PipeChat Digest #5436 - Saturday, July 2, 2005 Re: Why New Organ at Bryn Mawr Presb.? by <DarrylbytheSea@aol.com> Re: Why New Organ at Bryn Mawr Presb.? by <Seedlac@aol.com> How disturbing by "Nathan Smith" <email@example.com> Re: How disturbing by "Colin Mitchell" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: Calvar and St Goerges Organs in NYC by <TubaMagna@aol.com> Re: Pardon ME!--thats CalvaRY and St GEOrges! by <TubaMagna@aol.com> Re: Why a new pipe organ at Bryn Mawr Presbyterian? by <TubaMagna@aol.com> Re: AGO RCYO Region I results by "Colin Mitchell" <email@example.com> Re: PipeChat ... rank service music ;-) by "Desiree'" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Conference Center Organ, Salt Lake by "Randy Terry" <email@example.com> Re: How disturbing by "Jim McFarland" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Re: Sampling? by "Jerry Richer" <jerry@ChirpingBat.Com> Re: the instrument is not to be sampled without the builder's express con by "Ned Benson" <email@example.com> Classical pianists [off-topic but relevant] by "Charlie Lester" <firstname.lastname@example.org> RE: Why New Organ at Bryn Mawr Presb.? by "Ned Benson" <email@example.com>
(back) Subject: Re: Why New Organ at Bryn Mawr Presb.? From: <DarrylbytheSea@aol.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 06:50:29 EDT In a message dated 7/2/2005 12:07:57 A.M. Central Standard Time, firstname.lastname@example.org writes: http://www.bmpc.org/finearts/ I don't know if it has been mentioned in any of the postings for this = organ, but Dana Kirkegaard was the acoustician on this project, and was a major reason so much renovation was done to the sanctuary as far as heating, = cooling, etc. Darryl by the Sea Nashville, TN
(back) Subject: Re: Why New Organ at Bryn Mawr Presb.? From: <Seedlac@aol.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 07:58:16 EDT Yes, the claim that the new tracker organ will be the last word in organ purchase for 100 years was just a lot of sales bluster. I remember when = Bryn Mawr's 1920s Welte was blasted as being old, dull and worse of all = unreliable due to that "oh so out of fashion" EP action. Of course they kept the 32' Open = wood stop. It is not difficult to tally up the number of tracker organs that have = been altered or replace after twenty short years of use. Many of them by not = name builders. Those of us in the world of pipe organs do no service to the art by = blasting one style or action type over the other. Each has its good and bad points. = Those hundred year old trackers that were used to help sell the new ones = are in fact quirks. SO many of their brothers and sisters were replaced when they = were 20 or 30 years old. Why do they seem to keep going? Many factors is my = guess. Steve Baltimore
(back) Subject: How disturbing From: "Nathan Smith" <email@example.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 08:36:27 -0400 > > It just goes to show that pipe-organ builders are > under pressure, and that can only be a good thing in a > free-market society. You're right, we're under pressure from companies that steal the sounds of our pipes and market it at 1/3 the price for the benefit of those who don't care how the sound is made, whether it be pipes, milking machine, etc... > > It also demonstrates desperation, when organ-builders > have to close ranks (so to speak) and talk about > points of law, which frankly, they couldn't afford to > prosecute for fear of losing a case. > I'd love for the AIO to team up and establish some precedent in this area, they have my donation if they want to do it! > It's a far-cry from the days of Cavaille-Coll, when > help and advice was freely given from one to the > other. That would be like a slide-rule master giving advice to a computer programmer; we do give free advice, to other organ-builders. > > Perhaps organ-builders to-day live in a meaner, more > mercenary world....or maybe I've got it wrong, and > they just have an over-inflated view of their own > intellectual property. Tell that to Schulze, Father Willis, Harrison, Skinner, Beckerath, Holtkamp, Fisk, or any builder alive today. > > I don't notice Yamaha or Steinway complaining about > digital pianos, or discussing lawsuits and "theft" of > intellectual property. They probably have better > things to do, such as making better instruments than > their competitors, and selling a few on the way. On even the most infantile and non-intellectual level, there is a marked difference between copying a piano and a pipe organ. > If any organ-builder tried to impose any clauses at > all, I'd soon be telling him what to do with his > product! And you would be without a fine product of real artistry. If a billionaire left a large endowment, say $100,000,000 to maintain the Church toilet, and the Church took the money and bought a new 8-manual allen with it, you'd better believe the estate could sue the pants off of that Church. I would stipulate a lot of different things... 