MusingMuso

(Quote MM) "I always get the impression that William Hill was a humble Lincolnshire-born man who listened to others and tried faithfully to provide what they wanted, using his tremendous natural organ-building abilities and craftsmanship." (Quote - Pierre Lauwers) I would be willing to accept that idea, but where did these "better knowing" gentlemen find their inspiration? At this time -1820-1830- could they have understood what the works of a Gabler or Holzhay would mean shortly afterwards? I suggest the question might deserve a bit more investigation. ========================== I don't think I properly know the answer Pierre, but if we move on to the building of the first great Schulze organ at Doncaster, it is abundantly obvious that there was, by then, an awareness of things. Working back from that point, we might usefully recall that Mendelssohn, as a very young man and organ virtuoso, was obliged to cancel recitals due to the fact that the organs were unsuitable. Mendelssohn had such a tremendous impact in the UK, and because he enjoyed a close friendship with the German Prince Albert, he would automatically be part of the "inner sanctum" of musical life. I wish that all the links fell into place concerning Dr Gauntlett, Mendelssohn, Prince Albert and the rest, but I have yet to come across anything definitive. More importantly, it is known that the organist of Doncaster Parish Church was especially well-versed in "the best organs in Europe" and was known to have travelled extensively. Furthermore, the Bavo organ was well-known in the UK, and Charles Burney certainly knew the instrument; the fame of which spread around Europe almost from the moment it was finished. I wouldn't dare speculate without firm evidence, but I have a hunch that the Bavo organ, being quite near, had an affect on those in the UK who went ot hear it, as it still does to this day. Almost certainly, organists were THE establishment figures in musical academia, and it follows naturally, that the walls of august institutions would resound to passionate arguments about the merits or otherwise of the "German" style of organ-building. Equally, there was an "old-guard" who defended the pedal-less, F-compass instruments, and one of the most celebrated examples of this concerns the organ of Lichfield Cathedral, when Holdich supplied a very comprehensive "German" style pedal organ. I think the reply the organist gave was, "....he (Holdich) may put them (the pedals) in, but I will never use them." Knowing what the hierarchy was like, and knowing how the educated musical-elite operated, I have serious doubts that they would take the slightest notice of anything that William Hill might have suggested. He would have been, I'm afraid, regarded as just a workman and servant, just as Schnitger and da Vinci were long before him. This was long before the idea that an organ-builder may have a) brains education c) musical ability d) superior knowledge Of course, Schulze, Cavaille-Coll and Father Willis proved that Hazlitt was right when he wrote about "The ignorance of the learned." MM PS: The great Victorian passion was continental travel Pierre; especially by rail. Quite a lot of people had connections with Germany as railway-engineer, and which town was the great railway engineering one, which supplied rolling stock? Doncaster, of course!

I have the impression (this is something very general and not about this very organ in particular) that today it is believed "romantic tone= loudness and darkness"; for me nor the first nor the other are true. The maximum output of a Walcker or Cavaillé-Coll organ does not exceed a baroque organ's one, while the darker registration are always firm and self-restrained, because of the harmonic developpment of the stops. I may be erring towards the treshold of conservatism, but I do not believe big scales and high volumes are the answer to accomodate organ in modern, strangely designed concert-halls (or churches by the way). =================== I'm sorry, but that is neither a scientific statement nor a musical one. The bass output of both Walcker and Cavaille-Coll organs, with their large wood basses fed from copius supplies of wind, is vast as compared to a true baroque instrument. It's interesting to compare recording a baroque organ and a big romantic organ; the latter of which requires much reduced gain levels. Once we get to orchestral organs and cinema organs, the power output is enormous. Look at it the other way, and consider how many horsepower are being used to pump air into big romantic instruments, and assuming that it isn't all leaking away, the energy is going somewhere! Unfortunately, the ears are not a good guide to what is atually going on, because the brain modifies what we hear a very great deal; like a whole studio full of tricks. The trick of voicing a good organ is to adapt the sound to the room, and if that room is taking away mid-frequencies at an alarming rate, then a good organ-builder has to compensate. The best way of compensating is to increase the mid-frequencies, and that is perhaps best done with high cut-ups, bigger scaling and a healthy supply of wind; thus giving a voicer some control over the relative amplitude of pipes at different points in the audible spectrum. In other words, it is what I said right at the beginning about many modern concert-halls........as baroque as you like, but with Wurlitzer firmly in mind! I stand by what I said. MM

