MusingMuso
-
Posts
4,821 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MusingMuso
-
-
Well, le'ts be practical now.
The organ should be thrown out the Cathedral, and then
out of W...estern England's town. Not an easy task, we
would need some rather good trucks.
==============
I have an LGV Class 1 licence and I would be very happy to volunteer my services.
When do we roll?
MM
-
What does this ridiculous statement mean. I don't want an answer and suggest that all political references be kept out of this website!
=============
I always like people who make statements.
Actually, it was a reference to "a letter to the Times" and not politically inspired at all.
I see Ted Heath died.....wasn't he an organ scholar? ;-)
MM
-
Here's another, and ditto I suspect the accuracy of Rodgers statement also, although it would make sense.......
===============
I am now so sick of hearing about the ghastly organ at Worcester, I just wish someone would chuck a primed grenade in its' direction.
That would be good for music, good for organ-building, good for further discussion and good for Britain.
MM
-
At the time of writing, I gather that it may yet be open to the RAH to opt for "the full way", without losing face or wasting money or doing something that looks like "mission creep". Would people here feel able to write to the organ press, magazines such as The Organists' Review , Choir and Organ and maybe The Organ as well? And, as this is topical, a letter to the Times of London maybe as well?
================
Dear Mr Blair,
You of all people will be aware of the need to maintain a squeaky-clean facade and retain a polished-image. Your shining example has been an inspiration to us all....etc etc
MM
-
Especially interesting are scores marked up by the (perhaps very eminent) organist. Does he just circle troublesome notes, or is he more inventive? Little drawings of a pair of spectacles perhaps? Or warnings such as "Watch it!", "Trouble looming!", "Count!!!" or "Careful!"?
===========
THAT'S where I left my music Nick!
I still have the music with the ruder bits scribbled on them, so my reputation remains marginally intact....at least on this discussion board.
I like using international traffic signs; especially for Organ Concertii....."Beware of oncoming traffic" or "Give way."
As for tidy organ-consoles, I have a lovely head-scarf and a bib, marigolds and a feather duster, a can of "Pledge" and knee pads. I leave them by the console, in the hope that some visiting organist will someday do the cleaning and polishing!
MM
-
In the Edwardian era (and indeed after) the prestige of an organ seems to have been measured by the number of Open Diapasons it had on the Great Organ. Two, three and four such stops were by no means uncommon......(snip)
It is not unusual for there to be two Principal 4 stops to go with the large and small Open Diapasons. They don't normally get called Principal I and Principal II but Principal 4 (the smaller scaled of the two) and Octave 4.
Is this all a good idea? Well, it has its problems. Although it is common, indeed usual, to have a correspondingly scaled Principal (or Octave) 4 for the two or more Open Diapasons, it is rare that this luxury extends to the 2ft stops and beyond. So when it comes to the upperwork, the organ builder has to decide which foundation stops (8 & 4) the higher pitched stops are going to be scaled to work with. Even more significantly, when it comes to the tonal finishing, how is he going to balance the upperwork? Is it going to belong primarily to the Open Diapason I and Octave 4 and so be too loud for the Open Diapason II and Octave 4? Or the other way about perhaps? Or a compromise so that it works half way with both, but not properly with either? This is a real dilemma and there is no resolution to it. Of course, one might provide two mixtures, one for the Open I and the other for the Open II. But how much more useful two complimentary and very different Mixtures would be, one "grave" and the other higher pitched.
In my experience the introduction of additional Open Diapasons introduces problems which actually compromise the final outcome of the organ....(snip)
====================
The quest for larger foundation tone actualy goes back a long way; to the late baroque in fact. At the Bavokerk, Haarlem, can be found a two-rank 8ft Principal on the Hoofdwerk. (1727?)
With the early romantic German organs and Topfer, came bigger scalings and therefore louder 8ft unison stops, which organ-builders such as Schulze seized upon with relish.
When Schulze completed the Doncaster instrument, it cause such a sensation, that everyone wanted at least one "Schulze diapason," but probably got nothing of the sort unless they were genuine articles. The English organists never understood the Doncaster "double chorus," of one based on the 16ft pitch and one based on the (louder) 8ft pitch; each with their own complement of Mixtures/mutations etc.
