PipeChat Digest #5081 - Thursday, January 13, 2005
 
Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
RE: harmonic flutes
  by "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk>
Re: "Praise Songs" as heard by an outside observer
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Some brief thoughts on Praise Music
  by "Nathan Smith" <erzahler@sbcglobal.net>
RE: Richer Content In Praise Songs
  by "J Van Riper" <jvanripe@rochester.rr.com>
Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs
  by "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@adelphia.net>
Re: Some brief thoughts on Praise Music
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: *ADMIN POST* re: Tonal Styles
  by "Brent Johnson" <brentmj@charter.net>
Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs
  by "Shirley" <pnst.shirley@verizon.net>
Re: "Praise Songs" as heard by an outside observer
  by "cc" <belcanto@brainerd.net>
Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
confusion of passions
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
Tonal Styles
  by "Keith Zimmerman" <kwzimmerman@alltel.net>
Bar tunes and church music
  by "Benjamin A Kolodziej" <bkolodzi@smu.edu>
RE: harmonic flutes
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
RE: harmonic flutes
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
"Praise Songs" as heard by those who don't like them
  by "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com>
Re: harmonic flutes... how romantic
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:15:09 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   In fairness to Jonathan, we do light music REALLY BADLY here in the UK, unless it's a big budget pop concert.....but then I recall certain things.   My proud boast is, "I once met the Beatles!"   I thought I'd just get that in..... :)   The Beatles apart, I have listened to all sorts of light music over the years. I've tapped my feet and smiled at pianists, theatre organists, jazz combos, singers, brass bands, big bands, electronic "whizz kids" and even pop concerts.....In a word, I am not "ignorant" of light music and actually enjoy much of it.   In spite of the fact that much contemporary religious music is badly trotted out in UK churches, I have listened to many of the offerings on cable TV which come from the US. They they are....all arms....singing their hearts out, tears everywhere, rocking to and fro, spilling into the aisles and generally having a jolly old time.   I switch off, and five minutes later, what do I remember?   I'll tell you! "Praise Jesus" and "Amen brother."   Only the "Hour of power" seems to strike a familiar chord, and it's not because of the organ and the choir, which appear to be about 40 times bigger than that with which I am familar "at home." If all church music were like this, it would be fantastic....great singers, great instrumentalists, a good orchestra, a good choir....and of course the organ(s) scattered around. It has balance, it has merit and it leaves a good impression.....sort of "Greenhouse Methodism."   Then I recall my school days.....   "Now thank we all our God" "Come down O love divine" "Hills of the North rejoice" "And did those feet" "All people that on Earth do dwell" etc etc "ad infinitum"   I remember them ALL....even the ones we never sing anymore.   So why can't I recall a single hymn, a single song, a single address or even a single item from all the hundreds of US "Praise services" I've put on when "Will and Grace" or "The Simpsons" aren't being broadcast on cable?   Is it me?   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- Jonathan Orwig <giwro@adelphia.net> wrote:   > My main point was (and is) to > IMPLORE you all not to > make blanket statements and judgements about Praise > bands and that genre > of music. That is only taking a slice of the data > and your bad > experiences (those which support your conclusion) > upon which to base > conclusions     __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250  
(back) Subject: RE: harmonic flutes From: "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:38:21 -0000   Ross, my friend. I think we need to have a fund set up, so as we can buy = you hearing aides. Or are you wearing your biretta over your ears. (grin)   Alan     Let me begin a new thread, but one related to comments in recent times:   Why is it that so many people seem to want harmonic flutes everywhere = these days?   In my experience, harmonic flutes often don't blend well with anything at all, and have a habit of sounding rather like honky open metal flutes. In fact it was often the case in English-tradition organs through till the = end of the 1950s that builders would put in a harmonic flute at 4ft to go with the 8ft Hohl Flute or Claribel on the Great. That sort of tone is ghastly for accompanying singing and useless in the classic schools of = composition.   Stopped or chimneyed flutes, on the other hand, have a habit of blending with other flutes, or with mutations, or even with Diapason ranks.   Even if I had 45 to 50 stops, I'd not include a harmonic flute at all as there are so many more useful stops.   Yes, I do know the arguments about Cavaille-Coll, Romantic French music etc., but I'm not convinced as most churches don't have the kind of acoustics Cavaille-Coll worked in, and also Romantic French music may be a blast as an occasional closing voluntary, but cannot be used during the average parish service where accompaniment to singing (be it = congregational or choir), and little "fill-in" bits are mostly required.   Yes, I expect a heap of comments in favour of harmonic flutes: I'd really like to hear reasoned arguments and not just a heap of "I love it" = remarks. Fire away! :-)   Ross     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.11 - Release Date: 12/01/2005    
