PipeChat Digest #5035 - Monday, December 27, 2004
 
Re: Warranty
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: Philosophical/Educational ..B all or END all.
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name?
  by "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net>
NEW Phantom of the Opera
  by "atal" <atal@sympatico.ca>
Re: NEW Phantom of the Opera
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Organ Pieces
  by "Dominic Scullion" <dominicscullion@email.com>
Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name?
  by "noel jones" <gedeckt@usit.net>
Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name?
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name?
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
RE: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name?
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
RE: Philosophical/Educational ..B all or END all.
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Holy Name: back into focus
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Are we blaming rooms too much?
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name?
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
Holy Name or Holy Wind?
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
RC Christmas
  by "David Baker" <dgb137@mac.com>
Re: Are we blaming rooms too much?
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Warranty From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:10:32 EST   They offer throughout the world as long as it was purchased through an AUTHORIZED dealer.......not e-bay or some such thing.   private me if you want more information. i am in close touch with the = local dealer because i bought another brand from him and he carries both.   dale in florida  
(back) Subject: Re: Philosophical/Educational ..B all or END all. From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 03:39:04 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Ron Severin writes from the heart, and he's right to a fair extent.   I'm not sure that I agree with all his conclusions, for after all, a theatre organ overcomes many acoustic limitations in fine style!   Furthermore, I know of no acoustic "expert" who can micro-manage a frozen meal, let alone a whole room!!   The "fact" seems to be that the whole design process is hit and miss, but architects know that by using enough absorbent materials, they can avoid most things bad and then add electronic reverberation if it isn't very good. This is exactly what they did in London at the Royal Festival Hall.   Of course, the only answer is theological!   The clergy seem to harbour the absurd view that "the word of God" is more important than the aesthetic beauty of music heard in a resonant edifice. Every self-respecting musician knows that Handel's Messiah has gained more converts than all the world's sermons placed end to end, and if they don't believe that passionately, then they should take up knitting.   Like the little girl, about 8 years of age, who clutched her father's hand and said, "Daddy, are we going to hear another Missa Incomprehensibulis today?"   "Yes darling," he replied, "William Byrd."   "Oh good!" She replied, "I just hate it when the vicar talks to us."   Bring back music! Nay.....bring back LATIN!!   Give me an R...... Give me an E..... Give me a V..... Give me an E...... Give me an R......   Then give me a 'B' not an END!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell   --- RonSeverin@aol.com wrote:   > Dear Richard: > > I think church musicians would all be much happier > with even > a bad pipe organ, if room acoustics weren't micro > managed to > death.     __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250  
(back) Subject: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name? From: "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 06:48:29 -0600   Good Morning, PipeChatters: Our discussions are not addressing what I asked. At the core of the "problems" cited with Holy Name Cathedral was the responsibility of the "management" of the place. Having been the people responsible for the outcome of a list of problems, what would be the proper corrective actions for the "management" to implement? Ron, we need to be aware of the current mindset prevalent among sound engineers and acousticians for public buildings. Their approach now is to make the room absolutely flat, with no reflections at all. Then, a super system can be implemented with speakers all over everywhere that builds the sound environment to whatever they want can be installed, some with excellent reverb characteristics. Denver recently built a new symphony hall, and that was the way they approached it With this approach, the venue can vary from rock and roll to live drama on stage, and the performers have no real control over the end result. That is supposedly left up to the resident expert for the sound. Now, if the "management" at Holy Name Cathedral does not know something of the effect desired in natural acoustics, what would they do? The logical answer is to call in a consultant to advise them how to implement corrective action, but, unless the "management" insists on creating a naturally reverberant acoustical environment, the consultant will resort to padding the room with acoustical absorbers and adding amplification to spread the sounds evenly all over the space. THAT IS WHAT ACOUSTIC CONSULTANTS GET PAID FOR. So, if the "management" has already paid for that service, who should be surprised that they believe they have already corrected the "problems" at Holy Name Cathedral? . . . and spend their time and money on other aspects of running the Cathedral? If, however, a future manager of the Cathedral concludes that the natural reverberation should be restored, he will have the social stigma of spending money again to fix problems that were identified in previous times as undesirable, and that will probably need a few more years to allow the people who bought the present set of fixes to pass on. We here on PipeChat can readily talk about the lack of the natural acoustics (complete with the reverberation), but we somehow seem to miss the application of common sense by our church managers who commit to making the acoustics flat and non-reverberant. I am fishing for some creativity from our pool of practical experience that is creative enough to do the acoustics right the first time, or take the initiative in corrective actions to get it right for music the second time around, which seems to be the "proper" course of corrective actions needed at Holy Name Cathedral. Appreciatively, F. Richard Burt ..    