11 speaking stops and I'd have suggested going along to hear St.Joseph's. RC, Keighley, West Yorks....Laycock & Bannister 1974.....but it's been disqualified. Pity....it's absolutely perfect, and it intrigued and delighted me for close on 30 years. Ten ranks, and I could have thrown most of a Compton cathedral organ into the arena, but that's out too. MM

It's interesting that recent discussion about concert-hall acoustics now find a relevant focal point with the new Rosales/Glatter-Glotz instrument at the Walt Disney concert hall, some miles away. It's also been interesting to note from the specification that the wind-pressures vary from between 4" and 17", with the Great being on 5" pressure throughout. Perhaps this means, that in combination with big scaling, the voicer had a certain control over the final outcome, and tonal balance could be achieved successfully right across the audible spectrum. I think it was Nick Bennett who suggested that the Bridgewater was good for orchestral music. I wonder if this is simply a reflection on the skills of orchestral players, who can quite easily compensate for defective acoustics simply by listening to what bounces back. Once in place, an organ can't be instantly adjusted like a choir or an orchestra can be. Perhaps the lesson is maybe being learned, that baroque organs sound wonderful in the right building, but seldom (if ever) in modern concert halls. MM

Well, well! A man who thinks classical but keeps Wurlitzer in mind......finally! It's the ONLY way of doing it right in a modern concert hall! As for stroking wooden pipes Barry, I suppose it's the organist's equivalent to hugging trees. I personally adored those velvet-curtains around the organ consoles in old Methodist chapels.......they made wonderful cloth-mothers. MM

By definition an elite is a minority or it would not be an elite. That is why University (= for an elite, as traditionally conceived) education for 50% of the population is so much nonsense , whereas further, additional , extended or even "higher" education are perfectly feasible for that or greater numbers. The great con is in using a name which implies access to an elite status when that is not what will be delivered. In view of the tenor of other posts you have made it seems very unlikely to me that dumbing down so that "all shall have prizes" is what you mean. The rest of the post from which this is lifted seemed to be addressing the relevance orfitness for purpose of much of what was offered by the RCO as well as its mode of delivery of that which it does offer, which is implied to be rather out dated in approach. I just wondered whether what you were driving at here is not so much that people are kept outas that they stay out voluntarilybecause they do not see what is inside as of interest or relevance to them or their concerns. Meritocracy as usually understood would allow all to apply but select rigorously. Some sort of caste or class system restricts those qualified to apply in the first place. I assume you favour the first rather than the second approach ? ======================= Brian raises interesting points, and I'm not sure I have black & white answers. The logic of what Brian suggests is impeccable, but I know it to be flawed. Rather than give answers, perhaps I can fly off at slight tangents. My uncle, now long dead, was a superb singer. He was a bass soloist who did the rounds of the various "Messiah" performances in Yorkshire. He was lined up with singers such as Isobelle Bailey and Kathleen Ferrier. The BBC wanted him to sign up for them, but he declined. 98% of his time was taken up as a dairy farmer...he just liked singing a bit, but never had a lesson in his life. A tonic sol-fa man to the end! In my own case, no-one EVER encouraged me to play the organ, so I taught myself. It was the school of hard-knocks, but I gained some degree of competence on the way; since which I have given recitals at some reasonably respected venues. It's a modest example of how enthusiasm can triumph over adversity, but I've never had the inclination to make music a career. Someone mentioned driving tests. How annoying it must be, when someone like Michael Schumacher comes along and earns millions, and had even picked up a major championship at the age of 16, before he could legally drive on the roads!! Academia must NEVER be remote, discouraging or inaccessible, because not EVERYONE fits into the neat academic sausage-machine. It doesn't matter whether it's Sir Simon Rattle or Carlo Curley; communciation and enthusiasm are the key components in ensuring a healthy future for great music and the organ, and because the RCO is now isolated due to the downturn of interest in organ-music within sparsely attended churches, they need to get off their bums and DO something about it. The resources are there, the organists are there and the music is there. The RCO COULD be a focus for both excellence and communication in equal measure, and if it reaches out, it would never be regarded as elitist. MM

