PipeChat Digest #4944 - Tuesday, November 30, 2004
 
Re: Real Wind Pressures
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re:an advert of interest
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
an advert of interest
  by "Nathan Smith" <erzahler@sbcglobal.net>
Re:an advert of interest
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
St. Anne
  by "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com>
RE: an advert of interest
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: St. Anne
  by <DudelK@aol.com>
Re:an advert of interest
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: St. Anne
  by "Alicia Zeilenga" <azeilenga@theatreorgans.com>
Re: St. Anne
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
Re: St. Anne
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re:an advert of interest
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
Re: St. Anne
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
That "advert" of interest
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Real Wind Pressures From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:42:49 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Having re-read what Sebastian wrote about restorations, I wonder which of these he had in mind?   It seems to be an extrordinarily expensive way of restoring things.   So far as I am aware, Schnitger did not use nicking, whereas other builder did; but always sparingly. Low cut-ups appear to be very common in the German/Dutch areas, and indeed, as late as 1857, Schulze was using open foot voicing, no-nicking, large scales of around 6.3" at CC, 2/7ths mouths, 1:5 cut ups and wind-pressures around 2.5" to 2.75".   I suspect that this was the way they did it, as a matter of course. Further, ALL the early romantic organ-builders in Germany and Holland, would have spent much of their time repairing much older instruments, so they would have been familiar with the earlier voicing techniques.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- TubaMagna@aol.com wrote:   > Plenty of organs were "restored" badly. Part of > what went on was the > miscalculation of modern inches from centuries-old > measurements without making (or > knowing) the appropriate adjustments. I wonder how > many pipes were cut apart > at the languids to drop the cutups, with the > languids shaved down to fit the > butchered pipes. Hence, low wind, low cutups, no > nicking -- but was somebody > covering their tracks?       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail  
(back) Subject: Re:an advert of interest From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:22:16 EST   >Nathan, > >I suggest you go and hear one in person. Then you may know better your >reaction to the ad. >As far as I know, there is only one installed, the one in Trinity = Church, >Wall Street, NYC. Be brave, go down to lower Manhatten, and see and = hear >the installed instrument. > >You will definitely have a reaction to it. > >I know, I did. > >Arie V. Well I'll just open my big mouth here... I am a fan of pipes obviously, BUT, after hearing the demo CD, I had to go = hear the Trinity Wall Street organ in person. While the CD is fantastic, = the organ in person will knock your socks off. It has brought digital organs = to a whole new level. The nuances of the speech that are on the CD, as well = as all the "Chamber Sounds", are much more obvious in person, and it gives = the whole organ a more "lifelike" sound. Trinity has never called this organ a permanent organ and they've been upfront in their literature that the organ IS digital. They just wanted = something other than an "off the rack" model instrument...and they got it! It started when I sat down at a real pipe organ company built organ = console (two of them, actually) and started up the electronic blowers and heard = the sampled reservoirs fill with air. I knew I was in for a treat from that = point forward, and I wasn't disappointed. The nice thing about the samples in these two organs (Chancel and Gallery) are while they have the same specifications, they have different sets of samples, so a creative player = can really have a ball bouncing from the front to the back washing the room in a blaze of =   sound. Both consoles control both organs, and either console can play = either organ or both at once. Another note about the samples...they are not manipulated through filters = to change chiff, or scaling, or amount of air, or attack/release characteristics, etc. What was sampled is what you get. The only thing = that is adjusted is volume balance so the choruses are level. So a stop is basically = "true" to form, it's not been altered in any way. Yes, the organ is a digital, but the organ is still an amazing = instrument. In person the organ is much better than off the church's webcasts, so DO = NOT judge what you hear off the Trinity website. The organ in person is warm = and rich, full and majestic. It brings custom digital technology to a whole = new level. Can you tell I was impressed? Plus, the guys at M&O are great fun and wonderful hosts. Monty Bennett  
