapason voicing from Schulze rather than Willis.   Ross      
(back) Subject: Re: Looking for a Kimball Viole D'Orchestra From: "Jim Filsinger" <kimballl@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:40:44 -0800 (PST)   Hi, Michael, I'll bet it's cold up there, right? I'll also bet that you will find = several sets of Kimball VDOs. Let me know if you have any extra. Also, I promised you a care package and I WILL get around to mailing it. = I've been so busy working on the Kimball that I haven't even gotten around = to purchasing or sending any Xmas cards. So I wish you a Merry Christmas = and a Happy New Year. Do wish ME luck in getting this organ winded before = February when Tim arrives. Jim Weisenborne   Michael Brandt <michaelpl70@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear List Members,   I am looking for an 8' Kimball Viole D'Orchestra to replace the one missing from my Kimball "Soloist" pipe organ. I actually have the low 9 zinc pipes from CC to GG*; the missing pipes are the tin ones from AA to C73. The scale is CC=3D68, and the wind pressure is 7.5". I would appreciate any and all leads that list members might be able to provide. I know these are rare stops, but I am sure there is one out there just waiting to be put back into a Kimball organ. Thank you, Michael LuBrant (e-mail MichaelPL70@yahoo.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: List-Digest: List-Unsubscribe:     --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
(back) Subject: Re: Celestes - E.M.S. speaks .... I saved this about 2 years ago From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:34:00 EST   In a message dated 12/22/2004 6:41:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, TheShieling@xtra.co.nz writes:   > Really? I'm sure I'm not the only organ enthusiast who would find a > Diapason/Principal chorus to be far more beautiful than a double = celeste. >   well, chalk up one for the celeste........lol a surprise to NO ONE whom knoweth me.   dale in florida  
(back) Subject: Karn pianos From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:40:16 -0500   Ross,   Your Karn piano would be much older than 1930s, more likely early 1900s. Are you sure it is only 3' 7" above the casters. I would have thought they didn't build anything smaller than a 48" upright.   I grew up just outside Woodstock, Ontario, worked there, studied organ there, and started my piano practicing on a Karn piano.   Karn got together with Warren and built pipe organs for awhile.   Arie V.         > >Oh yes! My piano is a Karn upright (from Woodstock, Ontario, I believe) = from >the early 1930s, and is only 3ft 7ins. high above the castors. It's = bottom >octave is certainly not what I'd wish, but it has a lovely bright treble = and >a superb touch that make it a delight to play. Against that, though with >even better touch, was the flawless 1906 Bechstein grand in my last = parish >church - it was 7ft 8ins. long and had a gloriously rich bass that sang = for >a long time before dying away. I love my piano, and it's fine for my = simple >playing needs - hymns, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, sundry harpsichord >music, a bit of the easier Chopin, etc., but the big Bechstein deserved a >great talent and BIG music, though was incredible even in hymns. It was = used >constantly by music teachers for pupil recitals as well as by the parish = for >its own music and concerts. > >Ross      
(back) Subject: Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare From: <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:48:34 EST   In a message dated 12/22/04 3:57:02 PM Pacific Standard Time, thomasmohr@aon.at writes:   > Thanks for shring this with us. Now I feel far better about my last = mistake > > with Boellmann's Suite Gothique.   ok, spill it...  