Go to almost ANY Victorian/Edwardian instrument, and there in all its' glory will be a "Schulze" Diapason no.1, which usually stands out like a musical sore-thumb, simply because no-one really bother to work out what Schulze had been doing; except T C Lewis of course.
In the Harrison & Harrison "standard" instrument, sheer outright power was very much the order of the day, and the organists loved it because it could not only lead large-scale congregational singing, it could quell riots!
Of course, without the appropriate upperwork, the Great choruses simply lacked brilliance; the dreadful Harmonics mixtures little more than a sticking-plaster for the equally awful Trombas, which never stood a chance of blending with such assertive flues without a little help.
I therefore believe that the "Fat Alice" Diapasons were a travesty born of misconception, and really have no place in a serious musical instrument. If the English organists had done their homework, and actually worked out what Schulze had been doing, we wouldn't have been saddled with stringy and ineffectual Willis chorus-work, or the ridiculously loud choruses of Arthur Harrison/Geroge Dixon, and those large-scaled, leathered Diapasons.
Now if Willis hadn't strangled the Lewis company and dealt the death blow to the company, English organ-building might have taken a different and better turn....but that never happened.
Of course, the idea of "Grave" and "Sharp" Mixtures was exploited by Schulze very effectively.
MM
-
And why not "en chamade", in order to hang your bag?
===============
And a Regal en chamade to hang your.........
MM
-
My questions are:
-Do we still have intact Dulciana stops by Samuel Green?
-Would this stop make sense in a modern organ?
-Would any Dulciana mixture do as a secondary Diapason chorus or would it be a mere fancy?
=====================
Answers to the questions:-
1. Heaton Hall, Manchester, Lancashire, Samuel Green 1790
2. It would certainly have uses in a very small room
3. As no.2, but otherwise a mere fancy
MM
-
I have a particular interest in organ plus other instruments, both contemporary and historical. Another LP that I have is organ and guitar duets (John Williams & Peter Hurford). I really must get my LP's out and have another listen.
============
Then you really MUST investigate modern/contemporary Czech music Tony!
MM
-
As a lady organist I do sometimes find it problematic playing the organ as the console is very restricted and I find my right breast droops onto the Great when playing on the Swell.
Are there any other lady organists who have the same problem, and who could offer me some practical advice?
Thank you.
====================
The only possible solution is to employ the services of a titulare!
MM
-
Whilst I take your point about the 100mm wind pressure for the Choir Organ at Liverpool, there are plenty of examples of very high wind pressures elsewhere in the instrument. Unnecessarily high, in my opinion. I have only heard it live on one occasion - and that was quite sufficient! Ian Tracey played so loudly that I had to leave the building. Now, I like loud organ music, but the operative word here is 'music'. Notwithstanding Ian Tracey's great ability and superb technique, I found the sound oppressive and distinctly un-musical. Rather, it was just so much sheer noise. Personally, I think that many of the wind pressures could be lowered to good effect - the organ will still, I am sure, be adequate for the building.
....waiting for incredulous response from Roffensis....
===================
I'm a bit of a (genuine) baroque freak, but even I am incredulous!
Liverpool Anglican is, to the best of my knowledge, the largest single enclosed space on the face of the planet. The moment a sound is made in that immense mini-universe, we are into the realms of astro-physics and time-travel.....11 seconds of not terribly clean reverberation.
To fill such a huge space, any organ has to be big and loud....very big and loud in fact.
St.Bavo, Haarlem is an interesting comparison. Here there is a big acoustic, a big organ in the ideal west-end position, clear voicing and low wind-pressures; yet walk down the building, and by the time one arrives at the crossing, the sound is getting decidedly indistinct. Go the east-end of the building, and the sound is quite a riot and clarity has gone out of the window. It also doesn't sound very loud that far away, but fills the building nicely nevertheless.
Haarlem is a fraction the size of Liverpool Cathedral....possibly half the volume of space to be filled.
The only real comparison in terms of size and effect, has to be St.John-the-Divine, New York, and that suffers from much the same problems as Liverpool. The sound down the building is loud but indistinct; the quality of the sound very high, as at Liverpool. However, at close quarters, both instruments sound over-loud and the reeds rather "clangy." Both instruments were meant to be heard at their best from some distance away, but given the acoustics, clarity was never going to be the most notable feature of the sound.