(back) Subject: an advert of interest From: "Nathan Smith" <erzahler@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:07:04 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)   Hello list.=0D Certainly. I was disappointed with the advertisement as such. As a young = man who, along with his contemporaries, hopes someday to inherit a viable fie= ld of pipe organ maintenance, and perhaps build them as well, I am concerned= by the sort of tone that this advert sets. It seems to me that in spirit, it calls for the eventual extermination of the pipe organ. It tweaked me because it has also knocked the field of service that I love and work in: maintenance. I have always felt that until now, other than the fair competition for contracts, builders have managed to peacefully coexist. I= do not recall seeing many instances where organ builders actively go out to knock each other in advertising, with the exception of some Wicks adverts= =2E=20 It is a practice that may make business sense, but also belittles not onl= y the dignity of the art, but the contributions of hundreds of builders and maintenance people. I would hate to see the tone of organ building resemb= le something of our last Presidential race, always slamming each other with half-truths. I'm not gunning for electronics, but should I have to?=0D Besides, we're only in it for the money, right? (C;=0D Best,=0D Nathan
(back) Subject: Re:an advert of interest From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:27:26 -0500   Well, I just listened to a few bits and pieces of the CD and wouldn't have =   known it was electronic if I hadn't been told. It sounds pretty good. I have a few questions, of course... how's the accoustic? Anything sounds good in a good accoustic. How much did (or would) it cost? Of course, = its amazing what you can do with enough speakers, enough channels, and = whatever else you need to really make it work. But then we start encroaching on = the cost of a pipe organ. Is this the day when the electronic finally is the same as the real thing? I have to be a little skeptical, as how many = times have we heard that before? However, if time (i.e. more installations) = prove that it is indistiguishable, or nearly so, from the real thing, even by organists, and the cost is significantly less than the real thing, then = next time I need an organ, I'll seriously consider one! I've never considered = an electronic to be a viable option for anything but a temporary organ to replace a pipe organ that's in the shop, but I feel that way only because = of how they sound, so if the sound problem can be eliminated, I'll be happy = to change my mind.   The reason I say it would have to cost a lot less than a pipe organ is = that I still say the pipe organ will last longer, so the electronic would have = to cost less to make up for the cost of earlier replacement. The pipe organ = is also more trouble free, I think, in the long run. I've esperienced a lot = of 40 year old pipe organs that are essentially trouble free (others that are =   not, but usually these were low quality from the start). Not so on any 40 =   year-old electronic I've experienced yet. But like I say... if the = initial cost was low enough to balance this, and it sounds like a pipe organ, I'll =   take one.   Andy     On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:22:16 EST, RMB10 wrote > >Nathan, > > > >I suggest you go and hear one in person. Then you may know better = your > >reaction to the ad. > >As far as I know, there is only one installed, the one in Trinity Church, > >Wall Street, NYC. Be brave, go down to lower Manhatten, and see and hear > >the installed instrument. > > > >You will definitely have a reaction to it. > > > >I know, I did. > > > >Arie V. >     A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service PO Box 111 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)578-3936 Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com  
(back) Subject: St. Anne From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:29:13 -0600   Was the choral/hymn tune St. Anne or its similitude in existence at the time that Bach wrote the 'St. Anne' Fugue? I haven't had time to research this issue, but assumed that somewhere, sometime, this has been discussed and someone knows the answer.   Thanks.   Glenda Sutton gksjd85@direcway.com          
(back) Subject: RE: an advert of interest From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 02:46:46 +1300     >It sounds pretty good. I have a few questions, of course... how's the accoustic? Anything sounds good in a good accoustic. How much did (or would) it cost?   The cost is a very important factor. I've not heard the instrument, in person or on record or any other way, so could someone please post the = cost.     >I've experienced a lot of 40 year old pipe organs that are essentially trouble free   I would be extremely cross with a pipe organ that had any significant troubles of any kind after only 40 years. I've played many instruments = that are upwards of 120 years old and remain essentially trouble free. I've played many instruments with very ho-hum electric actions lasting = virtually trouble-free for more than 45 years.   Ross    
(back) Subject: Re: St. Anne From: <DudelK@aol.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:51:11 EST   In the Hymnal 1982 it is attributed to William Croft, 1678-1727. I don't = have the date of the St. Anne fugue, but it would seem possible since Bach died = in 1750.  