(back) Subject: Re: "Praise Songs" as heard by an outside observer From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:40:47 EST   Sebastian:   I couldn't have expressed what you wrote any better, and you caught the essence of my post to a "T". The problem here is that they want to dumb down to appeal to the youth. The youth are saying uh ah. That leaves us middle age folks to suffer either the indignity of the experience or just saying uh ah like the youth and just stay home. You and I were growing up with a higher standard of music, with deep roots. I was flabbergasted when I found out the clergy were bored and jumped ship for something more condescending. I have no particular axe to grind except I don't want someone looking down their nose at me because I wish to do it the old way. Forcing me outside my comfort zone is not friendly nor is it COOL. I'm not likely to change, nor should I be expected to. The parish where all this started in new england states, has bought a new pipe organ and thrown out the hippies and Oh by the way, the priest who started all this has left the priesthood. So much for that. He's probably selling shoes, but that is no consolation to me or those like me, or the legacy he left behind.   Ron Severin    
(back) Subject: Some brief thoughts on Praise Music From: "Nathan Smith" <erzahler@sbcglobal.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:47:46 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)   Dear list,=0D =0D I would like to share some thoughts I have on Praise Music, based on a visit to a local Evangelical Free, and Calvary Church.=0D =0D I don't have a problem with Praise Music, even though I am most comfortable with traditional Hymns (particularly Episcopal ones). That being said, I found it difficult to get into the Music at these two Churc= hes and I'll tell you why. The Music was not bad at all, but the lyrics for the hymns were up on a projector screen - with no music. So, by the time the fifth verse rolled around, I finally got the hang of the melody, and= I then felt somewhat comfortable singing, albeit not very loud! With any o= ld hymn book, I am pretty comfortable belting out the Tenor line right off t= he bat. The Praise music, with more lively, syncopated, and humanized rhyth= ms and melodies (and no music), are a bit tougher for a first timer.=0D =0D I can't help but recognize a sense of fellowship when I open up a traditional hymnal at a different Church than my own, when I'm on the roa= d, and sing Hymns along-side another group of believers. Even though I don'= t know any of them, the connection is undeniable.=0D =0D Best,=0D =0D - Nathan
(back) Subject: RE: Richer Content In Praise Songs From: "J Van Riper" <jvanripe@rochester.rr.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:51:10 -0500   I believe that the appeal of "praise music" (for those who find it appealing) is its musical and lyrical simplicity and repetitiveness. = Would it still be "praise music" with richer content and musical interest?   My two cents.   Joy Van Riper Farmington, NY -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of Devon3000@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 7:46 PM To: Pipechat@pipechat.org Subject: Richer Content In Praise Songs     Hi all,   I normally listen to this talk of Praise Band Music, and let it roll by, but Jonathan's recent remarks about the better content of some = contemporary music really upset me. I listen to that one song he quoted about "we believe" about every other week, and want to throw up. The music is so repetitive and the chords so boring, that it doesn't make any difference what the words are to a lot of us, the music doesn't support the text.   Sure, the texts might have improved, but only by a minute notch, in my experience. At my congregation, we have watched the contemporary services gradually decrease in attendance. But the damage has already been done, = and the congregation will be forever divided, musically, for certain. We lose our heritage of great music and hymns, and we're losing our credibility in the long run, as the music sounds more and more like that you hear on the popular radio, and they do it so much better.   We even now call the screen the "Worship Window" at the traditional services. BARF!   One of the rare joys I experience even in the traditional service is in seeing people rediscover the rich hymnody and occasional well-composed anthem, but most of all the discovery of the pipe organ. I've never seen = so many people light up with excitement after a worship experience as when = they sing with an organ, unamplified and free of feedback and ear-splitting noise. We're on our third sound system in two years, and there's still feedback and too much volume attempting to amplify the choir, which is totally unnecessary. What I do also have great fun doing is to hit a hymn intro after an anthem, as the sound dude is always off-guard, and there is = a tremendous screech or low-pitched hum in the sound system from trying to overmodulate the choir sound. Certain pedal notes on the organ just love = to aggravate sound systems.   I really long for the days when worship was mysterious, exalting, silent at times, roof-raising when singing hymns, and when preaching was stimulating and challenging to the core. I know there are still places = like this, but having part or all of the above is sadly a rarity.   Hopefully, a new generation will rediscover "unplugged" sounds of voices and the glory of the King of Instruments anew.   Until then, all we can do is wear earplugs during the contemporary = music, and do everything we can to promote excellence (boy is that a bad word lately) and integrity in our worship experiences. Good wishes to you all.   Devon Hollingsworth DeKalb, Illinois  
