Pre-flash!

[Vox Humana]

(Thank God Microsoft do not manufacture automotive vehicles....)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's done it. Now you've set me off (I forgot to take the pills this morning). They may not do it yet, but if you ask me they're encroaching by stealth. Rapidly going are the days when the mechanic would just look under the bonnet, mumur something about spark plugs and fix it in a trice. Now you have to hook the car's computer up to a diagnostic computer and try to get them to talk to each other before you can find out what's wrong. Sheesh!

 

Sorry for the off-topic post. I needed a rant...

[Vox Humana]

But a strict romantic Crescendo should be made without resorting to the swell shutters!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Like pcnd I have never heard this. Surely you could only achieve this smoothly on a rather large organ?

[Pierre Lauwers]

Again:

 

http://www.walckerorgel.de/gewalcker.de/Wu...Reger_Cresc.mp3

 

Without any Swellbox shutter!

 

Pierre

[pcnd5584]

Again:

 

http://www.walckerorgel.de/gewalcker.de/Wu...Reger_Cresc.mp3

 

Without any Swellbox shutter!

 

Pierre

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Pierre, this is like saying "My car is not black - therefore it must be yellow."

 

Because it is possible to produce a smooth crescendo on a particular instrument (and I could do this on my own instrument, too), is not to say that this is how it should be done! The performance habits of Vierne are well-documented. His use of the swell-pedal was legendary.

 

To contemplate preforming the organ music of Franck, Widor or Vierne (for example) without the use of swell pedals for the crescendi and diminuendi is like trying to have pizza without cheese - it is possible, but not greatly edifying.

 

More later - teaching again.

[Pierre Lauwers]

The french composers did have to take what they had -the french romantic organ- into account while making music.

But should we build new organs, we should aim at doing something else.

 

Pierre

[Westgate Morris]

Thanks folks - enough about the TUBA, now take it outside!

 

Vox Humana - your brief reply at #39 - I think it was - was all I needed to understand.

 

 

PRE-FLASH

 

Have these two been mentioned?

Willan: Prelude and Fugue in G- and Tema Ostinato. A good set if played together. Not difficult.

I have these in a publication by Frederick Harris and the final piece in the trio is Willan's Festival - a good Flash piece for the end - again not difficult.

The whole "Three Pieces for Organ" will make a good collection if I should ever be invited to play out again and need something I can muster - and not be embarrassed

 

ps. since starting these two threads (Flash and Pre-Flash) - I have put this little set of pieces on my LEARN IT OR ELSE list - plus a few others I will share later ...got a go now.

 

 

WM

[Brian Childs]

The Tuba is a thick, deadening blanket of sound devoid of harmonics. There is nothing a Tuba can do that a good, bright Royal, Military or Orchestral Trumpet (or whatever you want to call it) of equivalent power cannot do better. The Trumpet does not necessarily have to be en chamade though it may be nice if it is.*

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think I could better agree with this statement if the word "almost" were inserted before "nothing" in the second sentence. There are times when what is required is the equivalent of the voice of a Brigade of Guards RSM which will cut through everything and brook no disagreement or dissent. I have never encountered a Trumpet that could guarantee to do that, not even the Trompette Militaire at St Paul's much as I like it: they may be loud but they do not stand sufficiently apart utterly confident of their right to dominate all around. I can think of several tubas that can do this quite well. Granted there is not much need for such an effect if one is principally interested in Bach and his precursors, and modern neo-baroque music but as I am not I want the tuba to be around at least until I have grown too frail to attend any more recitals.

 

BAC

[pcnd5584]

Thanks folks - enough about the TUBA, now take it outside!  

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For the record, I have not mentioned tuba stops for several posts....

[Vox Humana]

With apologies to Westgate:

 

There are times when what is required is the equivalent of the voice of a Brigade of Guards RSM which will cut through everything and brook no disagreement or dissent. I have never encountered a Trumpet that could guarantee to do that, not even the Trompette Militaire at St Paul's much as I like it: they may be loud but they do not stand sufficiently apart utterly confident of their right to dominate all around.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's strange - I would have said the exact opposite. Perhaps I'm being overly semantic, but surely a Tuba doesn't cut through anything; it bulldozes everything out of the way. Conversely I've heard one or two Trumpets that could slice cucumber with transparent thinness. But I think I know what you mean and wouldn't disagree. Almost any organ colour has its use somewhere. The Felton Rapley piece I mentioned is a round, lugubrious piece (in the nicest way) that really does seem to require a round, lugubrious solo reed.