1 - The organ is not to be modified, tonally or otherwise, ever, without permission of the builder 2 - If the Church decides to go ahead and put solid state in the organ anyway, it must be connected to a lightning rod 3 - Prior to the signing of the contract, the organist must audition for the instrument. The audition will be graded A, B, C, D, or F according to my standards 4 - An F performance will void any prospect of getting a new pipe organ from my company until a year has passed and the next audition takes place 5 - A D performance will allow the Church to purchase a 2-manual instrument, with one reed, an Oboe, in the Swell, and a Resultant 32 6 - A C performance will get the Church a larger 2-manual, with full reed choruses and solo reeds in two enclosed divisions and a 10 2/3 pedal quint 7 - A B performance will be rewarded with a complete 3-manual instrument, with 2 full length 32's and a 10 2/3 pedal quint 8 - An A performance will award the Church with the finest 4-manual instrument, complete with Choir, Great, Swell, Solo, Echo, Positiv, and Petit Choeur divisions and 32's 9 - The organist must sign a 30-year contract with the Church, or until retirement age, whichever comes first. 10 - The organist will not keep any junk, excess papers, paper clips, gloppy messes, pencils, pens, markers, hymnals, old chewing gum, or other garbage on the console* 11 - The organist must wash his/her hands prior to playing the instrument 12 - The organ must not be sampled, any hideous digital console containing samples of the organ will be taken out and blown up on live TV * - a special built-in container will be provided for the tuner's helper, in which the organist may include Creme Savers, butterscotch, truffles, or other miniature candies Best, Nathan
(back) Subject: Re: How disturbing From: "Colin Mitchell" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 06:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Hello, I'm sorry, but there is no difference! OK...substitute Full Orchestra for Piano....what does it matter? The simple truth is, that digital organs possibly have a financial advantage, they are more or less good enough for most requirements and they are not made for the most discerning of consumers, unless they are used as home practise instruments. The very best are very good, but they are also very expensive.......Mr Willis learned that a long time ago, and were he alive to-day, he would probably have been the only organ-builder to be in a position to sue anyone!! (And he was devious enough to do it!!) People really should wake up and smell the coffee.....the market is contracting on all fronts. Traditional church music is under threat from those who think they can be "More happening ... more ALIVE....shout Alleluya...Praise the Lord....pass the plate....Credit Cards accepted!!!" The decline in the fortunes of these traditional places of worship, means that proper organs are now beyond reach NEW. The hideously wealth benefactors, who once supported great social and religious causes, now live far away on secluded islands or on remote estates with high walls, and invest their money in Vietnam. As the hymn goes, "Change and decay, around me all I see." For the digital makers, it's "There is a land of milk and honey." For the wealthy, "There is a happy land, far, far away." In the world of markets, supply and demand, changing fortunes and changing fashions....nothing stays still. Organ builders are no more a protected species than are garment makers I'm afraid, and some will fall by the wayside as the market contracts. As I said before, even if anyone could sue anyone else, (which I doubt), what is the point? It's just sour grapes and a self-destructive side-issue, when there are tens of thousands of wonderful historic organs of all types waiting to be sampled for free. Life can be a bitch....but somehow, we muddle through. Our preferred choice is sometimes no longer an option. Regards, Colin Mitchell UK PS: A slide rule can calculate fractions of a 3rd....a dumb computer can't!! --- Nathan Smith <email@example.com> wrote: > You're right, we're under pressure from companies > that steal the sounds > of our pipes.... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
(back) Subject: Re: Calvar and St Goerges Organs in NYC From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 09:52:56 EDT The Moller at Saint George's remains tonally unaltered, or at least it = did up through its recent refurbishment. As has been discussed many times = on the two major American organ chat lists, the instrument is generally felt to = be a musical failure. As an example of what Ernest White believed was a forward = step in organbuilding, it is certainly the largest and best preserved of = its kind. The instrument was lifted out of obscurity by E.G.P. Biggs' recordings = there. The sound was heavily engineered in the studio, and I believe the = venue was chosen for its acoustic, as well as for the fact that its widely = scattered divisions would make it a good "sell" for the nascent quadrophonic = technology that CBS was pushing. It was the American version of his Freiburg album. If I am not mistaken, the height of the nave vaulting at Saint = George's actually exceeds that of the city's Catholic cathedral; acoustics to not = make a bad organ great, they simply make its sound last a bit longer. The Calvary organ has been a disaster for many decades. It is a good example of what happens when an organ is serially altered by organists, = organ "techs," enthusiasts, and the like, cobbled together with parts raided = from other organs with no master tonal plan. Yet another organ-person has been assigned to look after the organ, = and I believe the parish(es?) are still in search of another organist. The pipe organ situation at Calvary is truly tragic, but they seem to want that as = the pattern is repeated. Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/ ..