(back) Subject: NEW Phantom of the Opera From: "atal" <atal@sympatico.ca> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:47:51 -0500   Charlie Lester wrote: "I have seen the silent version in a movie theater several=20 times, with Stan Kann, Bill Field, and, I think, Bob=20 Mitchell, playing the organ."   This may be a silly question: Did all these organists improvise their accompaniment, or did they have = a score of some sort available to them? Just wondering what the "common" = practice was/is.   Andreas Thiel
(back) Subject: Re: NEW Phantom of the Opera From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:22:16 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Speaking from across the pond, the practice of silent film accompaniment seemed (and still seems) to be based on improvisational technique.   I once had the extraordinary pleasure of hearing the wonderful Ena Baga accompany silent films at the Odeon Cinema, Leicester Square, London, on the 5-manual Compton. What struck me, was the fact that I soon found myself enjoying the FILM; to the extent that I put the music to the back of my mind.   When I spoke to Ena about this, she just lit up with delight. "Oh good! I must have been accompanying properly!"   I believe that every silent film organist (pianist) had an individual stock of tricks and effects, from which they drew particular ideas, emotions etc.   I also know that this particular discipline was absolutely invaluable to those organists who went on to become arrangers and composers of note.....Sidney Torch, Quentin Maclean etc. To hear some of the superlative Maclean arrangements and medleys, where he freely interspersed popular melodies with quotes from other compositions (often very amusingly), is to hear a very fertile imagination at work, combined with a wealth of exposure to a wide sweep of music; both classical and light.   There's something quite remarkable about Maclean's version of "The old man of the mountains," which quotes from "Peer Gynt" and includes some quasi-contrapuntal passages he obviously learned with Max Reger and Karl Straube in Leipzig.   The best of them were no fools, were often very well qualified and found a niche for their talents at a time when employment was scarce. The best of them made a very, very good living....comparable with the pop stars of today.   I once heard that in the depression years, the top organists were paid up to =A34,000 per annum, when average earnings were probably not more than =A3200 per annum......twenty times average salary.....probably around =A3600,000 per annum today!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK         --- atal <atal@sympatico.ca> wrote:   > This may be a silly question: > Did all these organists improvise their > accompaniment, or did they have a score of some sort > available to them? Just wondering what the "common" > practice was/is.       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com    
(back) Subject: Organ Pieces From: "Dominic Scullion" <dominicscullion@email.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:02:10 -0000   Dear all,     I have not been playing the organ for too long and would like to build my repertoire.     Can anyone suggest any relatively simple or easy to learn organ pieces suitable for recessional voluntaries? Preferably by Bach but any composer would be great.     Regards.        