 

I must say, though, that the Tuba at Rochester Cathedral is comparatively bright and a very satisfactory example of its type. It fits the rest of the organ like a glove (and it's not an out-and-out Romantic instrument either). It may be just a merest fraction under-powered though.

[Guest paul@trinitymusic.karoo.co.uk]

I fully agree that for a skilled improviser this is a perfectly feasible approach: was it not said of Howells that while acting organist at St John's during the war he never played any composed organ music by anybody ? However, there is the problem of what to do while the learning process is taking place, and also the consideration of what to do if the skill cannot be acquired: not everyone can learn every skill, after all, however easy others may find it. I have never been able to master swimming! Those with limited talent for the skill should perhaps not be encouraged to inflict their efforts on congregations (or anyone else) as a matter of course, if for no other reason than that it may serve to set people's benchmark for what organ music is like and confirm their opinion that they do not like it.  By all means encourage everyone to essay the skill but I have no more wish to hear the musical efforts of those who could not master it than I have to be flown by a pilot who has not quite got the hang of flying yet!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes.

 

I think a lot of this

'I prefer to improvise'

stuff is from folks who (speaking bluntly) can't be bothered to do anything else.

Sorry to be rude, but this is not only my opinion, it is my experience too.

 

Even if the organist were a total master of improvisation, (and there are some who qualify) I would still not want to hear improvisations at every service. This is both a highly arrogant approach and a limited one. Why should your listeners have to hear 'your' music to the exclusion of everything else. Variety, variety...

and I say again

variety.... is the spice of life.

 

No wonder some folks are anti organ.

[MusingMuso]

This gives a reasonable flavour of his style: http://www.stainer.co.uk/images/pdf/d85.pdf

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

===================

 

I can improvise better stuff than this.....I use quavers you know!

 

MM

[MusingMuso]

I fully agree that for a skilled improviser this is a perfectly feasible approach: was it not said of Howells that while acting organist at St John's during the war he never played any composed organ music by anybody ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

=====================

 

Mmmmmmmm......

 

That makes sense.

 

 

MM

[pcnd5584]

Yes.

 

I think a lot of this

'I prefer to improvise'

stuff is from folks who (speaking bluntly) can't be bothered to do anything else.

Sorry to be rude, but this is not only my opinion, it is my experience too.

 

Even if the organist were a total master of improvisation, (and there are some who qualify) I would still not want to hear improvisations at every service. This is both a highly arrogant approach and a limited one. Why should your listeners have to hear 'your' music to the exclusion of everything else.  Variety, variety...

and I say again

variety.... is the spice of life.

 

No wonder some folks are anti organ.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I quote from a post which I wrote on 5th September:

 

"This is all very well if one has the luxury of regular practice-time, Paul! In my case, I generally work in excess of seventy hours each week (and then go home and do all the boring things, such as cooking, cleaning, shopping, washing, paper-work, etc). I normally get to practise on Tuesday evenings, after teaching from around 08h to 21h. I occasionally have Saturday evenings available, too - providing the church is free. However, I am sure that you will appreciate that I am usually quite tired by this point. Since I have, in addition, to prepare the accompaniments for three fully-choral services (with a cathedral repertoire) each Sunday, I hope that you will understand why I choose frequently to improvise after services, too.

 

However, not only do I make certain that each improvisation is different - sticking to a particular style or period, I also try to ensure that it is appropriate to the mood of a service. I have attended services on a number of occasions, at which the (often published) voluntary is anything but suitable. Sometimes this was obviously a mis-calculation on the part of the organist; sometimes it just happened that the service ended with quite a different 'feel' than may have been expected from the readings and other music. Under the circumstances, a thoughtfully-crafted improvisation can be a very useful thing."

 

No, I do not improvise after every service - but neither do I have the luxury of much practice-time in order to ensure that I do not offer up a performance that is less than the best of which I am capable. However, I do try to play as many printed voluntaries as I can. The other problem is that Mass (which often over-runs to around 11h or even 11h05) is followed by Choral Matins at 11h15. The other day, I had prepared the Prelude, in E minor (BVW 548). Unfortunately, Mass again finished late and so, in order to avoid holding-up the start of Matins (which is obviously unacceptable), I had to improvise and save the Bach for after Choral Evensong.

 

In my own church, there is no point whatsoever in attempting to play printed music before a service. Aside from the fact that I have to accompany a full rehearsal, (which can finish as late as 18h28 for an 18h30 Choral Evensong, for example), the timing of the procession is entirely dependent on clergy who generally work to their own time-scale.

