pcnd5584

I assume that he was also able to adjust his combinations without leaving the seat.

Actually, I think that deadsheep meant the tuning faults book and the voluntary book - not actually tuning ranks during a sermon! (Although to be honest, this could sometimes be less boring.) :angry: For the record, deadsheep; no, the sermons are often repeated - by Matins on Christmas Day last year I could have preached the sermon. I had heard it already at the 08h Mass and the 09h45 Mass....Why? I do not normally repeat voluntaries within a year, except by request. Ah well....

An interesting scheme! Tierces in both mixtures! Hmm..... I forgot to mention anything with regard to empruntée - some judicious borrowing or extension in the Pedal Organ is permitted - but no extension or borrowing on any other department.

However, this is often easier with detached consoles! Whilst there are often inherent problems with regard to time-lag, there are many advantages - for example sight-lines to a conductor. The question of balance - I find generally, that it is far easier to assess balance from a detached console. Often with attached consoles, the case of the instrument overhangs the player, so one is shielded from much of the sound being produced. If there is a positive case behind, ther problem is exacerbated. (It is not always possible to open the access doors privided!) Ripon Cathedral has one of the most difficult organs with which to assess balance. The player is literally surrounded by the organ - visibility is limited (I am unable to recall if there is a monitor for the conductor) to peering through holes in the fretwork of the side-panels of the case. S. Sulpice sounds much better downstairs than at the console (I know that one would not normally accompany a choir on this instrument, save for things such as the Messes Solennelles by Vierne and Langlais, for example). It still does not solve the problem that several of the instuments which I mentioned do not have a mechanical action such as that at Girton. Even Bath is fairly heavy if everything is coupled through. In fairness, it must be said that the superb organ at Chichester is quite comfortable, even with the Solo Sub Octave drawn. However, each to his own!

Well, yes. However, I felt that it would be easier to design something larger first. To be fair, the church is a reasonable size: about 7-8 bays, with fairly wide aisles. Also, I had the pleasure of re-designing an instrument of just such a size. The scheme was subsequently carried out and the organ now stands proudly in a similar position to that described here. The disposition is: Pedal: 11 stops GO: 14 stops Swell: 11 stops Couplers: 13 It is difficult to write objectively about the instrument, since I am responsible for its design, including console layout. However, people seem to enjoy playing it. Therefore, I would be most interested to see what people make of this size scheme.

Hmm, yes it has - sorry, but I just had to reply to the comment by Rev. Newnham

A few months ago M. Lauwers posted an interesting thought with reference to the design of a two-clavier instrument. I found this fascinating, but I do not recall many replies. I must admit that, when I am not washing my anorak (it is a grey one, by the way) I like occasionally to while away what little spare time I have by dreaming-up schemes for various churches I have known. I am convinced that the smaller the organ, the more difficult it is to attain a really good, practical scheme. With this in mind (and if anyone is interested), I propose a scenario: Moderate-sized church - no carpet! Stone floors but with a wooden roof, so a bare one-second reverberation. No west gallery site is possible but an elevated position above the cantoris stalls is possible. There is, however, still ample height above the soundboards and room for a 16p front, if desired. The disposition of the instrument: two claviers (58) and pedals (32) fifty stops, with a maximum of fifteen couplers but not more than thirty-eight speaking stops (although the number of ranks can be greater). Action of choice. Mechanical is possible (but you may wish to consider having less couplers...) On the other hand, electric action (or other) can also be considered. It will re-use ranks from a pre-existing instrument but can have new ranks, if desired. Budget: flexible (well, I did say that it was a pipe-dream). [Groans off] If anyone is interested in rising to the challenge I would be delighted to read your scheme. However, if not then I can console myself with the thought that my anorak needs washing again....

Thank you, gentlemen - I will check out these sources.

Oh - there goes another dearly-cherished legend. Ah well, there is always Cochereau and his traffic-lights at N.-D.