(back) Subject: Re:an advert of interest From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:32:50 -0500   Andy,   I will answer your message in order.   Trinity Church, Wall Street has good acoustics. In some ways almost ideal. It does not have a Cathedral type reverb, but is live acoustically. Would be a very nice spot for choral works to be performed in. The sound in the room is very clear. It must also be said, the = church sanctuary is not huge volume wise, but it does have good length, I reckon the front wall to the back wall to be maybe 120' in length. There are = many much larger churches around.   This instrument I have been told was at the very high end of the = electronic organ price range. For what they paid they got 2 pipe organ grade consoles, tone generators, 74 channels of audio. It is in essence a dual 85 stop instrument, so it actually has 170 stops.   Proof of the pudding is in the taste. I think more than a few folks who have heard this instrument have had to revise their thinking about what is =   possible with electronic technology. If you really want to know how good it is, go and hear it in person.   As to long term reliability, and durability, I suppose only time will tell. Most electronic organs these days are much more reliable than they were 20 or 30 years ago. Most often it is mechanical things that are the problem with them. While electronic problems do happen, they are much less so now. Of course, they do not need tuning periodically, like pipe organs. So maintenance and service costs on an electronic organ should be =   much lower than with pipes.   But even so, I think there will always be a market for pipe organs, good ones anyway. I'm not sure about mediocre pipe organs though.   Arie V.             At 08:27 AM 2004-11-30 -0500, you wrote: >Well, I just listened to a few bits and pieces of the CD and wouldn't = have >known it was electronic if I hadn't been told. It sounds pretty good. I >have a few questions, of course... how's the accoustic? Anything sounds >good in a good accoustic. How much did (or would) it cost? Of course, = its >amazing what you can do with enough speakers, enough channels, and = whatever >else you need to really make it work. But then we start encroaching on = the >cost of a pipe organ. Is this the day when the electronic finally is the >same as the real thing? I have to be a little skeptical, as how many = times >have we heard that before? However, if time (i.e. more installations) = prove >that it is indistiguishable, or nearly so, from the real thing, even by >organists, and the cost is significantly less than the real thing, then = next >time I need an organ, I'll seriously consider one! I've never considered = an >electronic to be a viable option for anything but a temporary organ to >replace a pipe organ that's in the shop, but I feel that way only because = of >how they sound, so if the sound problem can be eliminated, I'll be happy = to >change my mind. > >The reason I say it would have to cost a lot less than a pipe organ is = that >I still say the pipe organ will last longer, so the electronic would have = to >cost less to make up for the cost of earlier replacement. The pipe organ = is >also more trouble free, I think, in the long run. I've esperienced a lot = of >40 year old pipe organs that are essentially trouble free (others that = are >not, but usually these were low quality from the start). Not so on any = 40 >year-old electronic I've experienced yet. But like I say... if the = initial >cost was low enough to balance this, and it sounds like a pipe organ, = I'll >take one. > >Andy > > > > >Nathan, > > > > > >I suggest you go and hear one in person. Then you may know better = your > > >reaction to the ad.As far as I know, there is only one installed, the =   > one in Trinity >Church, Wall Street, NYC. Be brave, go down to lower Manhatten, and see = and >hear the installed instrument. You will definitely have a reaction to it. > > > > > >I know, I did. > > > > > >Arie V. > > > > >A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service >PO Box 111 >Burlington, VT 05402      
(back) Subject: Re: St. Anne From: "Alicia Zeilenga" <azeilenga@theatreorgans.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:51:10 -0600   Or was it just coincidence. The first "fugue" from Buxtehude's Praeludium in E (BuxWV 141) has a similar subject. I think it is more likely that Bach would have copied Buxtehude than the hymntune, but I'm not a musicologist. Alicia Zeilenga     -----Original Message----- From: DudelK@aol.com To: pipechat@pipechat.org Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:51:11 EST Subject: Re: St. Anne   > In the Hymnal 1982 it is attributed to William Croft, 1678-1727. I > don't have > the date of the St. Anne fugue, but it would seem possible since Bach > died in > 1750. >      