 

Paul, a gentle thought: not all which may appear to be arrogance is necessarily so.

[Vox Humana]

Even if the organist were a total master of improvisation, (and there are some who qualify) I would still not want to hear improvisations at every service. This is both a highly arrogant approach and a limited one. Why should your listeners have to hear 'your' music to the exclusion of everything else.  Variety, variety...

and I say again

variety.... is the spice of life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But surely a total master of improvisation is one who can play in any style and idiom at will - and puts that variety into practice. But other than that I agree with you, if only because an improvisation can never be a substitute for a decent composition. It may be better than some third-rate concoctions though.

[David Coram]

But surely a total master of improvisation is one who can play in any style and idiom at will - and puts that variety into practice. But other than that I agree with you, if only because an improvisation can never be a substitute for a decent composition. It may be better than some third-rate concoctions though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm very firmly with pcnd on this, but for different reasons. The number of hours I work, or whether pre-service there isn't a lot of point in rolling out anything that took too long to prepare - too much talking and clattering around, pause for notices at about 3 minutes to, vestry prayers, processions, etc - all irrelevant, in my view. It's true that I would rather spend the time available working on the music for the service as paramount and after the service as secondary (which is always a piece from the literature, as NJA would say, except perhaps once or twice a term). But at the start of the service the music is trying to achieve something different. I try to make it relevant to one of the chorales in use at the service, or one of the readings, seasonal plainchant, the life of a saint on a saint's day, and try to vary the styles as much as I can while keeping in the general spirit of the service setting so the whole service unifies.

 

I'm not pretending to be marvellous or anything like that - some days are better than others - but PD's assertion that those who improvise quite a lot of the time are somehow starving a hungry world of "proper music" is one I take serious objection to. What could be more relevant or appropriate than something created to fit the mood of a place right now, and the mood, style and key of what's going to happen next? If PD actually objects to improvisation as in sticking a pedal note down and playing interlocking chords until something requires them to cease (in the wrong key, naturally), then I'm with him all the way. But improvisation just isn't about that.

 

I don't see it as a "cop out" at all; far from it. It is not an easy matter sitting down and delivering a structured and coherent piece of music with one kind of form or another, in a certain key, setting a certain and considered mood, making it blend seamlessly(ish) into the introduction to the first hymn when the choir get into position at the start (or return for the Agnus Dei at communion); or to sum up in 15 seconds the essence of a gospel reading in sound while the clergy process back. The number of eminent organ lofts I visit where I discover to my utter astonishment piles of these Kevin Mayhew-style books on 500 ways to modulate up a semitone, 6003 last verse arrangements, or 3.4 million things called "communion moods". Is any more than about half of the stuff in these books more inspired than what any one of us is capable of, having worked a bit at structure, form and confidence?

 

Improvisation is a perfectly valid skill to work on every bit as hard - if not even harder - than written down music, and that best comes with putting it into practice.

[Alistair McEwan]

I'm very firmly with pcnd on this, but for different reasons.  The number of hours I work, or whether pre-service there isn't a lot of point in rolling out anything that took too long to prepare - too much talking and clattering around, pause for notices at about 3 minutes to, vestry prayers, processions, etc - all irrelevant, in my view.  It's true that I would rather spend the time available working on the music for the service as paramount and after the service as secondary (which is always a piece from the literature, as NJA would say, except perhaps once or twice a term).  But at the start of the service the music is trying to achieve something different.  I try to make it relevant to one of the chorales in use at the service, or one of the readings, seasonal plainchant, the life of a saint on a saint's day, and try to vary the styles as much as I can while keeping in the general spirit of the service setting so the whole service unifies. 

 

I'm not pretending to be marvellous or anything like that - some days are better than others - but PD's assertion that those who improvise quite a lot of the time are somehow starving a hungry world of "proper music" is one I take serious objection to.  What could be more relevant or appropriate than something created to fit the mood of a place right now, and the mood, style and key of what's going to happen next?  If PD actually objects to improvisation as in sticking a pedal note down and playing interlocking chords until something requires them to cease (in the wrong key, naturally), then I'm with him all the way.  But improvisation just isn't about that.