Now if they pulled Liverpool Cathedral down and started again.........
MM
-
Most interesting about the soundboards of Blackburn. This is of course well on contemporary to Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral, whose soundboards have a very good slider seal system with huge cutouts to avoid runnings.It begs the question what type Blackburn's soundboards are now, and if plain slider then the seal is never perfect, and that in itslef would account perhaps for the loss of brilliance this organ has now to its fair name. The sheer fire is not what it was, it is decidedly more (too) polite. Tut tut.
==================
I cannot add anything more of interest I'm afraid. However, I didn't notice any loss of brilliance or fire when I heard it last, and actually expressed my relief to Richard Tanner that the instrument sounded as good as ever.
What I DID note was the difference when the sub-octave coupler was used, and this gave a distorted sense of balance with some degree of added mud which had never been there previously. With the 32ft digital voices underneath that, the effect was not terribly attractive I thought, but I can appreciate the value of the added body for accompaniment purposes.
David Wood tells me that he went to great pains to retain the character of the instrument, and spoke regularly to Dennis Thurlow during the re-building of the instrument.
One thing is sure, everyone was at pains to preserve what they knew to be so good, and if they were only 99% successful, then I believe we should all be happy with that.
MM
-
Well, maybe it is a sin to make links between things that seem to be different;
of course Howells, Tournemire and Reger are different, no doubt.
What they share is a style we call "post-romantic" in french, and a mood: meditative
music for big churches or cathedrals, deep-minded compositions perfectly suited
to gothic or neo-gothic atmospheres.
They are the trilogy of my preffered late-romantic composers, whose best suited
for organs were -and sometimes still are- systematically dismissed, and destroyed
wherever-whenever possible.
Maybe one day we shall need an organ style designed to suit the three.
=================
I once went to the fish museum at Hull....it's called "The Deep" I believe.
For some strange reason, I was reminded of Howells' music. It was relaxing watching all the fish swim up, down, round and round as well as side-to-side; quite unable to recall from whence they had come, and quite unable to decide where to go next.
Then a shark arrived, snatched a fish and departed.
"Aha! Reger!" I thought....don't ask me why.
MM
-
Interesting, because their workmanship in at least one other organ of a similar vintage is extremely good. True, the winding was somewhat experimental and resulted in a slightly unstable supply; but then, the rebuilt organ of Christchurch Priory (which utilises new Schwimmers) is also unstable. Insofar as the action is concerned, the workmanship is excellent and still functioning well.
I did not realise that Wood & Co. supplied new soundboards to Blackburn - this is particularly strange since I assume that when the organ was rebuilt by Walkers, they had also provided new soundboards. Is it certain that it was not just the (new) Solo division which had a new soundboard, but all departments?
=================
Off the top of my head, I can't quote the exact words, but David Wood wrote on his web-site that the chests at Blackburn were in an extremely poor state and needed to be renewed. I have no further details I'm afraid, but if I find my booklet about the re-build, I'll confirm the facts of the matter. However, I think it is quite certain that new chests were made and fitted.
I've played another Walker organ of a similar vintage, where bits kept falling off the console, half the combination action didn't work properly and the wind was definitely in the "wicken" category......North, South, East & West....all over the place.
MM
-
The problem with Blackburn is not so much what has been done to it recently, although I do abhor the addition of digital stops. No, the reason why the skids are already under this instrument and why it will surely be replaced in the fullness of time is that only 14 years after it was originally built by Walkers in 1969, the organ had serious wind and action problems. Wood of Huddersfield did a patch and mend job until the money had been raised for a proper restoration job.
I don't want to cast aspersions, but one of the reasons why the organs at places like Salisbury, Truro and Lincoln are still in such good condition is that they were solidly built with good materials in the first place. The longevity of these instruments is no coincidence.
Jeremy Jones
London
=====================
So far as I am aware, the Blackburn instrument has had entirely new windchests, a new console and a new wind supply in the Wood re-build.
Whatever Walker's achieved tonally, the organ was mechanically a bit of a disaster, to say the least.
Hopefully, all that has now been addressed and rectified.
MM
-
===============
Believe it or not, the harmonium is perfectly on-topic.