This is an interesting subject. I am quite happy for a moderate-sized two-clavier instrument to be operated by mechanical action (including any combination mechanisms) but remain unconvinced by the perceived merits of controlling large instruments by mechanical action. I would be interested to know how often the tracker console is used on the Marcussen at the Bridgewater Hall (and how often the electric action console is used, too). Is it like Christchurch Priory, where the mechanical console is almost exclusively used for convenience when tuning? It is heavy and a little uncomfortable. Bath Abbey, too, I found unconvincing. The repetition is actually considerably better on my own instrument, which has a forty-year-old electro-pneumatic action which still functions exceptionally well. If a mechanical action of a large instrument is heavy, or in any way unwieldy, then any possible advantages are largely offset. Apparently, I hear from a reliable source that the organ of Sherborne Abbey is still disappointingly heavy*. This, after £350,000, new soundboards, new console, new action and new chassis. It was also computer-designed. Sorry, but I do not see the point. Why not have a good electric or electro-pneumatic action? Electric assistance is, I feel, also not the answer. There arise questions of simultaneity of the couplers, for example. In the case of Sherborne, this is the third attempt since 1987. Perhaps it would have been better to consider the possibilty that mechanical action is not always the most suitable solution! Certainly I believe that there is a certain amount of disingenuousness purveyed by proponents of mechanical action. Articulation (in the pipe organ sense) is perfectly possible on electric and electro-pneumatic actions. I have never seen the merit of being able to depress a key so slowly that I obtain a hissing transient preceding a settling to a determinate pitch. Apart from the fact that I do not play anything slow enough for it to be useful, I find it an un-musical sound! * In respect to its action - I am not aware of any attempts to lift it from the gallery...

Thank you for your help and, naturally, I will not breathe a word of it to anyone.... However, some definite information with regard to the outcome, when possible, will be gratefully received. I find it an extremely useful resource, particularly when considering invitations to play recitals, etc. There are, of course, all those lonely hours in the loft during sermons to think of, too... Just joking - honest

Um...then why play it, if you do not like it? Is that not a little like stabbing yourself in the leg with a fork - (it is nice when it stops)? Actually, it has at least two soft reeds. Presumably you do not like the timbre of the Choir Cremona? However, I cannot see what you could find objectionable in the tone of the Swell Hautboy. Either the GO Bourdon or the West Positive Gedecktpommer can act as a suitable accompaniment. In any case, the effect in the stalls of the Choir Cremona is mellowed by the superb acoustics. I like Goucester - but I also like Truro, Exeter, Bristol, Chichester, Salisbury, Ripon, etc. Each have strong and weak points. On each organ, it is possible to play musically and effectively. To play (and hear) the Dupré Prélude et Fugue in B major at Gloucester is a thrilling experience - the music is clear and totally alive. To play (and hear) the first movement of the Elgar Sonata in G at Bristol is, to me, equally thrilling - but in a quite different way. Personally, I would not wish all the cathedral organs in the country to sound the same - I can think of nothing more boring - except listening to a sermon at my own church!

Um...I have tried listening! A few thoughts (Yes, I know that this is not a sermon-posting board): 1) Actually the sermons in my church are often boring - whole chunks sound as if they have been downloaded from the internet. 2) Preachers often talk for longer than twenty minutes. As a teacher, I can tell you that this is sheer self-indulgence. It is difficult for most people to concentrate for this length of time at a stretch. It is even harder for most people to retain much useful information from such a large quantity of monologue. 3) Most people talk loudly through my carefully-prepared voluntaries. As far as I am concerned, the voluntary is part of the service. I find this rude (but un-surprising) and slightly annoying. Generally if one attends a recital, it is by the choice of the individual. I am subjected to (on average) three sermons each Sunday. In fact, there are a number of congregants who regularly converse during both the sung parts of the service and whilst I (or my boss) play the organ. It is, incidentally, these same people who cannot understand why I do not wish to support their 'special' services - wherein they will attempt to explain (for example) the Trinity using three flanellette bed-sheets of differing hue, roped together. After this, they will enjoin everyone to sing songs thanking God for (amongst other things) creatures which 'poo on my shoe'. That I find this attitude hard to comprehend is surely unsurprising! 4) Sermon construction: If I were to improvise in a competition in the manner in which some priests, readers and visiting speakers preach, I would certainly be disqualified for failing to stick to the theme (and probably for continuing after the movement has finished, as it were!) Sir, if you are in the position of both giving and receiving well-constructed and concise sermons, then you are indeed fortunate - as are your congregation! Unfortunately, I am not in such a position. Before you unleash a fiery response; no, not all my voluntaries are good and not all are without mishap or slips. However I try fairly to assess each sermon looking for its merits and salient points. Unfortunately, I can only genuinely conclude many times that they are unhelpful, repetitive and most definitely over-long! I honestly believe that the Curé of Ste. Clothilde (during the tenure of César Franck) had a point when, in reply to the observation of his young assistant priest that Franck's playing was both moving and uplifting, said "Yes, my son, he will bring many more people to God than you or I." Right, now I am off to purchase a hard hat....

