PipeChat Digest #5028 - Thursday, December 23, 2004
 
Re: 32" sound in speakers
  by "Bruce Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk>
Re: 32" sound in speakers
  by "James Grebe" <pianoman@accessus.net>
Re: Midnight Mess after tee martoonees
  by "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au>
Re: Celeste Tuning  More Info. Please
  by "Mattcinnj" <mattcinnj@yahoo.com>
Re: piano bass
  by <AEolianSkinner@aol.com>
RE: piano bass
  by "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com>
RE: piano bass
  by "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com>
Re: piano bass
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
RE: Karn pianos
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
32" sound ...what you get is what you hear
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
RE: 32" sound in speakers
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
RE: 32" sound in speakers
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: O HOly Night
  by "David Baker" <dgb137@mac.com>
Re: Austin Opus 952; First United Methodist Church; Saratoga 	Springs, Ne
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Funerals
  by "David Baker" <dgb137@mac.com>
Re: Funerals
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: 32" sound in speakers From: "Bruce Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:28:54 -0000   At the risk of further confusing this discussion - the 32' tone is not really there in the physical sense - if the loudspeaker or the real pipes don't radiate it, it's not there in the sound waves in the air. And even = if it was, your ears would hardly be able to hear it.   To me that means it's not 'there'. If you add two soundwaves together, and =   transmit them through the air, bits of wire, an amplifier or whatever, so long as these tranmission media respond linearly ie. there is no = distortion, the waveform of the two added together will not change and there will be = no new frequencies (resultants). Once the transmisson medium response becomes non-linear, sum, difference and multiple tones are created. Mathematicians =   among you can work this out from (sin A + sin B)=B2 .   I suppose ones hearing mechanism is non-linear to some extent - but human hearing (the ear and the brain) has an uncanny ability to imagine -infer - =   somehow obtain a fundamental 'reference' tone for any combination of = sounds even when the tones are some way off being related - bells and drum = sounds have componentsswhich are not the exact multiples of anything, but ones hearing will try to find a best 'fit' fundamental frequency - if it fails the sound becomes 'unpitched'. This is often the case with the Bass Drum = and Triangle and is why low-pitched Tubular Bells don't work (and why they = sound so ghastly in chords).The octave and the quint are the second and third harmonics respectively of the resultant and 3f - 2f =3D f for whatever f = is, and working this out where the relationships are exact is a piece of cake for your hearing.   Just for fun have a look at my website Miscellaneous page - there are some demos there of 32' resultant and a an 8' resultant which you certainly = don't hear, but you can 'pitch' without any problem.(work that one out !!)   Don't let this weighty discussion stop you all having a Merry Christmas = and Happy New Year.   Best wishes,   Bruce Miles   website - http://www.gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk/misc.html   ----- Original Message ----- From: "Will Light" <will.light@btinternet.com> To: "'PipeChat'" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:33 AM Subject: RE: 32" sound in speakers     I agree Roy, I was speaking a bit loosely there. What I meant was that it was the psychological factor of the brain hearing a pattern of upper harmonics and "inferring" the fundamental which was responsible. I only = used the Resultant Bass example as another instance of the ear being fooled by hearing something which isn't really there... That's not right because the difference tone is really there, even if the 32' pipe isn't, but I think = you know what I mean... or maybe not....   Will Light Coventry UK   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of = Roy Kersey Sent: 22 December 2004 05:12 To: PipeChat Subject: Re: 32" sound in speakers   Hi Will and All, With all due respect, Will, I think your explanation of what's happening when an 8 inch speaker "seems" to reproduce 32 foot tone is not quite right. When a resultant is produced by a 16 foot pipe and a quint = at 10 2/3, a real difference tone is produced. If the 16 foot C is about 60 = Hz and the quint is 90 Hz, the difference tone produced is 90 minus 60, or 30 Hz, which is the 32 foot C frequency. It's really produced. When the = small speaker produces harmonics but not the fundamental, the ear, via auditory perception, "thinks" it hears the fundamental that isn't really there. I think the two phenomena are different. Best Regards, Roy Kersey Organ Enthusiast and Amateur Trumpeter        