(back) Subject: Re: Pardon ME!--thats CalvaRY and St GEOrges! From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 09:55:28 EDT Dr. Lind: I assure you that I change my underdirds daily, whether I need to or not.
(back) Subject: Re: Why a new pipe organ at Bryn Mawr Presbyterian? From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 09:59:52 EDT I believe they had been terribly dissatisfied with the astringent = scaling that produced thin and spikey sound, as well as the clinically dead = acoustic of the room. From what little information has come my way, there has been = an acoustical renovation of the room as well as the addition of a more appropriately scaled instrument. Adult pipe scales are required in dead rooms, and most American = auditoria ARE acoustically annihilating. I have not received my issue of the journal yet, but it may be = revealed in the detailed article that one assumes accompanies the cover photograph. Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/ ..
(back) Subject: Re: AGO RCYO Region I results From: "Colin Mitchell" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 07:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Hello, Congratulations to Chris Howeter. I had to smile at the thought of all the organists tramping off to a Wurlitzer party.....what a great idea! I thought of the Brit equivalent and shuddered slightly. It would probably be a glass of sherry, toasted crumpets (cold) and pleasant conversation in whispers, lest one failed to hear the Virginalist, up in the Minstrel's Gallery of some dusty old Elizbethan college hall. Even the praise would have been muted...... "It was a solid effort" or "I thought your performance quite interesting" or some great opening line of conversation such as, "I always prefer the re-working of the fugal exposition in Opus 451/b, of which I'm sure you are aware." When Stephen Roberts writes, ...."he played a fine program which included a big fantasy on themes from Bizet's opera "Carmen" and also a medley of tunes by CT composer, Leroy Anderson. His command of that Wurlitzer was nothing short of astounding!"...I know he means it. Good for him! Regards, Colin Mitchell UK --- Stephen Roberts <email@example.com> wrote: > Last Saturday, June 25 the finals of the Region I > AGO Regional Competition for Young Organists was > held at Center Church in Hartford. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat ... rank service music ;-) From: "Desiree'" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 08:40:48 -0700 (PDT) It's definately good to say that some publishing companies of "service" = music are not today, what they were years back as far as quality. Many of = them are publishing music that bivocational organists with little training = would find accessible. I was told this by a publishing company editorial = department. (and of course its obvious thats wht they are doing) When one thinks of "Service" Music there can be a look at the better of = what is published. One does not have to say that someone may like or will = play "Eagles Wings" variations. ( I would never hope to have them in my = library.. Im sure they have been written) But, IMHO there are indeed many = fine pieces and arrangements out there by living composers that have been = written for service use. Unless one learns just about the entire works of = one particular organ composer, and a few of another, the only other option = is being a good improviser. Another thing...I would not look at the books a publisher lists s the = latest "best picks" in a TAO ad to judge the quality of all of their = music. One should take into consideration that the abilities of the ones = who are making it the "best seller". Is it someone with a masters degree = from Oberlin, or someone who studied organ as a secondary or minor in = college? For example, some people judge the quality of Melbay/Mayhew = publications based upon their "Made Playable" pieces. Thats not the = foundation on which one should base judgement of their output as medeocre. = As said above, some companied are publishing these things for those of = lesser abilities. These collections are in addition to collections with more substantive = writing, for those who have greater abilities. Even Morning Star and = Concordia have lables for their music as "E, ME, M, MD, D" for the level = of difficult. For example, many organist love to play the Manz CWM Rhondda = setting. I think they catagorize it as MD because it is a fairly respected = arrangement. Organists who play this might say that Morning Star has = excellent quality music for use as voluntaries for the church service. And = organist who has only seen the "E and ME" collections of that company may = not be interested in any further output they may have. TDH __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
(back) Subject: Conference Center Organ, Salt Lake From: "Randy Terry" <email@example.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 08:44:38 -0700 I listened to PIPEDREAMS with the Salt Lake organs last night after = someone mentioned there was a program up. I have to say that for me, you can't compare the Tabernacle instrument = with the Conference Center one, for the Tabernacle is far more successful. I found the reed ensembles in the Conference Center to sound electronic, = but wonder if the microphone placement played a part in that. The acoustic doesn't seem as bad as I imagined - there is at least a tiny bit of acoustic, unless it is engineered in the recording. However, I just was not fond of the Conference Center organ as presented = on that recording. I always like the Schoenstien Pizzicato Bass stop though! +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Randy Terry Music Minister The Episcopal Church of St. Peter Redwood City, California
