pcnd5584

Richard - how do you mean, that Liverpool's acoustic is thicker - in what respect? The decay at St. Paul's is noticeably longer and the organ, to my ears, seems to 'kick' the resonance more effectively. I have to say that I was disappointed with the Liverpool Tutti - I thought that I would need a hat or at least get my hair blown around....and, yes, I was directly under the tower, at the front of the central space. I did like the sound of the organ considerably more that I thought I would, though. I also thought that Ian Tracey's playing was superb (even if poor Ian Wells did inadvertently advance the general pistons with the hand-held button - twice....) However, I gather that he is now off the critical list and hopes to leave hospital sometime next March....

This is a really interesting subject. There have been a number of sensible observations made - which I will try not to re-iterate. It is true that there is a certain uniformity in church organ design at present - no one builder is solely to blame - in fact, the former house-styles of most individual builders have all-but disappeared. Many instruments are moderate-sized, with two-claviers, often containing a cornet séparé on the GO, strings (but often no 8p diapason) on the Swell and a Bassoon, or wooden Trombone on the Pedal Organ. Whilst I take the point that this is slightly boring, the Rev. Newnham has observed that these instruments generally have to be suitable to lead congregational singing and accompany choirs - with voluntaries probably consisting of general repertoire, often of little more than average difficulty. In these situations, it is perhaps prudent to ask just how useful a Grosse Tierce 3 1/5p, a Regal 16p or a Septeint, consisting of a 1 1/7p and some broken glass are likely to be.... That said, I think that there are areas where organ builders could show some originality - I tried to, when designing a large two-clavier instrument (with electro-pneumatic action) - a rebuild of a Gray and Davison/Geo. Osmond. Oh God - I have just recalled that there is four-fifths of a cornet séparé on the GO....Oh well. Personally, I think that one of the most serious failings in organ design at present (particularly in moderate two- and three-clavier organs) is the apparent lack of colour. At this point, I shall remind myself of Rev. Newnham's exhortation that one cannot necessarily judge the sound of an instrument from a paper specification. Nevertheless, many seem to have bland flutes - usually Stopped Diapasons (Not technically a flute, I know), insipid, colourless strings (though often with little string quality in the timbre), thin reeds, etc. Whilst it can be unwise to generalise, I do think that there is some truth in these points. Perhaps it is because colour has now become almost completely subservient to the true chorus and 'genuine' organ effects. Maybe the pendulum, having swung away from the extreme sonorities of Hope-Jones and, to an extent, Arthur Harrison, is now at the other limit of its arc - a place in which the chorus occupies centre-stage and all else is very much an also-ran. I have to ask myself how useful a cornet really is, in service-playing. If I am honest, I would prefer a couple of good foundation stops - a Harmonic Flute (like Coventry) and a good Gamba - with some real string tone. That thing on the GO of Bath Abbey is about as useful as a chocolate chastity-belt in a convent. To that end, I shall post a scheme on the site which has been opened by another correspondent, just to see what I can come up with. I will, of course, attempt to ensure that the scheme, whilst having some individuality, is also practical.

I was interested to read your post. The organ of St. Thomas, Fifth Avenue has long been a favourite of mine - although I hear that it is currently in need of restoration. On paper it is similar to N-D (Gerre Hancock was a good friend of Pierre Cochereau), although the sound is different. NIce church, too. I wonder if John Scot is enjoying himself there?

Interesting point. Dare I say that I think that Ralph Downes made a serious error in the design of the RFH reeds - all the examples of French reeds which he cites in Baroque Tricks were in large, resonant buildings. This had the effect of enhancing the sound and counteracting thinness of timbre. The RFH being acoustically quite dead merely accentuated this. I am also surprised that he attempted to graft French reeds on to quasi-Dutch chorus and foundation-work. When I play French romantic music on my own instrument, I hardly ever use any mixtures other than the IV rank quint mixture on the GO. Having said that, I have a number of recordings of the C-C organ at S. Sulpice, and the chorus mixtures are very bright - but wonderful. It really is a fantastic instrument. The difference may lie in the acoustics, as has been said. It may also be in the intervals. If you are talking about tierce mixtures (à la Willis) then this is quite clear. French organ builders of any period hardly ever included tierce ranks in their mixtures - two notable exceptions being the Cornet and C-C's Carillon, which commenced at 12-17-22. Certainly the example in S. Etienne, Caen makes a fearful din (it did need tunung, though) and, to my surprise was included with the Jeux de Fonds - not the Jeux de Combinaisons.