(back) Subject: Re: 32" sound in speakers From: "James Grebe" <pianoman@accessus.net> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:10:01 -0600   Yesterday while tuning a 7' Yamaha, I tested C-1 with my frequency = analyzer built into my digital Reyburn Cyber-Tuner. It showed NO fundamental but lots of the 2nd partial, which would be the tone of A-2. Believe me, the C-1 sure sounded like fundamental to me but our mind makes up from the partial work contained by the C-1 James Grebe Piano-Forte Tuning & Repair Creator of Handsome Hardwood Caster Cups (314) 608-4137 WWW.JamesGrebe.com 1526 Raspberry Lane Arnold, MO 63010 BECOME WHAT YOU BELIEVE! pianoman@accessus.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 5:28 AM Subject: Re: 32" sound in speakers     > At the risk of further confusing this discussion - the 32' tone is not > really there in the physical sense - if the loudspeaker or the real = pipes > don't radiate it, it's not there in the sound waves in the air. And even =   > if it was, your ears would hardly be able to hear it. > > To me that means it's not 'there'. If you add two soundwaves together, = and > transmit them through the air, bits of wire, an amplifier or whatever, = so > long as these tranmission media respond linearly ie. there is no > distortion, the waveform of the two added together will not change and > there will be no new frequencies (resultants). Once the transmisson = medium > response becomes > non-linear, sum, difference and multiple tones are created. = Mathematicians > among you can work this out from (sin A + sin B)=B2 . > > I suppose ones hearing mechanism is non-linear to some extent - but = human > hearing (the ear and the brain) has an uncanny ability to imagine -infer = - > somehow obtain a fundamental 'reference' tone for any combination of > sounds even when the tones are some way off being related - bells and > drum sounds have componentsswhich are not the exact multiples of = anything, > but ones hearing will try to find a best 'fit' fundamental frequency - = if > it fails the sound becomes 'unpitched'. This is often the case with the > Bass Drum and Triangle and is why low-pitched Tubular Bells don't work > (and why they sound so ghastly in chords).The octave and the quint are = the > second and third harmonics respectively of the resultant and 3f - 2f =3D = f > for whatever f is, and working this out where the relationships are = exact > is a piece of cake for your hearing. > > Just for fun have a look at my website Miscellaneous page - there are = some > demos there of 32' resultant and a an 8' resultant which you certainly > don't hear, but you can 'pitch' without any problem.(work that one out = !!) > > Don't let this weighty discussion stop you all having a Merry Christmas > and > Happy New Year. > > Best wishes, > > Bruce Miles > > website - http://www.gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk/misc.html > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Will Light" <will.light@btinternet.com> > To: "'PipeChat'" <pipechat@pipechat.org> > Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:33 AM > Subject: RE: 32" sound in speakers > > > I agree Roy, I was speaking a bit loosely there. What I meant was that = it > was the psychological factor of the brain hearing a pattern of upper > harmonics and "inferring" the fundamental which was responsible. I only > used > the Resultant Bass example as another instance of the ear being fooled = by > hearing something which isn't really there... That's not right because = the > difference tone is really there, even if the 32' pipe isn't, but I think =   > you > know what I mean... or maybe not.... > > Will Light > Coventry UK > > -----Original Message----- > From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of > Roy > Kersey > Sent: 22 December 2004 05:12 > To: PipeChat > Subject: Re: 32" sound in speakers > > Hi Will and All, > With all due respect, Will, I think your explanation of what's > happening when an 8 inch speaker "seems" to reproduce 32 foot tone is = not > quite right. When a resultant is produced by a 16 foot pipe and a quint =   > at > 10 2/3, a real difference tone is produced. If the 16 foot C is about = 60 > Hz > and the quint is 90 Hz, the difference tone produced is 90 minus 60, or = 30 > Hz, which is the 32 foot C frequency. It's really produced. When the > small > speaker produces harmonics but not the fundamental, the ear, via = auditory > perception, "thinks" it hears the fundamental that isn't really there. = I > think the two phenomena are different. > Best Regards, > Roy Kersey > Organ Enthusiast and Amateur Trumpeter > > > > > ****************************************************************** > "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: Midnight Mess after tee martoonees From: "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:47:07 +0800   St Looney's Steve? Apt name Steve. Sounds as if one of them has escaped. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: SWF12262@aol.com=20 To: pipechat@pipechat.org=20 Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 4:29 PM Subject: Midnight Mess after tee martoonees     Preetings, Chipegatters!   Here's the upline for the sarol cervice and midnight mess at St. = Looney's:   11:30 p.m. The Carol Thingy Fanfart for Christmas Day (Shartin Maw) Irby (Once for Royal David's Pity) Experts from the Messy (George F Pitchergrabber) And the Lory of the Gourd Four, Unto Us a Three is Two (including those competitors to Tictacs = and Altoids -- Govermints) And There Were Shepherds (shame on them) And Lo the Angel (so now we know the angel's name was And Lo) And the Angle Strayed Unto Them And Suddenly (you shouldn't have been THAT surprised!) Lory to Od (we really need to work on diction there -- but I do like = the ending -- Good Will; Catholic Charities; Good Will; Salvation Army, = etc) Angels We Have Heard Get High (the Wet Minister Carol) A Traditional Filipino Carol -- Misa de Gallo (Mass of the Rooster) or = could it be Misa de Ernest and Julio Gallo? (really a very lovely piece = -- e-mail me if you want a copy) Muellerererer (Away With the Manager, No Scribbler Instead) Come Thou Redeemer (Puer Nobis, Prichael Maetorius composer of Lo How = a Nose E'er Running, Four treble soloists in the four corners of the = church for stanza 1 -- Come Thou, Redeemer; and stanza 5 -- From God the = Father He proceeds) THE MESS AT MIDNIGHT Processifessional Hum: Go Dust Your Fiddles, Lady Triumphantes (arr. = Sir David Willingroosters) Mess Ordinary: A Germy Mess (Franz Schubert) Psalm: by Nevets Dnayew Sreklof (guess I'm a little backwards) Gospel Acclamation: ya, that be by me too Offertory: Cantique de Newel Post (aka O Full of Holes After Dark) Communion: Gesu Bamboono (Pietro HitherandYon) (many Asian = parishioners, so bamboono fits rather nicely) Stille Nacht (including the obese celebate called Round John Virgin) = (you haven't lived till you've heard a largely Filipino-born choir = singing in German!) Recessional: Mendelsoonerorlater -- Hark the Herald Tribune Sings = arr. Sir David Testamentmalebird -- get those high As out of the way and = go to bed!   Hope I haven't offended, but if I have -- too bad! This has been = thremendously terapeutic -- well, you know what I mean. Will have a = 10-piece orchestra for this stuff; five stings, four brass, timpani. = Our fairly reverberant church (lotsa brick, wood ceiling, but carpeted = aisles -- returns a flat echo) will be quite dry with over 600 in the = nave. Try to prepare choir for this each year, but always seems to come = as a surprise. I WANT A HARD FLOOR FOR CHRISTMAS! And brick walls and = pecky cypress ceiling sealed with epoxy! And the new swell installed = and running! Oh Santa, where are you? The rantings and ravings = following a 2+hour rehearsal!   Unfortunately, because of time constraints we weren't able to include = "Go Rest Your Bellies, Gentlemen, Let Nothing Rude Display," or "Good = King Once Was Slush Looked=20 Down and His Feet Were Steaming."   Distractedly, Steve   Steven Weyand Folkers or Nevets Dnayew Sreklof St. Lambert Church Skokie, IL
(back) Subject: Re: Celeste Tuning More Info. Please From: "Mattcinnj" <mattcinnj@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 05:55:30 -0800 (PST)   Hi Paul The balance I referred to was regarding the volume of each of the 3 ranks = and also the degree of tuning variance. I can not say what exactly is = done on the Wanamaker organ. You might want to visit the Friends Of The = Wanamaker Organ website to see if you can ask about this ..... Curt Mangel = is the person to get the definitive answer from. I believe the tonal = qualities are identical for each 3 rank set.................... that is = why they have so many sets, each with different tonal qualities. Matt   Paul Smith <kipsmith@getgoin.net> wrote: 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. Thanks, = Kip in Missouri ----- Original Message ----- From: Mattcinnj To: PipeChat 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     --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
(back) Subject: Re: piano bass From: <AEolianSkinner@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:20:11 EST   Sorry, But I am a Steinway fan and have played on one Model D for about 10 = years. But, played on a very nice Bosendorfer Imperial that had a very = nice bass reverb in the note extensions past low A.   Best Regards, Gregory Hinson    