There was an organ in Poland which had, as a third added manual, an entire reed organ of harmonium type installed behind the knee-board of the console. The pipes are still there, but the harmonium disappeared.
MM
I'd be interested to know where that is and the specification, including the harmonium section, if you have that information.
John
===================
Ask and thou shalt receive!
Try the following link for pretty pictures and a description in Polish of the "Parabrahm-Orgel" (I think that may refer to the maker of the "Harmoniumwerk") which was labelled "Orchester Manual" and had ten stops, including a Celesta.
http://www.organy.art.pl/instrumenty.php?instr_id=10
I translated the whole thing, and it seems that the reed registers (I think there were 7 or 8 of them) were removed in 1928, and a "baroque" style Positive added to the instrument. The interesting thing is that the Celesta was available at various amplitudes, from ppp to ff.
If you find yourself struggling with the language and/or machine translations, then I would be happy to decipher for you John.
MM
-
I hesitate to post this topic as, of course, this is a PIPE organ forum, although as digital organs have been mentioned once or twice, I though I might chance it!
===============
Believe it or not, the harmonium is perfectly on-topic.
There was an organ in Poland which had, as a third added manual, an entire reed organ of harmonium type installed behind the knee-board of the console. The pipes are still there, but the harmonium disappeared.
MM
-
Personally I think to argue that the likes of Truro or Lincoln being with us forever, or indeed any organ is pretty pointless
Latest tweeakings occur at Blackburn for example, and one day even there, yes the lot WILL go!!! Sorry, but read the history books!!!
==================
Well, maybe I am not quite so cynical as to think that everything will go.
Blackburn is still very much Blackburn, and the small changes wrought are entirely reversible should someone so feel inclined in the future. Blackburn has a big advantage, because very few organs can do so much so well, and I think those who know and are respinsible for the instrument know this all too well.
We now have so FEW extant Fr.Willis organs in our cathedrals, I feel sure that the last remaining ones will be respected, just as the Grove organ at Tewskbury is respected.
I cannot even imagine that anyone would ever want to change St.Mary-Redcliffe, which is a glorious piece of work from the premier builder of the age. It may be unfashionable, but I've never heard anyone complain about it or want to scrap it.
It comes back to antiquity and the value of antiquity, surely?
Antiques are not expensive because they are better made necessarily. They are expensive because they are rare or perhaps unique, and make a statement about a particular age.
By my reckoning, Truro, Salisbury and Hereford now fall into the priceless antique category, as does Redcliffe. Blackburn is a modern classic, like a rare piece from Cartier, and people don't usually destroy what is outstanding, from whatever age.
I am optimistic.
MM
-
Well, apologies if I said something that could be felt offensive.
================
Please don't apologise Pierre....it's just me.
I just feel that the Howells legacy has become the millstone of British organ and choral music.
Someone once asked me to play Howells at a recital, and I did. ....just the once.
I played it really badly, and someone hit the nail right on the head when they said afterwards, "It was as if you really hated the music."
With that wonderfully perceptive criticism, I have never repeated the ordeal since.
Now Tournemire is something else, even though I'm not really into French music, Cavaille-Coll organs, garlic or accordians....I love the inventive imagination and some of the unique musical devices he employed.
I'm afraid I naturally lean towards the sort of music where lifting the fingers is as important as putting them down, and in some sort of contrapuntal order....Bach, Reger, Hindemith, Czech contemporary music....that sort of thing.
I'm a lost cause....ignore me!
MM
-
I listened with interest to last night's prom. Despite the fact that I'm not really "in to" modern classical music, I found the organ concerto interesting. The organ sounded well - although the interior shots on BBC4 seemed to bear no relevance to the pipes actually being used at the time!
I only wish we heard more of this unique instrument - especially in the Proms - the organ needs all the exposure it can get these days.
==================
After listening to the awful wheezing and gasping noises of an apparently always out-of-tune Royal Albert Hall organ for nigh on forty years, it is wonderful to hear the organ sounding so good these days.
Unfortunately, no-one will ever be able to do much to rectify the natural short-comings of the acoustic; possibly only matched by that of St.Pancras' Station; which leads me to another thought.
Why does London still not have a truly good large concert-hall with an organ in it?