(back) Subject: Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare From: "Stephen Best" <stevebest@usadatanet.net> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:02:59 -0500   When I sent the mp3 of the "Organist's Worst Nightmare" to a few friends along with the suggestion that the organist may have hit the transposer button instead of a piston, one individual wrote back that an instrument on which he plays does this (i.e. transposes to a new key) all by itself with some regularity. The same organ also produces automatic migrating tone clusters in the pedals: you play one note, and you get a cluster. But as soon as you memorize which note is the offending one so you can leave it out, it moves to another note. My friend didn't tell me the "brand," and I didn't ask.   Steve Best in Utica, NY    
(back) Subject: Re: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!) From: "Paul Smith" <kipsmith@getgoin.net> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:24:35 -0600   I have experimented with the tuning of the celesting ranks on my church's 1930 Moller. The Swell Salicional and Voix Celeste are on neighboring rows =   (as built by Moller), but are of different scales, and the Celeste only starts at tenor C, so the pulling in the 8' octave is avoided. I didn't = know the rule of maintaining space between celesting ranks, I made an overlay = for three ranks of Dulcianas, meaning to have the largest scaled one on pitch, =   the second loudest sharp and the softest one flat. The pulling made for no =   celesting until they were obviously out of tune and they fought badly and made for a jerky sound. Tally it up to "experience". When I had the first two Dulcianas on separate chests they sounded very sweet together. That overlay now has a small Sesquialtera on it. Since there is almost no upper =   work on this organ, I depend on the octave coupler alot, and even use the 16' coupler and move my hands up for special effects. After trying several =   arrangements, I have decided that I like the stringy celestes to beat twice-per-second in the tenor octave, four times in the middle C octave, = and then to taper off over the next octave, so that they are in tune in the = top octave and the extension octave (used only with the 4' coupler). This = makes them much easier to live with when coupled, they don't shriek. We have a very patient tuner!   I am in the middle of adding an Echo Organ at the rear of the sanctuary which will contain an exposed unit Dulciana rank (16' - 8' - 4') and four enclosed ranks: Echo Salicional (a medium string - tuned on pitch), a Viol =   d'Orch from tenor C (tuned sharper than the Swell Voix Celeste), a mild Viola (tuned slightly flat) and a Flute Damour. I would appreciate any comments on this tuning arrangement, by which I hope to maximize the combinations available. I hope the Echo Salicional + Viol d'Orch (which I will call "Violin Celeste") will give a very different and more intense effect than the Echo Salicional + flat Viola (which I will call "Unda Maris"), and that the three together, especially with the swell shutters closed, will make a rich, soft combination for chordal pieces and accompaniments. The Dulciana + flat Viola might make a quiet and = unassertive background sound. Remember, I am out to create an Echo Organ for a 1930 Orchestral instrument. Any ideas? = Kip in Missouri ----- Original Message ----- From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> To: "'PipeChat'" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 5:08 PM Subject: RE: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)     > >> properly tuned Voix celeste should increase in > "nervousness" as you ascend the scale. > > Why? I think we've had this debate before. > > The great masters like TCLewis always tuned their Celestes to create > exactly > the same number of beats to every note of the scale. > > It's certainly easier, and quicker, to tune a Celeste the other way - > merely > get the bottom octave right and then tune the Celeste in octaves on > itself. > The Celeste will sound far far better if the Celeste is always tuned to > the > parent rank. I only know one organ tuner who does not do it this way, = and > I > had to threaten to sack him from the church's tuning unless he'd do as I > directed. When I spoke to the man who had trained him, he assured me = that > he > had been trained correctly but had clearly not bothered with what he was > taught. > > That is the British, and therefore NZ, tradition anyway. > > Ross > > > ****************************************************************** > "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: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!) From: "Paul Smith" <kipsmith@getgoin.net> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:33:00 -0600   I need to know more about this "balance between the sharp and flat = celeste ranks". Do you mean just the tuning, or the scales and tone = qualities of the ranks, or the strength of their respective sounds = (volume)? Do you know what the comparative balances in the Wanamaker = string sets-of-three ranks are like? I expect there will be many tuning = and toe opening experiments before I find a good balance. Please = elucidate.