 

I don't see it as a "cop out" at all; far from it.  It is not an easy matter sitting down and delivering a structured and coherent piece of music with one kind of form or another, in a certain key, setting a certain and considered mood, making it blend seamlessly(ish) into the introduction to the first hymn when the choir get into position at the start (or return for the Agnus Dei at communion); or to sum up in 15 seconds the essence of a gospel reading in sound while the clergy process back.  The number of eminent organ lofts I visit where I discover to my utter astonishment piles of these Kevin Mayhew-style books on 500 ways to modulate up a semitone, 6003 last verse arrangements, or 3.4 million things called "communion moods".  Is any more than about half of the stuff in these books more inspired than what any one of us is capable of, having worked a bit at structure, form and confidence?

 

Improvisation is a perfectly valid skill to work on every bit as hard - if not even harder - than written down music, and that best comes with putting it into practice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I agree, this is not a "cop out". Improvisation, musically aware of the moment, can be most uplifting. The best does indeed come with putting it into practice. For those uncertain about their skills in this area - reach for Kevin Mayhew or similar.

[David Coram]

For those uncertain about their skills in this area - reach for Kevin Mayhew or similar.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Better still - reach for a Nigel Allcoat book/disc, a Naji Hakim book, a Briggs concert or masterclass, an RSCM residential course at Sarum College, a lesson with your nearest cathedral sub-organist. We can all talk; we can all compose a letter; so we can all improvise, but need to develop it as a skill, just as learning to walk, talk, read and write as children.

 

The ability to fluently improvise even a ten bar hymn extension or something simple over a ground bass just does wonders for the playing of all written-out music - it teaches so much about spontaneity that can't be learnt any other way, I don't think.

[giwro]

I'll bring us back to the topic a bit....

 

I've lately been exploring repertoire from the old collection "Les Maitres Contemporains pour orgue" (J. Joubert, pub. 1911-1914). To be sure, there are a number of pieces therein which are much better forgotten, but also there are a number which are quite fine. Some are manuals only, some are 3-stave and others can take a bit of judicious addition of the pedal to a presumably "manuals-only".

 

Here are a few clips:

 

Joseph Boulnois - Quatre Pieces:

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/BoulnoisQ1NDL.mp3

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/BoulnoisQ2NDL.mp3

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/BoulnoisQ3NDL.mp3

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/BoulnoisQ4NDL.mp3

 

Blanche Rozan - Communion

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/roznanComm.mp3

 

Jean Vadon - Grand Choeur and Toccata sur Haec Dies et O Filii

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/VadonGCD.mp3

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/VadonToccata.mp3

 

Armand Vivet - Toccata

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/VadonToccata.mp3

 

René Blin - Rosace and Offertoire

http://orwig.blackiris.com/blin_rosace.mp3

http://evensongmusic.net/audio/BlinOffertoire.mp3

 

None of these are really masterpieces, but they are mostly all well-crafted pieces, and either sight-readable or nearly so.

 

Cheers,

 

Jonathan

[pcnd5584]

I'll bring us back to the topic a bit....

 

Jonathan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I am not convinced that we have strayed.

 

Some of the most famous composers of organ music were also superb improvisors; for example, J S Bach, Louis Vierne and Marcel Dupré*. For that matter, there are several well-documented accounts of our own Sir George Thalben-Ball improvising - such as at the Queen's Hall (I believe), during a Handel organ concerto, in which the cadenza was almost as long as the rest of the movement - and quite brilliant, apparently. He also 'remembered' an improvisation which Dupré had created in a recital at St. Paul's Cathedral - and reproduced a sizeable part of it the next evening. (Whilst the latter two examples did not take place during Divine services, nevertheless they do serve to illustrate the point that some extremely influential performers and composers of organ music thought rather more highly of the art of improvisation than we seem to to-day.)

 

It is quite probable that many of the works of J S Bach began life as improvisations; (it would certainly be difficult to prove that this was not the case).

 

To say that improvisation is an easy way out, arrogant or lazy may be true if one is talking about meaningless meanderings on Swell strings with a vague flute solo and rumblings on the pedals. However, if one is referring to a well-crafted piece, often using a recognisable form and key-structure - and all tailor-made for a particular moment in a service, then, as David Coram stated, I cannot think of anything more appropriate.

 

I would certainly prefer this to yet another tired rendering of (for example) Ireland's Elegaic Romance (one of the most pointless, tedious pieces which I have ever heard) or Widor's infamous Toccata. For that matter, I would prefer it to a Psalm Prelude by Howells, (several of which follow the same formula, being dynamically equivalent to a parabolic arch-form). In any case, as at least two of us have mentioned, during WWII, whilst Howells was Acting Organist at St. John's College, Cambridge, he improvised all of his voluntaries - by his own admission. Naturally, I would not dream of suggesting that these pieces may have often sounded rather similar in shape and form.