(back) Subject: RE: piano bass From: "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:45:41 -0600   Amen!   Daniel Hancock   >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: "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:57:39 -0600   Chickering was the "Steinway" of the nineteenth century. Steinway didn't achieve their reputation for fine instruments until after the turn of the century, and it was at this time, around 1905, that the Chickering company was bought, and the quality declined.   =20   Timothy Daniel Hancock   Springfield, Missouri   =20   "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world - indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." --Margaret Mead   =20   Sorry, But I am a Steinway fan and have played on one Model D for about 10 years. But, played on a very nice Bosendorfer Imperial that had a very nice bass reverb in the note extensions past low A.=20   =20   Best Regards, Gregory Hinson  
(back) Subject: Re: piano bass From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:56:15 -0500   At 01:51 PM 2004-12-23 +0800, you wrote: >My personal favorites are Mason & Hamlin -- all the way down to the 5'8". =   >As a If you can find a "C", 9', all the better. Avoid the later Aeolian >years... The best I ever played was a rebuilt A from 1928. Mason & Hamlin =   >pianos are built in Haverill, MA www.masonhamlin.com Mason & Hamlin is >owned by PianoDisc. > >Baldwin SD10's - 9'5.5" - do a darn good job of projecting a rich bass >too. Grands are built in Truman, AR www.baldwinpiano.com. Baldwin is a >subsidiary of Gibson. > >Jonas Chickering was an experimenter and, while most examples are >extreemly well-built, there were a lot of design/scale changes in the >product. Chickering is now a Baldwin product. (imported?) > >Wm. Knabe pianos were also very rich and full-bodied. Knabe pianos are = now >built in Asia. www.knabepianos.com. The Knabe name was owned by = PianoDisc, >that may have changed recently, but there is still an association with = the >player system. > >There are several other brands that are near the center of the radar >scope. Since Digital pianos have come so far, there is very little room >for any second-rate acoustic piano. Nothing like the "musical firewood" >that was produced in the 60's and 70's is sold anymore.   Hi,   Regarding your last paragraph, you are quite wrong. Within a stone's = throw of our shop, there is a large piano dealer, who sells Petrof, Pleyel, Kemble, among other good piano names. But they also sell some third world =   pianos (mostly Chinese made) with sophisticated European sounding names. Prices are low (really very low) but musically they are very low. I'm sure a Steinway salesman would call them "PSOs" (piano-shaped-objects).   Arie V.      
(back) Subject: RE: Karn pianos From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:59:03 -0500   At 03:58 PM 2004-12-23 +1300, you wrote: > >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 Ross,   If you say so, it must be so. I would have thought that Karn was long out =   of business by then. Yes, they did make reeds organs too. The old Karn factory building was still standing the last time I drove by there a few years ago.   Arie V.      
(back) Subject: 32" sound ...what you get is what you hear From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:26:43 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   I've just been reminded of an amusing thing certain of us used to do at Halifax Parish Church, here in the UK.   There is/was a large wooden panel in the church, which had quite a resonant bottom D when it was thumped with the palm of the hand.   Of course, when the organist was playing a final voluntary in D.....didn't matter what it was....two or three of use would gather by the panel awaiting the last note of the voluntary.   Rapidly thumping the panel between us, we could produce a wonderful simulation of a 32ft reed!!   Hooligans!   Best wishes to everyone for Christmas and New Year,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- Bruce Miles <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:   > At the risk of further confusing this discussion - > the 32' tone is not > really there in the physical sense - if the > loudspeaker or the real pipes > don't radiate it     __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: RE: 32" sound in speakers From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:29:43 +1300   >At the risk of further confusing this discussion - the 32' tone is not really there in the physical sense - if the loudspeaker or the real pipes don't radiate it, it's not there in the sound waves in the air. And even = if it was, your ears would hardly be able to hear it.   Then how do you explain the physical shaking of the building? Wellington Cathedral is made of concrete and has just over 89 secs reverberation. The 32ft Resultant literally makes the building shake in the way that the 16ft Open Wood most certainly does not.   Ross    