I think that sometimes incumbent organists are inclined to fuss a little too much! Naturally one would wish to check the bona fides of any visiting organist - particularly one who is to accompany a service. However, I have also played at Coventry (for both recital and service-work). I used the Swell, Solo and Choir organs - judiciously, of course. Whilst it is true that I used the GO as a coupling manual when accompanying the choir, nevertheless, I found that it was necessary to use a fair amount of the GO for the hymns. Apparently, I did not blow the congregation out of the building, as it were! Friends are very quick to accuse me when I have played loudly, so I can only conclude that it was acceptable. Generally, an experienced organist, a good choirmaster (or mistress!) and a friend who does not mind walking around the building during rehearsals is sufficient to avoid inducing apoplexy amongst the more mature members of the congregation. With reference to awkward foot pistons: does anyone here have experience of playing at Durham before James Lancelot had H&H alter Conrad Eden's original eccentric (and anonymous) layout? I think that that had to be the most frightening foot piston scheme ever conceived - the organ equivalent of a fruit-machine

This was also helpful to me - thank you. However, I am apparently unable to obtain search results for an entire county. When I typed in a county (and included the wildcard) the software rather testily replied 'This would bring back a search of 429 buildings' (tsk! tsk!) 'And?' I thought to myself. Is there any way of achieving this, please? I could on the old layout.

Could anyone inform me where I can obtain a copy of Andriessen's Toccata, please? I have tried a Google search, sheetmusicplus.com/and several other sites - all to no avail. Any help would be gratefully appreciated. Thank you!

Dear Mr. Derrett, I think I agree with you - but I am confused! I am probably just being stupid, but your footnote appears to give a slightly different reading than the last paragraph of your post. I agree heartily that there have been recent occasions when a mechanical en-fenetre console was specified apparently without due regard to practicalities - Christchurch Priory being a case in point. It is now the proud possessor of an expensive chocolate chastity-belt up in the organ loft. It also has one of the ugliest nave consoles I have ever seen. I cannot imagine why it was deemed necessary to make such a squat console. Watching the conductor from the console of the old toaster in its original position perpendicular to the back of the (Cantoris) stalls was never a problem. They are now encountering real problems trying to locate places for the extra draw-stops for the desired additions to the scheme. (However, that is quite another story.) However, I am puzzled by exactly what you mean in your footnote. Are you advocating mechanical action for (by way of an example) a more faithful performance of a Widor symphony? (Also, do you mean Barker-lever assistance - or even electric?). I am not aware of any action which has 'mechanical assistance'. Please could you clarify?! However, on balance, I am fairly certain that I agree with what I think you mean...

Please may we have your Vicar when you have finished with him? :angry: Seriously, it sounds a good scheme. If you get approval, will the nave console have similar luminous light-touches? If so, will you have them controlled by LEDs (and the choir console, too?) I once had had a few moments of panic some years back at St. Luke's, Chelsea and I also know of colleagues with similar stories at Downside Abbey. As you will know, one of the problems with the old Compton light-touches is that the bulbs kept (keep!) burning out. Unwittingly leaving a stray Contra Posaune 32p wandering around near the beginning of the Coll. Reg. Nunc (Howells) is not something to recommend...

I originally assumed that this was the case. Apparently, technically, it is not. St. Mary's is the actual Parish Church. Whilst Beverly Minster has a Rector (or is it a Vicar?) and is also has a PCC, I presume that it is somewhat in limbo? Does anyone have any further information on ths slightly pink fish-thing...? Nice photographs, though. The only thing I would wish to alter are the nasty square thumb pistons. Having occasionally stabbed my thumb (under the nail) at Gloucester (could not swear - playing for services...) it REALLY HURT!! :angry: Personally, I would rather spend the sermon swivelling round piston-heads around in order that the engraved numerals were correctly aligned. (Well, what else should I do in the sermon?) I await a somewhat pained response from the Rev. Newnham...

This is indeed strange. There is an excellent CD available of the service improvisations of Yves Devernay (on the Grandes Orgues, N.-D.) He was clearly extremely talented. Apparently, he was also much-liked and respected by colleagues and the cathedral authorities. However, you were asking about the specification. That which is given in the link is mostly correct. There are a few details which are not self-evident. The GO Cymbale contains a tierce rank, which can be silenced if desired. The Chamades consist of three sets. The 8p and 4p ranks added by Robert Boisseau in about 1970-1 are visible in many photographs dating from when Pierre Cochereau was Titulaire (and also include a 16p/2p Regal rank). When the instrument was restored, two further ranks of 8p and 4p trompettes were added, ostensibly modelled on the C-C stops on the GO at S. Sernin, Toulouse. They are VERY loud! (Particularly if you are leaning against the case...) The Boisseau ranks are bright and fiery, the 1992 ranks are rounder - but not in the English tuba sense. There is a good booklet available from the cathedral (in english) with several colour photographs. It also contains the history of the Orgue-de-Choeur.