(back) Subject: Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs From: "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@adelphia.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:58:12 -0800   Yes, actually I believe it could be so (and is the case now in some contexts)   It used to be that it would take 3 or 4 praise choruses to equal the lyrical content of a hymn... in many instances that is no longer the case   The hallmark factors are (at least to me) the use of instrumentation other = than organ (guitars,drums, etc) lyrics that use modern language, leadership by =   a team of singers.   Many in the contemporary movement have progressed in their faith enough to = want richer lyrics while still retaining a similar musical style to earlier praise choruses.   -J   On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:51:10 -0500, J Van Riper <jvanripe@rochester.rr.com> wrote:   > I believe that the appeal of "praise music" (for those who find it > appealing) is its musical and lyrical simplicity and repetitiveness. > Would > it still be "praise music" with richer content and musical interest? > > My two cents. > > Joy Van Riper > Farmington, NY  
(back) Subject: Re: Some brief thoughts on Praise Music From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 19:08:52 EST   Dear Nathan and Devon:   I can't help but recognize a sense of fellowship when I open up a traditional hymnal at a different Church than my own, when I'm on the = road, and sing Hymns along-side another group of believers. Even though I don't know = any of them, the connection is undeniable. Devon   At my church it's a new set of contempt music each week. Nobody sings but the band of hirelings. Those of us who grew up with the traditional music can only look at each other in total puzzlement. According to Vatican II the people are supposed to sing familiar hymns and the Mass ordinaries and responses. These Liturgists don't seem to realize that it is simply not working. What these people need is for us to take a = vacation for say a month with no money to come in. Then perhaps the elevator will finally reach the top. We need to take back our churches, NOW! This craziness has got to stop. Numbers and no money will scare the hell out of them.   Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re: *ADMIN POST* re: Tonal Styles From: "Brent Johnson" <brentmj@charter.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:17:04 -0600   Aww, Tim... Just when I thought we would get some online drama on this list, you guys snipped it. He hadn't said anything *that* bad, *yet*! Brent Johnson (Who occasionally gets tired of talking about organs all the time!)   ORGANLive - Music of the organ on demand www.organlive.com (Where we never get tired of organs)   Tim Bovard wrote:   > Whoops....!! > > We're so sorry for *that* ugly little excursion, everyone. . . > > Please join me in waving bye-bye to Alex ! ;-) > > Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming . . . :-) :-) > > --Tim > Pipechat Co-Administrator > > > ****************************************************************** > "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: Richer Content In Praise Songs From: "Shirley" <pnst.shirley@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 19:19:45 -0500     Recently, our church held two focus groups. I was in one of the groups, = and just the other day received the reports. Now, understand that one of the = morning services is praise-song-oriented, and we have a Sunday evening worship experience as well which, at the time, was designed for Youth (it's since = been retooled). So there is opportunity to worship in a "modern" atmosphere.   One of the points under the category of worship was: "Hymns are needed = that have an uplifting mood to them; ones that make you happy. A Mighty = Fortress does not make you feel that way, but On Eagle's Wings does give you a good =   feeling."   And this is a Lutheran church.   Oy. We have a lot of education ahead of us.   What HAS happened to worship? Seems like there is a great divide between majesty and warm fuzzies.   --Shirley    
(back) Subject: Re: "Praise Songs" as heard by an outside observer From: "cc" <belcanto@brainerd.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:28:36 -0600   I agree with what you've said. Another thing that bothers me about this type of music is that somtimes when I hear one of the songs, I am fooled into thinking it is a "regular" love song. The lyrics talk about love and yearning in such a way that I think it is about a male-female = relationship. Then later in the song, God or Jesus is mentioned, and , I don't know, I just feel kind of weird--like I've been deceived.   Carla C     ----- Original Message ----- From: <TubaMagna@aol.com>   > What leaves me disappointed (and impatient or offended) by = mainstream > "praise" music is the fact that I find the "songs" indistinguishable = from one > another. At first (and often last) blush, they appear to rely on a = steady, > monotonous beat and simplistic harmonic progressions to affect the listeners' mental > state, but I am consistently left unmoved. When I see four-CD sets of = such > music advertised on television, I see throngs of tens of thousands, eyes closed, > arms outstretched, open palms toward heaven, tears streaming down their > faces, all in response to what to me is passionless, formulaic writing. >    