(back) Subject: RE: 32" sound in speakers From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:52:32 +1300   > Wellington Cathedral is made of concrete and has just over 89 secs reverberation. The 32ft Resultant literally makes the building shake in the way that the 16ft Open Wood most certainly does not.   I made a most ridiculous type here, as is obvious :-) :-)   Wellington Cathedral has 8 seconds reverb, not = 89!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Sorry 'bout that, Ross    
(back) Subject: Re: O HOly Night From: "David Baker" <dgb137@mac.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:37:22 -0500   You're not wrong. I always put the burden on the pastor to say no, if it needs to be said. Our problem is that we get quite a number of funerals where the family does not attend our parish, and may not even be catholic! Also, the archdiocese has been somewhat more vocal about what they call liturgical "abuses" in the last couple of years, especially eulogies. What we try to do is to get people to do liturgically inappropriate music at the wake, where they can sing anything they want and nobody will say a thing. David Baker   On Thursday, December 23, 2004, at 01:47 PM, DudelK@aol.com wrote:   > Given the date on the calendar and the fact that it may have had great > attachment for the dear deceased, I wouldn't have hesitated to do it. > Many years ago two of my father's best friends died the same year--one > on Dec. 23 and one on Dec. 26. And many years later I went to my best > friend's mother's funeral which came right after Christmas and the > church was all beautifully and tastefully decorated and lovely and > actually seemed appropriate since the mother of this large Irish > family was very big on Christmas and decorations. Sometimes I think we > get a bit too caught up in being right about certain things and forget > we are dealing with people and their emotions and needs at very > critical times. > > But what do I know.    
(back) Subject: Re: Austin Opus 952; First United Methodist Church; Saratoga Springs, New York From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:11:30 +0000   On 12/21/04 10:23 PM, "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> wrote:   > It is hard for us organ buffs to think this, but the organ is not main st= ream > at the moment, and may never be again.   Arie, it doesn=B9t seem that way in MY neighborhood. I haven=B9t done a poll, but I think that if you checked with, say, two dozen houses of worship (all sorts) in our neighborhood, almost all (maybe all but one or two?) have, use, and feature PIPE organs every Saturday/Sunday. Some no longer young, but WELL maintained; some significant instruments barely broken in. Four o= r five are Lutheran; at LEAST that many are Roman, and a similar number Episcopal. Fewer are the Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Christian Scientist, and Jewish=8Bbut most even of the synagogues have VERY significant pipe organs. More than a few churches and synagogues have (and use) MORE than one pipe organ. Other instruments are used (piano, harpsichord, etc.)= , but organ is always the biggie.   Maybe we=B9re just an odd little backwater (called Midtown Manhattan), far from the =B3main stream,=B2 but the =B3organ mood=B2 is certainly not pessimistic around HERE!   Alan Freed www.stlukesnyc.org=20            
(back) Subject: Re: Funerals From: "David Baker" <dgb137@mac.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:17:30 -0500   While I would certainly agree with the sentiment, the problem, at least in large parishes, is that we have no idea whether the life was "well-spent" (whatever that means), and many times the deceased hasn't darkened the door of the church in years! Plus often times the family has no idea what to do at a funeral. "Loving tolerance" is not the opposite of "tough love", and I think it is entirely possible to have standards and to enforce them in a loving and considerate way. Cultural traditions have an impact on this, too, by the way. When I lived in NYC I played in catholic parishes with large Haitian congregations. If you've never played a Haitian funeral, you haven't lived. They hire >professional mourners< to weep and wail and carry on like you wouldn't believe! David Baker   On Thursday, December 23, 2004, at 04:00 PM, JC Moore wrote:   > OK listers, > > For goodness sakes! <snip>    
(back) Subject: Re: Funerals From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:24:06 EST     In a message dated 12/23/04 3:18:33 PM, dgb137@mac.com writes:     > They hire >professional mourners< to weep and wail and carry on > like you wouldn't believe!=A0 =A0 David Baker >=20 >=20   Just out of curiosity, do they deal with depression? What is the hourly=20 rate? LOLOLOL Merry Christmas!!! gfc       Gregory Ceurvorst 1921 Sherman Ave. #GS Evanston, IL 60201 847.332.2788 home/fax 708.243.2549 mobile gfc234@aol.com gfc234@nextel.blackberry.net