(back) Subject: Re: St. Anne From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:03:01 -0600   Glenda wrote:   >Was the choral/hymn tune St. Anne or its similitude in existence at the >time that Bach wrote the 'St. Anne' Fugue? I haven't had time to >research this issue, but assumed that somewhere, sometime, this has been >discussed and someone knows the answer. > The tune "St. Anne" may have been extant when Bach composed the Fugue on the same theme, but both were predated by a "Ricercar del sesto tono" composed by Sperindio Bertoldo, an organist who lived in Padua from c 1530 to 1570. Further, the St. Anne theme occurs in one of the Buxtehude Praeludia in F, where it is the end of the subject of the theme of the fugue (m. 45; p. 87 in the Hedar edition). I've found it in several other places as well, though I have misplaced the list I once had.   ns  
(back) Subject: Re: St. Anne From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:25:26 EST   Here's an interesting Saint. She was the mother of the Virgin Mary and Jesus' Grand Mother. In statues she is always shown with a child, Mary at her side. Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re:an advert of interest From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:46:12 -0500   > As to long term reliability, and durability, I suppose only time > will tell. Most electronic organs these days are much more reliable > than they were 20 or 30 years ago. Most often it is mechanical > things that are the problem with them. While electronic problems do > happen, they are much less so now. Of course, they do not need > tuning periodically, like pipe organs. So maintenance and service > costs on an electronic organ should be much lower than with pipes. >   I appreciate and agree with most of your post, including the part I quote here. I only want to mention that while it is true that pipe organs = require more scheduled maintenance (tuning), I think the cost of this is often exaggerated. The largest organ I've been involved in maintaining is 69 ranks (including large antiphonal). It gets tuned once a year, in about a =   day if a thorough tuning is needed. (Smaller organs, naturally, requiring =   significantly less time). Occasionally it gets touched up (reeds mainly) for other special occasions. It is nothing astronomical. It has had the occasional cipher, but fairly rarely, and its always easy to remedy. Its about 6 years old now, going on 100. So while I agree that pipe organs require tuning and this needs to figured into the equation, I think it = still works out that the electronic must have a significantly lower initial cost =   to come out even with the pipe organ in the end. Pipe organs last an awfully long time! Most instances I know of where significant amounts of money were spent on a pipe organ, it has been a case where a different = sound was desired, not because it wore out. In fact, even many restorations = turn into this. How often do we hear of an organ that needed a restoration, = that might have been quite straightforward, but then the organist realizes, = aha, while we're at it we can change this! And that! And that leads to more changes, and soon the cost becomes significant. I'm not saying the = practice is bad... only that it should be taken into account.   I do have a bias toward pipes and admit its more than musical. There's something about it... sort of like how I long to have lived in the steam era, but know its an era long gone. Gone because its no longer cost effective. I think the pipe organ remains with us not only because it sounds better, but has remained cost effective (this is especially true = for churches that already have a good pipe organ and choose to maintain it, rather than change or replace it to fit whatever current tonal tastes dictate, but is also true of new organs as long as they plan to keep it = for a long time). If these reasons go away, I'll be sad to see the pipe organ =   go, but realize that it will happen (again, there's that big "if" at the beginning of this sentence!). But I think its safe to say that if it happens, a similar phenomenon will happen as with the railroads... the "romance" of it will be lost. Once that happens, its only a matter of =   time before the music is lost too. I think this is why we pipe people = cling so strongly... we just don't want this to happen. Its more than just = what's more cost effective. Its the very future of church music. Even if electronic organs sound exactly like pipe organs, there's still something significant about that fact that its no longer an accoustic instrument. (Accoustic guitars and other accoustic instruments are still a big deal!)   Gosh, what a depressing post. Sorry about that! :) Take heart fellow = pipe people... if pipe organs are superior, as we claim, they'll remain on = their own merit, though likely in smaller numbers all the time. If fact, even = if they only remain superior, but not cost effective, there will still be = some market, because of being in the category of art (unlike railroads, where cost effectiveness is the only real deciding issue).   Andy   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: St. Anne From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:49:41 -0600   A modern edition of the work I wrote of   > "Ricercar del sesto tono" composed by Sperindio Bertoldo, an organist > who lived in Padua from c 1530 to 1570.   is to be found in Volume 16 of the Faber Early Organ Series, edited by James Dalton, and published by Faber and FAber in 1988.   ns  