It was not so much that I was patronising someone with an alternative point of view - my point was that he seemed to be talking about a completely different magazine. As I mentioned, given time, I know that I can find many articles in back-issues of OR which will contradict the correspondent's statement concerning the insular ('British') nature of the old magazine. I am not objecting to an alternative viewpoint, but to something which I know to be patently untrue. For example: from 2003 No. 3: British Concert Organs, Solo Organ Music of Krebs, E. M. Skinner (USA). 2002 No. 1: Mad Dogs....Provence, Manila Bamboo Organ, Fukuyama City, Japan. 2001 No. 3: Morristown, New Jersey, Amsterdam 1659 Tabulatuur-Boeck...., St. George's Hall, Liverpool. 2001 No. 2: Swedish Rhapsody (Göteborg's new organ), André Isoir, An article on the performance of JSB's organ music. 2001 No. 1 Pietermaritzburg City Hall Organ, Historic Organs in Sydney, Performance notes on JSB's O Mensch, bewein...., Haarlem 2000. Just five issues, chosen at random, which help to illustrate my point. I have absolutely no objection with the wish of the correspondent to express an alternative point of view. However, in his post he made comments which I feel are not accurate - and easy to prove so to be. Whilst there was naturally a bias towards the British organ world, there are many articles such as those which I have listed, dealing with instruments in several continents. Of course the correspondent has a right to his opinion - I just felt that some of the points he made were not accurate and therefore, not a true reflection of the nature of the magazine.

Yup, sorry - I was tired yesterday and distracted by the fact that if I do not finish my accounts by tonight, my accountant says that the cute fluffy bunny will get it.

Then, of course, there is the question of the 'missing' ranks at Canterbury Cathedral. I know that someone has already informed me as to the present location of much of the old Canterbury Solo Organ. However, the board does not (and presumably could not) have an index - and I cannot now locate the post. I would also be interested in knowing whether the old Choir Organ pipework was used in another instrument. I cannot help thinking that the old organ was considerably more versatile than the present instrument. This is, of course, not to decry the work of Mander's - presumably, they did exactly what they were asked to do by Allan Wicks.

Oh, OK!! Sorry - I was late and it was tired.... ....I had also just 'done' my accounts - which I loathe! Thanks for your support.... ....I shall wear it always.

Indeed, David! There is another point about the Priory Swell-box: despite the builders designing the case, interior layout and the internal dimensions of the box - the bass of the 16ft. Bourdon is outside!! WHY?? If dimensions are not pre-determined and space is not exactly at a premium (there is enough room behind the case for a hippo to live comfortably), then why can they not design a box big enough for every rank?

Thanks, David; and - yes, it is the instrument you think that I mean. I will consider that advice! Can you explain the workings of a Tremblant fort sometime, please?

Of course they are! The point I was making was that I was unable to recognise the former style of Organists' Review from the description given by the correspondent Read the sub-heading of this thread!

Sorry - I think we must be talking about two completely different periodicals. I could not disagree with you more! I could also (given time, which I have not got at this moment as I am about to go to work again) find innumerable articles in back-issues of OR which deal with many facets of the organ scene, not just in continental Europe, but in Eastern Bloc countries, the Americas, the Southern Hemisphere, etc. Personally, in a review, I would place a miniature reproduction of the CD covers very low on my list of priorities. I still stand by my comments that the new layout is unnecessarily fussy and badly thought-out. I speak as one who has some experience in commercial graphic design. There seems to be little point in talking about performance practice - a considerable part of the first edition was taken up with a tedious article concerning (as I previously mentioned) Britten's War Requiem - why? If I want to read about that (which I do not!) I can find the information in several other places. You mentioned photographs; why, on the front of a magazine dedicated to the organ do we have a view of part of The Tower of London - apparently taken at twilight? I, too, miss the superb reproductions of new (and older) instruments. Your comment regarding the perceived coldness of the former style I find impossible to reconcile. Paul Hale is more than a very well-informed enthusiast - he is, as far as I am concerned, an evangelist for the instrument. Are you sure that you have not been reading Cosmopolitan, in error?

Well, I shall probably renew my subscription this time. However, I shall also probably write to the editor and express my concerns. Personally, I think that the editorial team have already taken a seriously wrong turn. It is to be hoped that the situation is not past redemption.

Thank you, Nick. It sounds both an interesting and a slightly unusual instrument. At least it was not radically altered - the 1970s have a lot to answer for!

Having just finished wading through an entire year's bank statements, I can only wonder what a family of dulcianas would be doing anywhere. I heartily concur with your last statement - I think that almost any other stop would be more useful. Except perhaps a H-J Kinura, or a really fat H&H Tromba.

Yes - that is what I have said in my posts concerning this subject. I originally stated that if one were to attempt true equal temperament tuning the octaves would not 'fit' - they would be too wide. I do not ever recall having stated that octaves were to be tuned wide!

I had a similar (but possibly even more alarming) experience some years ago. It was the Sunday after Ascension and I had just finished playing Transports de Joie after Mass, when a gentleman who had recently booked me to play the organ for a concert at Wardour Castle Chapel turned up at the console and asked if I would play the same piece as one of my solos. I replied that I would be happy to do so. You are, of course, wondering why I did not ask about the type of organ first. There could be several reasons for this. I like to think that it is because I am generally an obliging sort of chap. Well, on the night of the concert, I arrived at the chapel, found my way up to the organ gallery.... .... and stood, frozen in horror and disbelief at the console of a quaint little eighteenth century instrument, with a Pedal Open, eight stops on the GO and six on the Swell Organ. Oh....my....God.... Well, I had to play the piece, but it was an interesting experience. At least now that we have the NPOR (when I can understand how to navigate my way around the site) I can check to see if an organ is listed and so avoid making a similar error. In my defence, I was quite young at the time....