=20 Thanks, = Kip in Missouri ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mattcinnj=20 To: PipeChat=20 Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:51 PM Subject: Re: Celeste Tuning (the real thing, not the stop tab!)     Hi Everyone,   I'm sure most of us has indeed heard this ........ via the STRING = Division on the Wanamaker organ. There are about 60 some odd sets (3 = ranks each) like this. Allen organs had 1 set on the ADC8350's Swell = Division. The balance between the sharp and flat celeste ranks was = crucial ............... otherwise a very "out of phase" sound resulted.   Matt
(back) Subject: A new life for Aeolian-Skinner 1006A From: "Ned Benson" <nbenson@stjohnschurch.org> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:40:37 -0800   I am very pleased to tell the List that we have purchased the Hutchings 1896 opus 384 / =C6olian-Skinner 1954 opus 1066A from Christ Church, Episcopal, New Haven, through the Organ Clearing House. The information on the instrument is on the OCH site at http://www.organclearinghouse.com/instruments/detail/2076.php   Christ Church is retaining 2 ranks of Choir strings and the Swell Vox and Clarinet for their new Lively-Fulcher organ which is to be installed Spring of 2005. See their information at http://www.christchurchnh.org/organnotes1.htm   The instrument will be rebuilt by Michael Quimby for St. John's, with replacement Skinner pipes for those retained by Christ Church provided by Michael LuBrant, God bless him. Quimby will build new Blackington-Quimby ep slider chests for the Great, Swell and Choir, awith Pitman offset chests, either rebuilt Hutchings/A-S or new, for the Pedal. I'm sure we'll add an 8' Diapason to the Great and the Swell, and probably a Tierce to the Swell, and make the pedal reed available on the Great, at a minimum. It'll be about 47 ranks, I think. Quimby will also rebuild the wonderful 1945 A-S console with solid state relays and stop controls. We haven't got the marvelous reverberant Henry Vaughn space that Christ Church does, but we are working to make our 1969 A-frame space as friendly as possible for the recycled instrument.   Now all we have to do is raise a bunch of bucks to pay for the project, and wait.   John Bishop of Organ Clearing House, and Bob Lehman and Fr. David Cobb of Christ Church, have been great to work with on this venture.   What's the Hutchings/Aeolian-Skinner/Quimby replacing? Uh, ummm - well, it's circa 1912 Murray Harris Great and Swell chests, supplemented by a couple of Balcom-Vaughn offsets, with a Heinz 57 collection of pipes - Trivo, Stinken, Schopp, M=F6ller, Murray Harris, and an unknown 8' Diapason - slapped together by a group of church volunteers 22 years ago with virtually no voicing. Balcom & Vaughan did a tiny bit when they added some Stinken pipes in 1986. The Murray Harris chests, with all original leather, are kaput, and the whole melange is dying. Scott Nelson, bless him too, has somehow kept this mutt playing for the past 6 years. The only thing to be said for our mutt is that it's better than . .. . . oh, well, you know. I don't want to open up that topic again.   I've learned a lot from reading this List, and I'll post more on the progress of the recycling of the Hutchings 1896 opus 384 / =C6olian-Skinner 1954 opus 1066A as it happens. -- Dr. Ned H. Benson St. John's Presbyterian Church 1070 West Plumb Lane Reno, Nevada 89509 http://www.stjohnschurch.org    
(back) Subject: RE: Karn pianos From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:58:36 +1300   >Your Karn piano would be much older than 1930s, more likely early 1900s. Are you sure it is only 3' 7" above the casters. I would have thought they didn't build anything smaller than a 48" upright.   Nope. 43" high. And it dates from 1933 - I looked up the serial number in the Piano Atlas when I bought the piano back in 1975. It had been a rental piano from new and piano company confirmed when they had bought it. It was black varnish on what looked like oak and, though the action was in fine order, the case was not in good order, being faded badly in places. When I stripped the piano I discovered it is just an oak veneer. I've polished it golden oak now. Cost me a whole $250, a huge sum for a first-year theological student with a wife and two young children. Well, huge = compared with my first piano in 1968, a vastly tall horrid old German clunker that cost me about $20 (and which I sold in 1974 for $36). :-)   Karn made reed organs, too, I think: I seem to remember having seen one once, at least as good as an Estey.   Ross    
