PipeChat Digest #5075 - Wednesday, January 12, 2005
 
Question about Dorothy Wells
  by "Christy Croxall" <pastorchristy@asburyumc1.org>
Re: Hymn playing, particularly registration
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net>
Re: Oceans of Strings
  by "M Fox" <ophicleide16@direcway.com>
Another Skinner going for restoration
  by "Linda Kay Strouf" <strouf@hope.edu>
Re: Oceans of Strings
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
Re: Oceans of Strings
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
plain text (was RE: Oceans of Strings)
  by "Harry E. Martenas" <harrym@epix.net>
Re: plain text (was RE: Oceans of Strings)
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
gibberish
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
Re: gibberish
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
How to Stay Well
  by <BlueeyedBear@aol.com>
Organ repertoire question
  by "Stephen Best" <stevebest@usadatanet.net>
Hymn playing; particularly registration
  by "Hugh Drogemuller" <hdrogemuller@sympatico.ca>
RE: Hymn playing, particularly registration
  by "Jan Nijhuis" <nijhuis@email.com>
Re: Organ repertoire question
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
 

(back) Subject: Question about Dorothy Wells From: "Christy Croxall" <pastorchristy@asburyumc1.org> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:23:10 -0500   Hello all,   I am trying to find out some information about the composer, arranger, compiler Dorothy Wells. My church is doing a special service (a "Great = Day of Singing") featuring music composed, arranged, authored, etc. by women. = I am including brief biographical comments about each woman whose music we = are using. But I cannot find a scrap of information about her.     If anyone has any insights, please let me know. Her music seems to be published by the Lorenz Corporation (hopefully they'll call me back with some info about her).     Thanks!     Pastor Christy Croxall   Asbury United Methodist Church   200 W. Freedley Street   Norristown, PA 19401      
(back) Subject: Re: Hymn playing, particularly registration From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:23:35 -0600   > I should like to try that one 8' open diapason some day.   In England Henry Willis I built dozens of tiny "Scudamore" organs that consisted only of an Open Diapason with perhaps one or two more stops.   In the USA Hook and Hastings of Boston also built some very small organs. One model was 8 ft. Open Diapason and 8 ft. Dulciana. All that one would ever need for service accompaniment: Open Diapason for the hymns and Dulciana for playing softly during communion.   Actually the most effective small organ I ever played was a little larger than this. This was the 1895 Henry Jones organ in the Parish Church at Huish Episcopi in Somerset. This had the following stoplist:   GREAT   8' Open Diapason 8' Dulciana 4' Gemshorn 2' Piccolo   SWELL   8' Rohr Flute 8' Gamba TC 8' Oboe TC   PEDAL   16' Pedal Pipes (Bourdon)   The Gemshorn and Piccolo are very slender and brilliant, making for quite = an impressive full organ sound with the Open Diapason and Pedal Bourdon. And besides that you have flute tone, reed tone and a choice of strings. What else could one need?   John Speller          
(back) Subject: Re: Oceans of Strings From: "M Fox" <ophicleide16@direcway.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:57:40 -0800     >----- Original Message ----- >From: Randolph Runyon >You are quite right. The OED only gives the pristine meaning, as it = were, of "pristine." However, American usage does >indeed differ = apparently, though I would like to know what definition a 20th- or = 21st-century British dictionary would give.   >According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary,   >Etymology: L pristinus; akin to Latin prior >1 : belonging to the earliest period or state : ORIGINAL <the = hypothetical pristine lunar atmosphere> >2 a : not spoiled, corrupted, or polluted (as by civilization) : PURE = <a pristine forest> b : fresh and clean as or as if new ><pristine = hard-backs in uniform editions to fill our built-in bookcases -- Michiko = Kakutani>   >According to the American Heritage Dictionary:   >1a. Remaining in a pure state; uncorrupted by civilization. b. = Remaining free from dirt or decay; clean: pristine mountain >snow. 2. Of, = relating to, or typical of the earliest time or condition; primitive or = original.   >It's interesting that the American Heritage actually gives preference = to the newer meaning by giving it first.   Merriam-Webster as a matter I suppose of principle gives its definitions = in historical order (which in my opinion is fine for a truly historical = dictionary such as the OED, but is something of a disservice in a = practical dictionary). Other dictionaries sensibly provide definitions in = order of their frequency of usage. MAF      