 

*For that matter, there is a strong tradition of improvisation in Holland and Germany to this day - and not just immediately prior to each sung chorale (as I was required to do in Nürnberg a few years ago). One has only to talk to competitors (and auditors) of improvisation competitions such as those held at Haarlem and Chartres, to realise that here in Britain we lag well behind our continental colleagues in this field.

 

Speaking personally, as a teacher, I take the view that it is extremely important for a pupil to be able to do rather more than to 'accompany' the bishop from position 'A' to position 'B' during Mass.

[giwro]

I am not convinced that we have strayed.

 

>snip>

 

Some of the most famous composers of organ music were also superb improvisors; for example, J S Bach, Louis Vierne and Marcel Dupré

 

<snip>

 

Speaking personally, as a teacher, I take the view that it is extremely important for a pupil to be able to do rather more than to 'accompany' the bishop from position 'A' to position 'B' during Mass.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well....

 

I'd have to agree with your history on improv, and the reality of needing to teach it still...

 

I have been to a number of improv workshops, and every one has given me some new tricks to throw in my bag. I also have to admit that a number of my compositions are reworked improvs (!)

 

I've also corresponded with a kind organist or two (one such from France) who have given critique and sugestion for my improvising. I doubt I'll ever get to the level of improvising a fugue (came close a few times when I was diligently practicing improv every day).

 

In my estimation, if one is going to improvise for services regularly, one should undertake to PRACTICE and STUDY improv, and get better at it. It is so easy to get in a rut and end up resorting to one's usual tricks otherwise(!)

 

~~

 

I have the great fortune to have a number of live recordings of great improvisors, and the best of them were/are nothing short of stunning. Some of Dupré's stuff sounds like a finished composition, Cochereau too (except on the rare ones that it sounds like he's messing around while he decides what to do!). Then I have heard some fabulous improvising by the Germans as well, and of course David Briggs..

 

I'm not at that level, nor will I be, since my schedule doesn't allow for proper practice, but I _can_ get better at it in small ways. I think one of the KEY things you mention is a thought-out plan... when I just sit down and start playing without at least having a basic structure in mind, I find my improvs very unsatisfying. The moments that I have felt best about it are when I have sudden inspiration for an improv on a particular tune, and almost simultaneously receive the idea for the structure, key centers and overall plan. Moments like those are transcendant (and alas, far too infrequent in my world)

 

Cheers,

 

Jonathan

[pcnd5584]

Jonathan, you make some very sensible comments!

 

May I also recommend the recorded improvisations of Pierre Pincemaille (Titulaire, S. Denis, Paris) and Frédéric Blanc (Titulaire, Nôtre-Dame d'Auteil, Paris). Both of these gentlemen are superbly gifted in the art of improvisation.

 

My best wishes to you for your further study.

[AJJ]

And also Gerre Hancock from the USA - I've mentioned this before but his improvised symphony on a JAV CD from Washington National Cathedral is a hugely enjoyable piece (not at all in Cochereau style) with some amazing moments, vey efficiently worked out and I suppose at times rather Dupre like. There is also an improvise set in alternation with plainsong - in a more 'antique' in style perhaps than the symphony. One of these days I will ask for his book for Christmas or something similar to see what he has to say on a more basic level.

 

AJJ

[Vox Humana]

Some of Dupré's stuff sounds like a finished composition

Not too surprising since some of his finished stuff sounds like improvisation. (Miaow!) Seriously, I'd give almost anything to be able to improvise like him - or at all for that matter. Too many of mine are - shall we say - Thimanesque!

 

Having a structure and a theme (or two) is all very well and necessary, but even then improvisations can still be boring. I suspect an essential tool for making them interesting is facility in handling counterpoint. Any views on this and on how you go about acquiring it?

[David Coram]

I suspect an essential tool for making them interesting is facility in handling counterpoint. Any views on this and on how you go about acquiring it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

When I got my first organist job aged about 12, the vicar presented me with a melody only hymn book and I would have a few days (less lateron, and eventually no time at all) to work out a harmony for the following Sunday's hymns. That was just mind-bogglingly good training.

[Phil T]

How about,

 

Three Chorale Fantasias-Parry

Sonata in E flat-Bairstow

Rhapsody on a Ground-Statham