(back) Subject: piano bass From: "First Christian Church of Casey, IL" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:07:31 -0600   For a reverberating, wonderful bass in a grand piano, I'm convinced you cannot beat an old Chickering grand....they are wonderful!   Dennis Steckley Lover of Cats, Pipe Organs & 1940-65 Sewing Machines    
(back) Subject: RE: piano bass From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:23:23 +1300   >For a reverberating, wonderful bass in a grand piano, I'm convinced you cannot beat an old Chickering grand....they are wonderful!   Never seen one, sadly, though have certainly heard of them.   I love the big old grands - not just Steinway, but Bechstein, Bluthner, Bosendorfer.   Ross    
(back) Subject: RE: 32' sound in speakers From: "Garrison Johnson" <johnco18@comcast.net> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:23:16 -0500   Granted. But....try to rattle the windows in a large sanctuary with those speakers!   Jennie Mae & Garry J. The Johnsons 1913 Rockcreek Lane Flint MI 48507-2274 voice (810)233-7094 fax (810)233-7599   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of Kenneth Potter Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 9:37 PM To: pipechat@pipechat.org Subject: 32' sound in speakers     In a message dated 12/18/2004 11:43:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, Garrison Johnson writes:   Let's take another look: middle C (2')=3D256 Hz two octaves down, 8' C then =3D 64 Hz 16' C =3D 32 Hz 32" C =3D 16 Hz 64' C =3D 8 Hz, still (barely) audible As far as producing these low notes electronically, no problem with generating them (oscillators), but try to find a speaker which will reproduce them. A 32' stop requires a big box and a couple of at least 18" speakers!   Hey guys,   I have a couple of Paradigm speakers with no more than 8" speakers for the bass. How come I get nice purring 32' sound on a regular basis from my organ recordings? The contrareeds ain't bad either. wonderful sound, little speakers. I can't imagine those big boxes people had in the sixties for organ recordings did much better. What say ye?   Ken     ****************************************************************** "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: piano bass From: <RMaryman@aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:52:34 EST   In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:10:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, kzrev@rr1.net writes: For a reverberating, wonderful bass in a grand piano, I'm convinced you cannot beat an old Chickering grand....they are wonderful! this is more likely to be true if it is an UNALTERED chickering. I = installed a pipe organ in a large church in DC in the mid 1970's that had a = WONderful chickering 9-foot (or so) grand with a gorgeous cherry case...till they = sent it to some place in New York to have it rebuilt. When it was returned to the church, it was a dull, lack-lustre sounding thing...what WAS a joy to play = with a giant rolling bass was afterwards stiff-actioned and dull of sound...the = bass register was all but GONE...a hugh disappointment.   Rick inVA  
(back) Subject: Re: Organists Worst Nightmare From: "Kenneth Potter" <swell_shades@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:58:44 -0800 (PST)   Subject: Re: Every Organist's Worst Nightmare From: <Tspiggle@aol.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:27:39 EST   Sounds like the organist may have hit a transposer button instead of a piston!   Tom   Of course, now that I listen again, that is exactly what did happen - a pretty stunning conclusion to the Messiah. It reminds me of a story that my best friend tells about a wedding or funeral he played in South Jersey. They were on an old Wicks with a transposer. He had been playing the service not realizing the transposer was kicked up several half-steps. When it came time for the soloist to sing, the man realized they were way higher than he wanted to be singing. He knew he'd never get the high notes at the end if they continued. His solution was to put his hand on the transposer knob and at the end of each phrase, he lowered the pitch a half tone. My friend said it was the most appalling effect he'd ever experienced. He just kept playing, and they had some good laughs afterward. I bet there were some eyes bugging out in the congregation.   Ken   =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to = revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation, It will = preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been = built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national = morality, and the family as the basis of national life." --Adolph Hitler, February 1, 1933 (what goes around comes around)