(back) Subject: Another Skinner going for restoration From: "Linda Kay Strouf" <strouf@hope.edu> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:00:08 -0500   The 4-manual E.M. Skinner, op. 732 at Hope College in Holland, Michigan is = in the process of being packed up to be sent to CT for restoration by the A. Thompson-Allen Company. http://www.thompson-allen.com/   A story about the "organ transplant" ran in the local paper yesterday. http://hollandsentinel.com/stories/010705/loc_010705002.shtml The organ = is scheduled to return in time for our annual Christmas Vespers services in December 2006. The organ's specification can be found here: http://www.hope.edu/academic/music/keyboard/chancelorgan.html and more information about the college's other instruments and Professor of Organ = Huw Lewis can be found here: http://www.hope.edu/academic/music/keyboard/organ.html   We are very excited about this extensive restoration. The organ has = remained virtually untouched since its installation in 1929.   Linda Strouf Assistant Professor of Music, Hope College Minister of Music, Third Reformed Church, Holland, Michigan    
(back) Subject: Re: Oceans of Strings From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:04:40 -0500   What are we to make of all this gibberish? Only very recently we had = this very same problem.   Come on, people, simply use plain text for your messages!   Bob Conway, - whose screen reader cannot make anything of it either!   At 04:57 PM 1/11/2005, you wrote: > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: <mailto:runyonr@muohio.edu>Randolph Runyon > >You are quite right. The OED only gives the pristine meaning, as it > were, of "pristine." However, American usage does >indeed differ > apparently, though I would like to know what definition a 20th- or > 21st-century British dictionary would give. > > >According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, ><?fontfamily><?param Times><?bigger><?bigger> > >Etymology: L pristinus; akin to Latin prior > >1 : belonging to the earliest period or state : > <?/bigger><?/bigger><?color><?param > = 0000,0000,9999><?x-tad-bigger>ORIGINAL<?/x-tad-bigger><?/color><?bigger><?b= igger> > <the hypothetical pristine lunar atmosphere> > >2 a : not spoiled, corrupted, or polluted (as by civilization) : > <?/bigger><?/bigger><?color><?param > = 0000,0000,9999><?x-tad-bigger>PURE<?/x-tad-bigger><?/color><?bigger><?bigge= r> > <a pristine forest> b : fresh and clean as or as if new ><pristine > hard-backs in uniform editions to fill our built-in bookcases -- Michiko =   > Kakutani> > > >According to the American Heritage Dictionary: ><?/bigger><?/bigger><?/fontfamily> ><?fontfamily><?param Times><?color><?param >0000,0000,2020><?bigger><?bigger> = <?/bigger><?/bigger><?/color><?x-tad-bigger> ><?/x-tad-bigger><?color><?param >0000,0000,2020><?bigger><?bigger>>1a.<?/bigger><?/bigger><?/color><?color>= <?param >0000,0000,2020><?bigger><?bigger> Remaining in a pure state; uncorrupted >by civilization. b. Remaining free from dirt or decay; clean: pristine >mountain >snow. 2. Of, relating to, or typical of the earliest time or >condition; primitive or >original.<?/bigger><?/bigger><?/color><?bigger><?bigger> > > >It's interesting that the American Heritage actually gives preference = to > the newer meaning by giving it first. >Merriam-Webster as a matter I suppose of principle gives its definitions >in historical order (which in my opinion is fine for a truly historical >dictionary such as the OED, but is something of a disservice in a >practical dictionary). Other dictionaries sensibly provide definitions in =   >order of their frequency of usage. > >MAF > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Oceans of Strings From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:13:08 EST   According to the New Century Dictionary (published by The College of Knowledge):     Etymology: Latin: pristinus 1: not irritating list members by refusing to change the subject = heading.   2: not wasting time by cloaking etymological ramblings with enticing subject headings about string stops.   3: in a clean state; unsullied; not beating an already dead subject to =   even further levels of death -- which has nothing whatsoever to do with = the subject heading.    
(back) Subject: plain text (was RE: Oceans of Strings) From: "Harry E. Martenas" <harrym@epix.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:20:20 -0500   I try to stay out of the text wars, but Bob - your message came through as HTML, too.   Even if your email program (such as Outlook and Outlook Express) is set to plain text, when you reply to an HTML message...they send your reply in HTML.   You have to select reply, and then format back to plain text.   Really a mess.   /Harry   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of Bob Conway Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 5:05 PM To: PipeChat Subject: Re: Oceans of Strings     What are we to make of all this gibberish? Only very recently we had this very same problem.   Come on, people, simply use plain text for your messages!   Bob Conway, - whose screen reader cannot make anything of it either!      