As far as I know, the Trompette Militaire resonators were manufactured by Wurlitzer. Oh, I had thought that the GO Claribel replaced a Quint 5 1/3, which I believe stood on the lower GO soundboard. However, having just looked at the current specification on-line, both ranks are listed in the present specification - is this correct, Mr. Mander? As to the other points - I, too, would like to know where the additional Choir Organ ranks are situated, since they seem not to have displaced any older stops. Perhaps Mr. Mander could enlighten us - it really is an interesting organ.

I must confess that I have never heard of 'inharmonicity'; however, I suspect that we may be talking about two different facets of the same point. As far as I am aware, it is the octaves which are kept in tune - one normally tempers fourths or fifths, etc. However, this is becoming difficult (for me) to explain, since it depends on what tuning method one adopts, and on which keys one 'favours' - and which notes are the octaves of which keys.... ....did that make any sense to anyone else?

Ummmm.... I thought that was what I said! The Positive section is delightful - and probably very useful.

Well, I suspect that they were removed because they were simply not used....!

OK, I think I have your replies sorted-out from my quote....! As I intimated, I only had a short time before lunch. I do like many types of chorus (except Willis tierce mixtures and H&H Harmonics). Even some baroque choruses can excite me! However, I suspect that I would quickly get bored with the organ in St. Bavo, Haarlem - sorry! I like Bach, Buxtehude and a number of other baroque composers, but I also like French and German romantic music, too. I remain unconvinced by previous postings extolling the suitability of the St. Bavo organ for this repertoire. I hope that this serves to clarify my views. Now I absolutely have to do my yearly accounts - my accountant is currently having a cow....

Does anyone else have reservations about the change in style and layout of Organists' Review? I realise that some of the editorial team are new, but I must confess that I am not that enamoured of the new look. Colour is not always clearer that monochrome. The review section is less-clear: the colour sub-headings and the underscores are fussy and unnecessary. I do miss the friendly, informative (and substantially larger) review section of the former team. I also miss the specifications which Paul Hale (?) used to include, particularly interesting when relating to reviews of lesser-known instruments. More disturbingly, I have found several of the recent feature articles quite boring - I am not particularly interested in Britten's War Requiem, for example. (I heard it as a student and I am afraid that it did not 'speak' to me.) I find that there is not enough specifically organ-related material to keep me interested. Whilst I am not suggesting that we organists should stay closeted in our own little world, with only a cursory acquaintance with other musical matters in general - if I wish to read about such things, I can do so at school, by perusing a copy of BBC Music Magazine or Classical Music, or a similar organ (pun unintentional). It seeme to me that it is a little like (for example) expecting an orchestral player to be interested in an article on the restoration of the RAH organ - probably the only interest most orchestral players will have in this subject is whether or not they will be heard through the sound (I nearly typed 'noise') of full organ. I like to think that I am not whining simply because they failed to review a copy of my CD - I am not bitter - or twisted....grrrrrrrr. So, are there any like-minded individuals out there - or am I just a sour-puss?

Hmmm.... I think that this would be like trying to explain the difference between blue and orange to a blind person. Please do not think me rude or uncouth - I simply mean that it is very difficult accurately to describe the components of a good chorus. It is also somewhat subjective, by its very nature. However, here goes: Naturally, I can only speak personally, but I look for firm, yet bright diapason(s) -with some harmonic development. The octave and fifteenth ranks should be perhaps a little smaller, but not greatly softer. I do not personally like twelfths in my choruses and tend generally to omit them from piston settings. I am aware that some organists talk about 'binding the chorus together'; however, I just find the effect quinty and one that serves to obscure the texture. For the GO, my ideal mixture would commence at 19-22-26-29, with the breaks kept off the Cs and ending at 1-8-12-15 on a 61-note compass. (I would consider taking up the 19th rank, if the compass were only 56 notes.) I realise that I have not mentioned scales, cut-up or wind pressures. So much depends upon the acoustic environment, casework, the precise use to which the chorus will be put, etc. This is the best that I can do at present - my lunch is ready and I have just opened a nice Côtes-du-Rhône, which is simply asking to be drunk. Rest assured that I have not forgotten that I have yet to play for Evensong to-day. I have no intention of being found drunk in charge of an organ - particularly one with chamades....

I am sorry, Pierre - I do not know what to do with one Dulciana - the last thing I want is a whole bunch of them! Interestingly, the Great Organ of Liverpool Cathedral had a family of (unenclosed) dulcianas - which were unceremoniously ditched in favour of a nice Positive section decades ago. There is now no Dulciana in the entire instrument - unless one includes the Dulciana Mixture V on the Choir Organ.