(back) Subject: Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name? From: "noel jones" <gedeckt@usit.net> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:02:34 -0500   Richard,   The development of sound during steady state and after release is what it is all about. Prior to the advent (or Lent) of electronic artificial sound reinforcement artificial sound reinforcement was an important aspect of the trade in architecture.   Architects had to place sound sources in positions that would project throughout the building, both musical and spoken.   Canopies over the pulpit and altar were just two of the tools used to spoken sound to reach over the entire building.   The ease of speaking over microphones has eliminated the need for a preacher to learn the rudimentary tasks involved in vocal production.   The ease of singing over microphones has eliminated the need for a singer to learn the rudimentary tasks involved in vocal production.   Preachers, and singers, who would never find employment 100 years ago now lord it over houses of worship to what many, including myself, consider to be a sad state of affairs.   They are unwilling, or unknowing, and have failed to do what jazz players call, "Paid their dues."   Having said this, what is a possible solution? Working hand in hand with the architect and committee for the building and making all acoustical "treatments", of a temporary nature. Build the building to ring with sound and specify that if there are unpleasant reflections, diffusion panels may be added at positions A, B, C and D and preparations for banners to be hung at X, Y and Z are in place, if needed.   Many architects plan airbags into their designs...meaning that they figure out all the sound things that can "go wrong" in their opinion and solve them before the accident happens.   The only way a musician on staff can deal with this issue is to do such a good job and be likable enough so that outright threats...plainly voiced and up front...of leaving the situation if the room is not built correctly for music may be the only way to make sure it is built right for music...and properly produced speech.   -- | noel jones, aago | gedeckt@usit.net | athens, tn | Moderator | Rodgers Organ Users Group at www.frogmusic.com | Support Group and Publishing Music and User's Guides | Voicing Services for Rodgers Organs, Digital & Pipe  
(back) Subject: Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name? From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:17:19 EST   Dear Richard:   A good case "makeover" on acoustics, is St. James Cathedral in Seattle, Washington. The Rector decided ten years ago to remove all the acoustic impediments. It was so successful, an acoustical moron would be tarred and feathered attempting to change it. The music is gloriously singing now. They indeed allowed the building to sing in a European manner, and what a fine voice it has. It's the stuff goose bumps are made of, and that's a very good thing. A small choir of professionals sounds huge. What a difference!   Ron Severin   PS The two pipe organs sound marvelous too.    
(back) Subject: Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name? From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:17:10 EST     In a message dated 12/27/04 9:04:15 AM, gedeckt@usit.net writes:     > The ease of speaking over microphones has eliminated the need for a > preacher to learn the rudimentary tasks involved in vocal production. > > The ease of singing over microphones has eliminated the need for a > singer to learn the rudimentary tasks involved in vocal production. > > Preachers, and singers, who would never find employment 100 years ago > now lord it over houses of worship to what many, including myself, > consider to be a sad state of affairs. >   AMEN AMEN       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  
(back) Subject: RE: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name? From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:23:25 +1300   >The ease of speaking over microphones has eliminated the need for a preacher to learn the rudimentary tasks involved in vocal production.   Well, if you want mere audibility, I s'pose that's right. If you want quality of sound, of course, you must teach the preacher how to speak in, and use, the building. For me, I loathe spoken sound coming from a loudspeaker as much as music doing the same.   >The ease of singing over microphones has eliminated the need for a singer to learn the rudimentary tasks involved in vocal production.   Ditto.   >Preachers, and singers, who would never find employment 100 years ago now lord it over houses of worship to what many, including myself, consider to be a sad state of affairs.   Aye.   >Having said this, what is a possible solution?   I would suggest teaching acoustics at theological colleges as a = requirement of the time there. And THAT is something organists should be doing. Heaven knows, I've tried to get church musicians to teach their clergy, both pre- and post-ordination, but I've never found anyone willing to think of such = an idea. If the acoustics are foul because of ignorant clergy, the organists are largely to blame for not having done any teaching of both architects = and clergy.   > Working hand in hand with the architect and committee for the building and making all acoustical "treatments", of a temporary nature. Build the building to ring with sound and specify that if there are unpleasant reflections, diffusion panels may be added at positions A, B, C and D and preparations for banners to be hung at X, Y and Z are in place, if needed.   It's easy to work out the reverberation before the building is built, in octave bands at various percentages of audience size. The architect needs = to be told what is required, with a very heavy financial penalty to be = imposed if these are not accomplished. You know the kind of thing: no fee for his services, plus a $150,000 penalty. If the architect is not prepared to = work under those conditions, dismiss him/her and get someone else.   >The only way a musician on staff can deal with this issue is to do such a good job and be likable enough so that outright threats...plainly voiced and up front...of leaving the situation if the room is not built correctly for music may be the only way to make sure it is built right for music...and properly produced speech.   A better way is to teach the clergy so they are on the musician's side = right at the beginning. If you don't believe this is possible, given the = ignorance level of the clergy, then I would ask what organists have done about this situation during the last century or so. Probably absolutely nothing.   Ross    