Hmm - I think that I would ask myself a few questions, first: 1) Does the replacement mixture blend satisfactorily? 2) Was it installed and voiced by H&H? 3) How musical and useful would a new 17, 19, flat21, 22 mixture be? (Have you heard the surviving stop at Crediton, Devon?) It is original, but it is also anti-social. It is no use for Bach or other Baroque composers and whilst it is brilliant (it does not break back until well up the compass) it is strident and very reedy. I am all for authenticity - but never at the expense of musicality and general usefulness. However, it is, of course, your decision. The rest of the organ sounds superb, though! Best wishes

For the record, I cannot currently write in html either! However, I often experience difficulty with the italic feature - whole posts often decide to slope off stage right, leaving me perplexed - why is this?! A small point, but it would add to my enjoyment. I have been unsuccessful in uploading an avatar (or even selecting one from the prescribed list) they just will not load! I have ensured that they are saved as jpegs, within the size perameters specified, but I always get an error message - usually 'no avatar selected' - huh?? If anyone knows what I am doing wrong or whether (whisper it) there is an error in the programme-writing code of this board, I would be pleased to know! No, it is not a world-shattering point, but it would just brighten things up a little to have one or two avatars dotted around the board, livening-up everyones' days!

Thank you, MusingMuso, for the details. However, I am uneasy - just how much 'transcribing' did Jos van der Kooy have to do, to make the big pieces 'work'? I must agree with M. Lauwers. I still think that it is a bit of a waste of effort! As for registration in JSB's time - there is still a well-supported school of thought that he would have expected to play entire movements without altering the registration. Even, some maintain, remaining on the same clavier throughout a movement/prelude/fugue, etc. A colleague heard a very able young organist play a recital at Sint Bavokerk some years ago - he kept stopping during JSB preludes and fugues, in order to adjust the stops - that is not 'transcribing' - that, to my mind, is 'butchery'! (I trust that this is not the normal course of events at recitals in Sint Bavo's?) Last point - honest! The perfect Reger organ? Passau? Nah! Riga Dom, Latvia - now that is the perfect Reger organ! However, each to his own!

This is an interesting concept. I would not necessarily agree that a mixture of musical styles can be very challenging. I further find it hard to accept (personally) a mixture of worship styles. Many people often do not, in many other areas of society, welcome the juxtaposition of diversity. For example, some people like football, but cricket bores them stupid. Whilst they both involve balls and people running about on turf, not only is the level of excitement different, but the pace of the two games is also different. Then, some people like a good hot curry after a concert - others prefer to go home for a mug of cocoa. To try to suggest that each might get equal enjoyment if they tried the others' sport/method of socialising, etc, sounds ever so slightly arrogant. We are, after all, different people! The point of this is, I get quite weary of clergy injecting unusual/unsuitable/badly thought-out styles of worship in my own church, purely because they think that it is 'a good idea' or because of the young people. Yes, of course we need to attract people of all ages to our services. I just do not think that serving up the ecclesiastical equivalent of kippers and custard is necessarily the best use of our resources. There is still the problem of lack of tolerance - from both camps. If you doubt this, I suggest you try going to your local charismatic church and suggesting that they offer a monthly High Mass with Benediction, in order that by all means some [Anglo-Catholics] might be saved.... I would suggest not that one style is better than the other, but that they do not mix effectively - in some places where it has been tried regularly, it merely created two quite separate congregations -which preferred not to socialise together. Anyway, why not do whatever we all do best, and do it with all our strength unto God - that way, we may even stop bickering with each other!

Iinteresting point - we often seem to go off topic - I am as guilty as anyone. Unfortunately here in the UK we often seem to be good at decrying our heritage, in a way. Or, if you prefer, knocking the things we actually do well. Insofar as church music is concerned, I think we are in serious danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water. In our society to-day, there is much evidence of 'dumbing-down' - church music included. We feel the need to make things over-simple, to over-explain things. It does not matter if it is done well, as long as we enjoy it. Some clergy (I know at least two) actually take a perverse kind of pride in things going wrong during services. This disgusts me. Personally, I think that we should only dare offer our best to God. Whilst Rev. Newnham has reminded us that there is no one way in which to worship God, I would ask him to remember that some of us are definitely not happy in 'both types of worship' (paraphrased). I have experienced many types, including charismatic and I have to say that I observed at least as much backbiting and un-Christian behaviour in these type of congregations as I did in those of a more traditional nature. In addition (and I can only speak personally as an experienced church musician) Graham Kendrick-type choruses drive me to distraction - I realise that to some they are encouraging and attractive. I can respect that. All I ask is a little tolerance in return from those who look down on myself and others who prefer a fully choral 'cathedral' style of worship. Let us not forget due reverence and genuine awe of the Creator of all things in our worship - not merely be a clanging gong or a jangling cymbal. (I know that this is a somewhat mangled quote, but it is now 01h28 and I was at school by 08h01 this morning.... yawn!)