(back) Subject: Re: Richer Content In Praise Songs From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:03:48 -0500     On Jan 13, 2005, at 4:20 PM, T.Desiree' Hines wrote:   > > If I recall correctly...Ein Fieste Burg was Contemporary for its=20 > time...a bar song=A0I think.   This urban legend is pretty thoroughly debunked at=20 http://www.av1611.org/question/cqluther.html For example (I quote from the site): "After researching every=20 published work dealing with Luther=92s music, Robert Harrell says=20 point-blank: "None of the works dealing with Luther=92s music can trace a single=20 melody of his back to a drinking song." (Robert D. Harrell, Martin=20 Luther, His Music, His Message, p. 34)     Randy Runyon Zion Lutheran Church Hamilton, Ohio Check out the music available at: http://www.evensongmusic.net/  
(back) Subject: confusion of passions From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:14:16 -0500   I agree that this is a problem sometimes in recent music, but hasn't it occasionally been a problem in the past as well? I'm tempted to suggest that some of the texts to Bach's cantatas may cross the same line, but I really do not know the texts that well and I may be crossing a line myself in saying so. But isn't there something in the Pietistic tradition, as I think it is called, that lends itself to that confusion? And in certain old American hymns? For example: "O How I Love Jesus, Because He First Loved Me." That sounds like a teen-aged girl mooning over some guy.   Randy Runyon Zion Lutheran Church Hamilton, Ohio     On Jan 13, 2005, at 7:28 PM, cc wrote:   > I agree with what you've said. Another thing that bothers me about > this > type of music is that somtimes when I hear one of the songs, I am > fooled > into thinking it is a "regular" love song. The lyrics talk about love > and > yearning in such a way that I think it is about a male-female > relationship. > Then later in the song, God or Jesus is mentioned, and , I don't know, > I > just feel kind of weird--like I've been deceived. > > Carla C > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> > >> What leaves me disappointed (and impatient or offended) by >> mainstream >> "praise" music is the fact that I find the "songs" indistinguishable >> from > one >> another. At first (and often last) blush, they appear to rely on a >> steady, >> monotonous beat and simplistic harmonic progressions to affect the > listeners' mental >> state, but I am consistently left unmoved. When I see four-CD sets of >> such >> music advertised on television, I see throngs of tens of thousands, >> eyes > closed, >> arms outstretched, open palms toward heaven, tears streaming down >> their >> faces, all in response to what to me is passionless, formulaic >> writing. >> > > > ****************************************************************** > "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: Tonal Styles From: "Keith Zimmerman" <kwzimmerman@alltel.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:58:20 -0500   Tim,   Thanks. I started to send the message to diyapason until I realized that the little diatribe was on pipechat. How did that happen?   I really would like to help this young man. But one has to want to be helped.   Thanks, Keith    
(back) Subject: Bar tunes and church music From: "Benjamin A Kolodziej" <bkolodzi@smu.edu> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:16:14 -0600   Perhaps this is a minor point, but it relates to the ongoing discussion of =   church music "styles" which does elicit such strong thoughts and feelings from us organists.   Martin Luther did not base any of his hymns on "bar tunes." Rather, in an =   effort to promote new vernacular hymnody he composed (or had others = compose) tunes based on familiar folk *forms* of the day. In this case, musicologically speaking, the BAR form, simply AAB/coda, was a common musical form of the day going back to the medieval German tradition. Many =   of our hymns today retain a similar arrangement. Think how many times one =   has sung the melody of the first phrase ("A") of "Ein Feste Burg" by the time one has finished singing the hymn--8 times! This form was used = because it was familiar and promoted quick learning of hymnody. Luther didn't use =   bar form all the time (see "Von Himmel Hoch"--which might very well have existed earlier as some sort of folk tune), but he certainly never would have employed "beer hall drinking songs" as a type of contrafactum in the Divine Service. I don't think even Luther would say he was the best or = most talented musician (sing the last lines, coda, sections of his hymns for = some real lack of creativity), but he understood that music was "second only to =   theology" (ie., the Word) in importance. I get frustrated when I hear = some people promoting (in my opinion) shoddy church music because somehow = Martin Luther did even worse. . .   