(back) Subject: RE: Philosophical/Educational ..B all or END all. From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:31:46 +1300     >The "fact" seems to be that the whole design process is hit and miss, but architects know that by using enough absorbent materials, they can avoid most things bad and then add electronic reverberation if it isn't very good. This is exactly what they did in London at the Royal Festival Hall.   I'm sorry, but that attitude just isn't good enough. Good acoustics are = easy to obtain and to suggest hit-and-miss is scientific nonsense.   >Of course, the only answer is theological!   NO!! The answer is clergy education. If clergy want something, it'll be done. We had a discussion a few days ago about Celeste tuning. well, in = one of my parishes I told the organbuilder to tune the Celeste as I wanted it done. He refused. I said, "You will tune the Celeste so it beats the same all the way up or I'll sack you and tell my clergy colleagues why. The = organ is ours, we employ you. We make the rules, not you. Now, will you do as I say?" They cooperated, to the great improvement of the tuning. Now, I = firmly believe that works with a new building as well, for good acoustics. I have experience of this very thing, believe me, in both a church and a church hall.   The clergy seem to harbour the absurd view that "the word of God" is more important than the aesthetic beauty of music heard in a resonant edifice.   Where's the conflict? The acoustics can be very good indeed for music with no sacrifice of quality for speech whatever. Who gave the clergy that = absurd view anyway? And what have the church musicians been doing about it since = it arose? Not teaching acoustics and sound production at theological = colleges, I'd suggest, nor have they taken clergy to organists' association = meetings, nor invited them to organ and choir conferences and congresses. Oh no, = they just moan from the sideline and have no education programme in mind.   Why am I so definite? Because I'm both a clergyman and a musician and = claim it is perfectly possible to be both.   Ross    
(back) Subject: Holy Name: back into focus From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:45:25 EST   This discussion has split on several tangents, from poor acoustical conditions to whether organs are too loud, when in fact, the crux of the = matter was the appropriateness of the style and builder chosen. What happened at Holy = Name was NOT unique to their situation, as we all know.   When I hear people say, "They insisted that Flentrop make it sound = English, and they wanted it more 'Romantic,' and they insisted on a swellbox," I = wonder to myself, "Why on Earth would they choose a builder and then ask them to = be something they're not? Is there not a greater chance of dooming the = project to failure?"   When I see an Episcopal church purchase a three-manual instrument with no enclosed divisions, no 8' line, and a smattering of fractional-length, = gutless reeds, I completely dismiss any proclamations that it "does the same job" = as an instrument based upon the Anglican tradition. I does not. It cannot. That doesn't mean it isn't a good musical instrument, it just means that it is inappropriate, and usually such capers are the brainchildren of one (or a = very few) self-involved people of more limited knowledge than they realize.   "Our Lutheran church just purchased a 12-rank Wurlitzer, and our 'organ = tech' is going to drop the pressure to 2", put electric valve action on it, substitute some imported Lithuanian pipework, build a French amphitheatre = keydesk, and put it in a freestanding resonant case for us. We chose the old cinema = organ because we wanted something that really addressed the works of Scheidt, Buxtehude, Lubeck, and Bach." It all sounds silly from the other = direction, does it not?   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City glucknewyork.com  
(back) Subject: Are we blaming rooms too much? From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:10:13 EST   Go to North or East Germany and play some of the great 18th-century pipe organs in clinically "dead" rooms. No reverberation, yet for 250 or more = years, these organs seem to have satisfied.   Good organbuilders know how to scale pipes and determine mouth heights and =   widths based upon the rooms that confront them.   Maybe we should stop buying instruments from firms whose write-ups in the trade journals say, "The installation, voicing, and tonal finishing of the =   52-rank instrument took two weeks. The organ features 112 square feet of = oak casework, 128 levels of memory, an adjustable bench, and music rack and = pedal lights with separate on/off switches."   That includes installation AND tonal finishing?! It takes TWICE as long to =   install a kitchenette. And organs should not be described as if they are appliances. Maybe if greater care were taken in the final stages of = organbuilding, acoustical encumbrances would not be used as scapegoats.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City glucknewyork.com  