(back) Subject: Re: How disturbing From: "Jim McFarland" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 12:18:25 -0400 On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 06:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Colin Mitchell <email@example.com> writes: > The simple truth is, that digital organs possibly have > a financial advantage, they are more or less good > enough for most requirements and they are not made for > the most discerning of consumers, unless they are used > as home practise instruments. There is another way of looking at this. Anywhere that free trade is practiced, you will find that manufacturers adapt with the market. Consider modern harpsichord making. Back in the 70's and 80's there was a glut of builders, and the quality and price of an instrument ran the gamut. By the mid 90's the market had achieved a certain saturation level. The outcome was the survival of only the best makers. There will always be a market for their product. The rest of the market is loaded with digital keyboards. Pipeorgan building has been in a state of "a glut of builders" for some time now. The situation is analogous to the harpsichord story. I believe that the digital instrument will put the poor quality builders out of business, leaving only the best in operation. I really don't think this is a bad thing. Jim
(back) Subject: Re: Sampling? From: "Jerry Richer" <jerry@ChirpingBat.Com> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 12:38:45 -0400 Gordon! Sampleing in this context, very superficially is the process of recording the sound of a pipe organ to make that same sound available = on an electronic organ. When the electronic organ is played we hear the = sound of the pipe organ that originally made the sound. Chirp|Chirp|Chirp: It's the Bat, Chirping Bat .Com
(back) Subject: Re: the instrument is not to be sampled without the builder's express consent From: "Ned Benson" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 10:20:02 -0700 From what I've read most pipes sampled are from instruments built by guys long long dead. There are enough of them - historic, valuable, tonally superb, etc. - why bother with anything less? So who's to sue? -- Dr. Ned H. Benson St. John's Presbyterian Church 1070 West Plumb Lane Reno, Nevada 89509 775-826-0990 http://www.stjohnschurch.org
(back) Subject: Classical pianists [off-topic but relevant] From: "Charlie Lester" <email@example.com> Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 10:29:18 -0700 =3D-> Perhaps this is because classical pianists would never think of performing on a "digital" piano. <-=3D Actually, and as usual, that's a broadbrush statement that's not quite accurate. I have a friend who is a renowned classical concert pianist. He recently showed up at an engagement to play, having agreed to play the program sight unseen as a return-favor for a friend. When he was shown to an "electronic piano" [his term] in the hall, he nearly turned tail and left. But then he figured he was already there so he may as well try it out, only after sticking his nose up and authoritatively disparaging it to his hosts before he did so, of course, letting them know he was sure he would be unable to perform on it. Well, he sat down and began playing on it and, in his words, "I nearly fell off the bench, it sounded so good! No, it's not the same as a 'real piano' but it really was amazingly good, far better than I would have expected, and it was very effective in the recital hall. I was actually pleased with it overall." No, he has not gone on to accept a position with the "electronic piano" company as sales associate or spokesperson, nor does he recommend them to his colleagues and students, nor does he have one himself to replace his 1927 Steinway. But he IS now certainly far less reluctant about playing one than he was BEFORE HE TRIED IT. "And So It Goes." ~ C
(back) Subject: RE: Why New Organ at Bryn Mawr Presb.? From: "Ned Benson" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 10:29:45 -0700 I heard the 1975 Rieger when I baptized my first grandson there 7 years ago. It was a real screech-machine. Abrosino wrote of it, "Neither successful nor popular, the Philadelphia Rieger was besieged with a long mechanical settling-in period. Its tonal effect unfortunately served to bolster the impression among those unsympathetic to mechanical action that all such instruments were shrieking, mixture-dominated and foundation-deprived." The new Rieger is French (at least on the drawknobs), whilst the 1975 instrument sounded like a neo-classic North German machine. Compare the stop lists at http://www.bmpc.org/finearts/organs.html And as someone noted, many Bryn Mawr folks ain't "money challenged." An anonymous donor gave a 21bell Verdin carillon at the same time the organ project began. -- Dr. Ned H. Benson St. John's Presbyterian Church 1070 West Plumb Lane Reno, Nevada 89509 775-826-0990 http://www.stjohnschurch.org This electronic message is confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The information may also be legally privileged. This transmission is sent in trust, for the sole purpose of delivery to the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify me by electronic message or telephone at 775-826-0990, and delete the message from your system. Thank you.