Of course, this could get us off on a discussion of the difference between =   folk music styles (which Luther at least sought to employ in the liturgy) and modern day contemporary (ie., "pop") music which I call "commercial." Chant was not folk music--"Ein feste Burg" arguably was. In my opinion, = the high art liturgical music of the Middle Ages has much more in common with the liturgical "folk music" of the Lutheran Reformation than either do = with modern commercial, soloistic "church music."   Sorry--this doesn't relate directly to organs. I play a III/75 Aeolian-Skinner/Schudi at the university where I work and an increasingly-atrocious Eminent at my church. Right now, only piston #7 is =   working on each memory level of the Eminent! Did I hear someone around = here had a replica of the Saint-Sulpice Cavaille-Coll they wanted to donate?!?!?!?!   Benjamin Kolodziej Lord of Life Lutheran Church, Plano, TX, USA Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA    
(back) Subject: RE: harmonic flutes From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:27:11 +1300     >Ross, my friend. I think we need to have a fund set up, so as we can buy you hearing aides. Or are you wearing your biretta over your ears. (grin)   Alan, my very good friend, I wouldn't wear a biretta, no way, ever....   Hearing aides? Or do you mean hearing aids? In any event, I can assure you my ears are very acute indeed in terms of tone (I wish my keyboard techniques were as good, but that will never happen).   And the above is before asking, again, why do people like harmonic flutes these days?   Ross          
(back) Subject: RE: harmonic flutes From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:36:13 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Sebastian suggested that the Harmonic Flute has quite a history.   I don't know that history, but I am aware, of course, of the French Romantic 8ft version, which is surely intended more as a solo voice?   Sorry to disagree with Ross, but the first organ I played was a fine 1880's Harrison & Harrison, which had a 4ft Harmonic Flute on the Great, and a Harmonic Picollo on the Swell.   The 4ft on the Great was not powerful or in the least bit like a Clarabella, and it seemed to blend very nicely with the rest of the Great. This was a far cry from the very full-toned registers of a few years later, which I have found to be less than attractive,   Anyone enlighten us?   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- TheShieling <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> wrote:     > .....why do people > like harmonic flutes > these days?       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250  
(back) Subject: "Praise Songs" as heard by those who don't like them From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@direcway.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:27:42 -0600   WARNING: The following can best be described as 'tongue in cheek'.   I don't think it appropriate to browbeat those of other opinions into accepting mine. But since we are discussing praise music yet again, I will chime in with an opinion like everyone else, because opinions are like . . . well, you get the drift. While everyone has the right to worship as he/she sees fit, I have several problems with the genre.   While I like most music, I don't like any music that isn't well done, and we've all been exposed to substandard praise music, bad tunes, worse lyrics, meaningless repetition that sounded like it belonged more to a bong party than a worship service. That gives all praise music a bad name. But of course, that could apply to gospel music, bluegrass, reggae, rap, or classical organ music.   I agree with Carla that much praise music is indistinguishable from pop/country/rock secular music. I remember in the late 1970s and early 1980s B.J. Thomas, his career on a downslide, decided to revive it by entering the religious music arena. His songs sounded like love songs of the time. Amy Grant made her name doing the same thing - no one could tell from listening to the stuff that it was praising God at all. I think the term used for them back then was "crossover artist". But back then I had a minister of music who sang "Cat's in the Cradle" as a Father's Day solo.   When I was in college, I played for a youth choir, and we did a plethora of contemporary jazz-type music which was well-written, musical, challenging and directly referenced God. We also did some of the simpler praise music of the time. Regarding the latter, I guess I grew out of it.   My theory about those that like praise music, and I mean no disrespect, is that they didn't experience it in the teen years, they never outgrew it, or they want their religious music to mirror their pop music.   As someone famous once said, "To each his own." If I can play organ music badly, then others can prefer praise music.   From someone who is watching for the first time a weird show called 'MXC' on Spike TV, and who used to like South Park - talk about poor taste,   Glenda Sutton gksjd85@direcway.com   P.S. Can anyone tell me the etymology of the term "swan song"? I'm using it in a letter.          
(back) Subject: Re: harmonic flutes... how romantic From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 21:48:49 EST   Harmonic flutes were not "invented" by Cavaille-Coll. They have been around for centuries. Very early examples in what is now Germany.