They wasted zillions on the Millenium Dome, contributed so splendidly to the visual environment with the "London Eye" and now look set to waste ten times as much money on the sweaty jock-strap brigade for the Olympics.
Ask if they ever intend to install a organ at the Barbican, and you are met with the sort of stunned reaction more familiar of those who have just heard Tuvan throat-singing for the first time.
Compare this to almost ANY capital city anywhere in the world, and it is a national disgrace. They do better than this in Bulgaria and even Azerbijan!
MM
-
while Tournemire you may see like a kind of french Herbert Howells, in a more liturgical version.
=================
I have just suffered a mild fit and a small nose-bleed!
MM
-
Apologies first; I was confusing Gloucester with the "W" place we shouldn't mention. I'm not sure how Bengal fits into the equation, but each to his own.
I never go to the West Country I'm afraid.
I think Brian makes excellent observations, but what strikes me about the Victorians and Edwardians is the total lack of respect for the past. They came, they saw...they butchered.
Perhaps there is another perspective to all this. Great things only happen infrequently, but when they do, we should preserve them as best we may. The business of preservation is what happens when things have been so destroyed, that the few remaining examples of almost anything, become more significant than they were when first created.
Maybe what I am asking, is whether the preservation of 2nd or 3rd class instruments is sufficiently important to prevent the building of new 1st class instruments?
More importantly, is preservation governed by musical history or mere antiquity?
MM
-
I have often wondered why it is, that certain countries such as Holland, where not a great deal of organ-music has been written over the ages, should so consciously choose the path of restoration and historic preservation, whereas Germany, (for example) has just about eradicated the traces of its' own organ-history; save for the few masterpieces which have been restored.
As Pierre Lauwers has pointed out, actually finding a genuine romantic period-instrument in Germany is actually quite difficult, and those which do exist, tend to be in other countries such as Latvia, Poland and, of course, here in the UK.
The organ world is full of restorers and organ-historians, but equally well endowed with those who are able to build whatever a customer requires; from a copy Cavaille-Coll from Holland to a replica Hill/Gauntlett from the UK.
It is natural that organ-builders should respect earlier instruments as works of art and fine pieces of cabinet-making, but at what point does antique restoration become anti-art?
Standing back a little from the arguments and counter-arguments, it seems to me, that when organ-consultants arrive with a ball-point pen mightier than any wrecking-ball, it is often a period in which musical creativity is at its strongest....the desire to move forward and leave the past behind.
In the UK, we have seen the strength of feelings aroused by the destruction of the old organ at Worcester Cathedral, yet what replaces it is a rather fine instrument tonally. The same was evident at Blackburn almost 40 years ago.
So my point of discussion is deceptively simple. Do we look backwards by placing barbed-wire around every old organ and setting up gun turrets, or do we allow organ-consultants and organ-builders the right to change things as they feel fit?
MM
PS: Could we avoid mentioning Worcester AGAIN? !!!!!!!
-
I have played the organ at Sheffield Cathedral a few times, and I actually liked much of what I heard. However, in the madness of the age, there was a curious and highly fashionable attempt to tack "organ reform" voices to a "Father Willis" organ, and as those new registers were unenclosed, they did tend to be a bit bright, as well as being remote from the main section of the organ in the transept. Some of the pipework is hung on the nave wall, around the corner.
Isn't Neil Taylor the organist & choirmaster there?
I have a certain sympathy with the provision of a temporary electronic instrument, because the main organ, whatever its' merits as a recital instrument, lacks the variety of accompaniment tone necessary for Anglican choral-music, and everything was either all top and bottom, or a great roaring sound of Mixtures and Reeds....but a very good roaring sound.
I was personally aghast at the proposal to scrap the instrument and replace it with something new. There is the nucleus for a good instrument already there, and I'm quite sure that even the "Barokwerk" could be coaxed into harmony with the "non-Barokwerk."
It seems to me that an awful lot of money has been, and will be spent, in replacing it all. Once the cost of the temporary electronic is taken into account as an additional expense, I begin to wonder about the financial wisdom of the whole grandiose adventure.
Perhaps they could do with an independent organ-consultant to offer advice, or am I missing something in the final equation?
MM
Worcester Cathedral's Organ
in The Organ
Posted