(back) Subject: Re: What Corrective Action by "Management" at Holy Name? From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:11:00 EST   The sad thing about architects these days is that most of them don't care about acoustics or music. As we were planning our new sanctuary, the = music was one of the main concerns of the architect, because he is a singer! The = second concern was how was the pipe organ--yes, a PIPE ORGAN--going to fit into = the building. These factors were addressed from day one of the talks with the =   architect. When we had selected a builder, we then met with the = acoustical engineer--Kirkegaard and Associates--to discuss what styles of music we = did, what we wanted to accomplish with the sound in the santcuary, the choir rehearsal room, the bell rehearsal room, the orchestra rehearsal room, as well as = the offices, the conference center (Fellowship Hall), etc.   We made plans for the acoustics from the beginning--our architect even = went to Florida to see a church that Kirkegaard did and he came back raving = about how good the acoustics were. I think the problem is that too many = architects don't care about how music will be impacted and their answer is, "just mic = it." It's the easy way out of everything--just add a mic and a speaker = somewhere. Sound systems are good, but they should enhance sound, for clarity of speaking and for recording of services, not for people to rely on to = cmpensate for their weak speaking or singing voices, or for the poor acoustics.   However, churches who are not building new spaces don't have the luxury of =   tailoring acoustics to fit their needs, but acoustical engineers can be = brought in to "re-do" and "un-do" things that have been done, and to make bad = spaces better, and good spaces great.   Monty Bennett  
(back) Subject: Holy Name or Holy Wind? From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:13:25 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   I'm sorry, but this is just too tempting!   I thought ALL churches planned for wind-bags!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK   --- noel jones <gedeckt@usit.net> wrote:   > Many architects plan airbags into their > designs...meaning that they > figure out all the sound things that can "go wrong" > in their opinion and > solve them before the accident happens.       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: RC Christmas From: "David Baker" <dgb137@mac.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:34:00 -0500   Christmas Eve at historic St. Mary Parish, Waltham, MA   Preludes: Et misericordia - Bach (Magnificat) Jesu Bambino - Yon At mass: Entrance Hymn: O Come All Ye Faithful (Verse 1 in latin; verse 3 with the Wilcocks descant) Kyrie - Missa Brevis #4 (Corde natus ex parentis) - Healey Willan Christmas Gloria - Daniel Laginya (congregation sings THE refrain) Offertory Hymn: Of the Father's Love Begotten (Corde natus ex parentis) Ordinary of the Mass: People's Mass (Vermulst) Communion Anthem: Christmas Lullaby (Rutter) Hymn: Silent Night Closing hymn: Joy to the World! Postlude: Divinum Mysterium (a/k/a Corde natus ex parentis) - alas the composer's name escapes me at the moment.   St. Mary is the 7th oldest parish in the archdiocese of Boston. Hook & Hastings organ. For more on the organ, visit http://homepage.mac.com/dgb137/St_Mary_Parish/Personal5.html   Regards, David Baker, O/C    
(back) Subject: Re: Are we blaming rooms too much? From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:48:04 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   One should ALWAYS blame the organ-builder......it's a blood-sport many enjoy; especially if they are "foreign"   We should not confuse two things.   Firstly, reverberation is an abundance of resonance. Secondly, a lack of reverberation does not necessarily imply that a building lacks resonance....merely that it lacks an abundance of resonance.   This is a VERY different phenomenon to what many organ-builders now have to face, which is a super abundance of absorbency.   This is why I site Wurlitzer (Compton and Hill, Norman & Beard also) as a builder who overcame the problem of sound absorbent furnishings; and the means to that end are still available to us to-day.   I often quote Leeds Parish Church, here in the UK, which has absolutely no discernable reveberation, but in which the large four-manual organ (largely Arthur Harrison) sounds absolutely spiffing (a good 1930's word!)   So if people must worship in virtual cinemas, with wannabee film stars running the show, then bring back appropriate instruments.   Of course, with digital electronic substitutes, it is possible to bend the laws of physics and produce a very acceptable sound in a cotton-bud warehouse, but that's another story.   Sebastian's other comment about organ-builders knowing how to select scales appropriate to a room, and then voice accordingly, is exactly what I was getting at. From what I have heard in many installations, this is simply not true.   There is a massive difference between much/some/no resonance, or big/medium/small, and the sort of acoustic which is sonically "engineered" to act in particular ways....peculiar ways....ways which might be alien to acoustic instruments.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK   PS: How many Wurlitzers were voiced on site?       --- TubaMagna@aol.com wrote:   > Go to North or East Germany and play some of the > great 18th-century pipe > organs in clinically "dead" rooms. No reverberation, > yet for 250 or more years, > these organs seem to have satisfied. > > Good organbuilders know how to scale pipes and > determine mouth heights and > widths based upon the rooms that confront them.       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com