(back) Subject: That "advert" of interest From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:40:05 EST   In an age in which Newspeak disposes of syllables to save precious = time and keystrokes, and all crimes and life crises get solved in 22 minutes punctuated by eight minutes of commercial "adverts," it is no wonder that = easy solutions are voraciously sought. Regarding the "advert" in question, we must separate the tactics of = the "advert" from our judgment of the instrument. Are we objecting more to the =   content of the "advert" or to the threat of the device being "adverted"? Anybody who has sat down and played the Trinity instrument for a few hours on more than one occasion, and then listened to it in the room while = others have played, and heard it with choral responses and congregational = singing, will agree that its sound is more proximate than any other artificially generated organ simulation to date. As a pipe organ builder who has spent = the past three months hearing and playing a variety of pipeless simulations, I feel =   comfortable in saying that although one certainly is not "fooled," for = many reasons, it is truly a suggestive experience, and far ahead of any of the = competition within the sphere of electronically reproduced organ sounds. I am also friends with the gentlemen who created the "advert," and = must say that although the "advert" has some wording that confuses me = (especially in Section "2," because I do not know what conclusions to draw in comparison = to the breakdown of Section "1"), they speak from experience, and were = careful about their wording. It DOES paint with a very broad and extremely safe brush (U$50,000 to U$1,000,000 for pipe organ prices). Those who are determined never to have = a pipe organ will latch on to the million-dollar figure; those who really DO want = a pipe organ will get out of their chair and do some research, and will get = the pipe organ they want, having learned what real pipe organ prices are like. =   There are very few million-dollar church organs in the world, and we all = know it. On every organ-related chat-list, with the regularity of clockwork, armchair alarmist omniscients quote absurd dollars-per-rank prices with = absolutely no experience of any kind, and frighten off plenty of musicians. The = chorus of conspiracy theorists who insist that there IS some kind of standard price = per rank cause even more trouble. If you want a pipe organ, get at least three =   bids from real organbuilders. Not your piano teacher, not the "tech," = unless they happen to be an organbuilder, and not Lurleen Gudger, who has been = organist at Trinity Unitarian ever since you can remember and helped design the = 1904 Estey in her church. The "advert" is correct about the fact that pipe organs, like all fine =   things, require maintenance. The "advert" is correct, in that pipe organs = are crafted as individual works of art, not assembled from manufactured = components. The "advert" is correct about the bureaucratic intricacies of using pipe organs in concert halls. They did us the service of NOT mentioning the = attendance figures for pipe organ concerts...! Then we would be forced to investigate = just WHY attendance is so paltry, and THAT always seems SO painful. The "advert" lists options, admonishes the reader to "be sure to buy = the right one for you!" and lists the products offered. These are very costly products, mind you, and no price comparison was given. They are relying on =   organists, who demand and require bigger, better, larger, louder, to = discuss "'equivalent' ranks" and to insist upon 115 ranks for their 200-seat = church. How many organists will commission an appropriately sized simulation for their = space? How many 18- or 35-"rank" custom digital instruments have been = commissioned in the past twenty years? Don't blame the "advert." Don't even blame the advertisement or the marketing agency that did the job for which they were hired. You are being = OFFERED their product. You are NOT being forced to purchase it. THAT is something = for which YOU must take responsibility. Will you?   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/   ..