====================== Nick knows only too well that there are numerous FRCO holders who bore everyone to death with their performances, but the same performances would probably scrape through the FRCO exam. Equally, there are those who have few or even no qualifications, but who can lift the roof. People get there in different ways. The paperwork is of a very high standard, but I did not link this to the elitist tag. I actually said that "some" would class the RCO as elitist, and then went on to suggest that "elitism" is only elitist when it is inaccessible to the majority, and by that, I am not referring to the examinations, but more to the whole ethos of the organisation. Sir Simon Rattle went out of his way to bring great music to the people, and didn't rely on people discovering it for themselves by accident. In other words, he communicated his knowledge, his passion and his very great personal charisma, just as Sir Malcolm Sargent did and Sir David Wilcocks has always done. MM

========================= He he! I like that, but then, I once walked a pet cheetah around a garden in the US. That was fun. Perhaps I should explain a little. The FRCO exam is matched by other examinations from the technical performing point of view.....that is not the real hurdle for those who obviously have enough technique and ability to reach the technical standard. The real hurdle is the academic paperwork and the pass mark required; which sets the FRCO apart and makes it both feared and respected. My point is simply that stupendous organ-playing does not rely upon holding an FRCO diploma, and indeed, many great performers do not have the qualification, or ended up being given one. I think Jane Parker-Smith falls into this latter category, unless I am misinformed. Many people "rise to the challenge" of exams, but fall away afterwards. I can think of one cathedral organist from a previous generation, who was a superb choir-trainer, but could barely play Sweelinck's "Meine junges leben." He left all the organ-playing to the assistant. Dr Francis Jackson summed it up wonderfully, when he spoke about the RCO appeal many moons ago. He said, "Gaining a Fellowship means that an organist is....or rather was....at some point....on the right lines." MM

========================= I think it's a damn silly idea! Count me in.... MM

I have absolutely no axe to grind concerning the RCO or the RSCM, as I am not involved with either organisation and almost certainly never will be; being an ex-church organist who has turned his back on contemporary developments. Let's be quite clear about something. Both the RCO and the RSCM had a real role to play in the days when church-organists (and above) were the mainstay of local music. With the drift towards the lowering of musical standards in churches, a cyncial attempt to hijack pop-culture and the sort of theology which was once challenged by O-level students, the churches to-day have no need for the RSCM by and large. The support base has therefore vanished, and with it, a substantial amount of regular income. When faced with that, no organisation can continue with the expenses and fixed costs of a once large institution such as the RSCM was, and "downsizing" is the only possible option. I can fully understand the problems the RSCM has had to face, and I can also understand the need to reduce costs and shed assets. The RCO presents a different type of problem; possibly due to a failure to adapt to modern education and educational assessment. I think it would be fair to say that the RCO has NEVER really been concerned with the best in organ-playing, but has certainly been involved in setting a gigantic academic hurdle for candidates wishing to qualify for Associate and Fellowship status; largely as a consequence of the high pass mark. This possibly explains why a few FRCO holders have been fairly atrocious organists, but academically very able. Most have been very competent organists and able academics. A very small proportion have been brilliant in both fields, but not BECAUSE of the RCO. With the decline in church musical standards, the natural recruiting base has been diminished considerably, so that the RCO faces similar problems to that suffered by the RSCM ie: dwindling support at the grass roots level. Academically, the RCO is very much out on a limb, and perhaps now only serves the function of endorsing those parts which other qualifications fail to address in full. I think it would also be fair to state that the RCO hurdles are very much geared towards the Oxbridge model, which in this day and age, renders it automatically elitist in the eyes of many. It's interesting that the RCO has taken financial advice, and now finds that their planned move and the expenses involved, might threaten the future of the college. I would suggest that even setting up a tent on a brown-field site, with a second-hand digital organ as its' sole resource, would only be putting off the inevitable unless the organisation changes tac. In this day and age of rapid communications, the RCO could actually be a roving body without a fixed base; using established educational resources to fulfil its' mission on earth and presenting regional organ-days and events, as a type of outreach to the wider musical community. In this way, it would be a true college in the spirit of the age; enriching the appreciation for the instrument rather than expecting people to beat a path to the college doors as they once did. Long gone are the days of polished brass and the smell of bee's wax at Keinsington Gore, and merely finding cheaper property is not, in my honest opinion, addressing the fundamental changes and patterns of learning which now threaten organisations like the RCO. Eltism is only elitism when it has become inaccessible to the majority. Sir Simon Rattle pointed the way forward during his days at Birmingham, and they don't come much "elite" than he!! MM

====================== So was Nero! MM

Damn those lawyers! Can we ask for our money back then? MM