(back) Subject: Re: plain text (was RE: Oceans of Strings) From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:20:12 -0500   Harry F, Martenus, and others,   I give up! How on earth can I show what is wrong with all this messy = stuff other than by simply re-sending it as it comes to me. I am sorry if this has been mis-understood, - but for those of us who have to resort to = screen readers, or other text readers plain text is all that that it can understand, this is an eternal problem.   People simply are not yet aware that there are limitations to all this fancy stuff, - it would be nice if it could read hand writing, - but it cannot, - only plain text will work.   Cheers,   Bob Conway   At 05:20 PM 1/11/2005, you wrote: >I try to stay out of the text wars, but Bob - your message came through >as HTML, too. > >Even if your email program (such as Outlook and Outlook Express) is set >to plain text, when you reply to an HTML message...they send your reply >in HTML. > >You have to select reply, and then format back to plain text. > >Really a mess. > >/Harry > >-----Original Message----- >From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of >Bob Conway >Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 5:05 PM >To: PipeChat >Subject: Re: Oceans of Strings > > >What are we to make of all this gibberish? Only very recently we had >this very same problem. > >Come on, people, simply use plain text for your messages! > >Bob Conway, >- whose screen reader cannot make anything of it either! > > > >****************************************************************** >"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: gibberish From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:27:45 -0500     On Jan 11, 2005, at 5:04 PM, Bob Conway wrote:   > What are we to make of all this gibberish?=A0 Only very recently=A0 = we=20 > had this very same problem. > > Come on, people, simply use plain text for your messages! > >   Please accept my humblest apology. I promise never to do it again.   Randy Runyon      
(back) Subject: Re: gibberish From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:44:59 -0500   Randy,   Apology accepted, - I hope that others will remember to use plain text as = well!   Bob Conway   At 06:27 PM 1/11/2005, you wrote:   >On Jan 11, 2005, at 5:04 PM, Bob Conway wrote: > >> What are we to make of all this gibberish? Only very recently we had =   >> this very same problem. >> >> Come on, people, simply use plain text for your messages! >> > >Please accept my humblest apology. I promise never to do it again. > >Randy Runyon > > > >****************************************************************** >"Pipe Up and Be Heard!" >PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics >HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org >List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org >Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org >List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> >List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org>      
(back) Subject: How to Stay Well From: <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:47:39 EST   I couldn't help sharing this with other organists...   Miss Beatrice, the church organist, was in her eighties and had never been =   married. She was admired for her sweetness and kindness to all. One = afternoon the pastor came to call on her and she showed him into her quaint sitting = room. She invited him to have a seat while she prepared tea. As he sat facing = her old pump organ, the young minister noticed a cut-glass bowl sitting on top = of it. The bowl was filled with water. In the water floated, of all things, a =   condom! When she returned with tea and scones, they began to chat. The = pastor tried to stifle his curiosity about the bowl of water and its strange floater, = but soon it got the better of him and he could no longer resist. "Miss = Beatrice", he said. "I wonder if you would tell me about this?" pointing to the = bowl."Oh, yes" she replied, "isn't it wonderful?" I was walking through the park a = few months ago and I found this little package on the ground. The directions = said to place it on the organ, keep it wet and that it would prevent the spread = of disease. Do you know I haven't had the flu all winter.  
(back) Subject: Organ repertoire question From: "Stephen Best" <stevebest@usadatanet.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:25:13 -0500   Hi everyone,   A friend of mine who plays at a Unitarian church has asked for suggestions for organ music she might play the week a Hindu swami leads a worship service at her church. Any ideas as to what might work with such an occasion?   Steve Best in Utica, NY    
(back) Subject: Hymn playing; particularly registration From: "Hugh Drogemuller" <hdrogemuller@sympatico.ca> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:22:00 -0500     This "thread" brings to mind two quite different styles of registration that work for a great number of hymn tunes. The first is that practised by =   the organist at the church where I worship fairly frequently. He plays = the complete service other than prelude and postlude on the swell division which has 19 stops.. He has four pistons setup each with increasing power =   so that on the fourth piston the accompaniment is pretty big. It is a chancel installation and the sound is quite noble when it all comes together about 60 feet back in the sanctuary. Another quite different approach by another organist on the same instrument used the incremental adding of the 16', 8' and 4' pitches together from the three manual divisions and topping with 2' pitch. The sound was never as big , aurally, because of no mixtures and solo reeds but was extremely effective in hymn accompaniment. The question I have always asked myself is which registrational scheme did =   the job best. Both had certain attractions for certain tune/ text combinations. On balance I believe the second scheme had the edge because it was less aggressive aurally and it provided concentrated support at the pitch levels where congregational singing takes place. In my view neither organist was wrong; probably it gets down to a matter of (my) taste.   HD    
(back) Subject: RE: Hymn playing, particularly registration From: "Jan Nijhuis" <nijhuis@email.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:04:56 +0800   Unless the purpose is to have the congregation participate and sing; not to= be entertained. This topic can be argued both ways. After an few hours in = church with a lot of music and only one stop, I'd agree that things would g= et boring.   ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dominic Scullion" <dominicscullion@email.com>   > I can only hope that if there is such a 'school' it will be closed down > quickly. >=20 > DS   <snip>   > I was taught to vary registration from one stanza to the next, being > especially sensitive to the text. Is there a "school" of hymn playing th= at > advocates this idea of everything sounding the same? Just curious. >=20 >=20 >=20 > Russ Parker   -- Jan Nijhuis nijhuis@email.com   --=20 ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm    
(back) Subject: Re: Organ repertoire question From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 02:22:08 EST   Hi Steve: A Hindu Swami is leading the service in a Unitarian Church? How.....about...Song of India, followed by Moon light on the Ganges and an improvised Toccata and double fugue using both tunes. Have a tubla and zitar join in for a trio sonata. :))))) You've got to be kidding Ron Severin