MusingMuso
-
Posts
4,821 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MusingMuso
-
-
Nobody is going to hear the difference between a pneumatic and electro-pneumatic action and music is about what you hear, not the mechanics of how you make the sound. It might be interesting to preserve a few pneumatic action instruments as museum pieces (and they are certainly a different sort of playing experience) but to waste church money on pneumatic actions runs against common sense - a quality sometimes in rather short supply amongst organ 'experts'.
(citation)
If you come to Belgium, let me know. I'll show you a pneumatic organ that nears its 100 years anniversary without a hint.
In Britain there were excellent systems too, ditto in Germany. So why judge?
==========
The 100 year-old pneumatic-action in Belgium surprises me not. H & H have retained the pneumatic-action in the restoration of the Schulze at St.Bart's, Armley, and I bet that caused a few headaches for them.
Where I live, there's not a lot of money about among churches, and pneumatic actions continue to stagger on whilst the 1960's and 70's electro-pneumatic actions enter into terminal (no pun intended) decline.
In any event, no self-respecting street organ or dance organ builder in the low countries would ever have used anything else.
If you've never heard the speed of response and repetition of a Mortier organ, you haven't lived....it is phenomenal!
So is pneumatic-action restoration really "a waste of money" if it was good to start with?
I quite like the thumping noises, which make everything sound like a clog-dance.
MM
-
Of course, Schulze came later...
============
Well Schulze certainly arrived in the UK later, but the firm had been around in Germany for a long time before that!
His workmen used to gather the harvest and work in the fields when they weren,t building organs, which may explain some of the slightly agricultural quality of the workmanship.
I was translating something from some obscure language recently, using a computer translation, and the word "organ-builder" came out as "organ farmer". Clever things these computers!!
MM
-
Hill organs generally, but not always, have no Tierces.
================
I'm not sure if that statement is correct, but perhaps the offending word is "generally".
Was there anything "general" about what Hill did, considering that he was at the cutting-edge of the "German movement?"
I can think of at least a dozen organs by William Hill which included the Sesquialtera without digging further. At Ashton-under-Lyne, (1845 rebuild) not only was there the usual pitched version, there was also an octave Sequialtera at 24.26.29 and even separate 3.1/5th and 1.3/5th registers on the Great. The Swell not only had the Sesquialtera, it also had a separate 5rks Echo Cornet of 1.8.12.15.17
I suspect that Hill was the professional, who built what people asked him to build, and gave of his best without too many questions being asked.
I wouldn't pretend to be an expert of Wm.Hill or British organs circa.1850, but it seems to me that "generally" is the most dangerous choice of word, when so much was happening and so much was changing at the time.
MM
-
In the meantime, the very fact the Grande oeuvre of Mander is in New York
must have us all thinking -I mean us all europeans-. But let's be fair, this is very
good for NY.
===================
Indeed we agree, and it has been a source of great personal annoyance that there seems to have been a rush towards what many would regard as an inferior sound, in many of the prestige projects of recent years.
If some of these projects demonstrated that the imported products were tonally superior, I would have welcomed them, but they patently are not. In fact, I can only think of two instruments imported to this country which really excite me, and those are the original Frobenius at Queen's College, Oxford, and the excellent Rieger at Clifton Cathedral.
I wonder what sort of a mess certain continental builders would have made with the St.John's, Cambridge project, where the acoustic is less then generous?
But as this thread was about Trombas and Trompettes in the first instance, and we seem to have strayed far away from that, perhaps we should recall the 1960's instrument at Blackburn Cathedral; a tonal landmark in British organ-building, and one which still sets a standard.
For those who like their Trompettes and pedal reeds, it's still the place to go, with the added advantage that it has better chorus-work than anything ever made by Aristide Cavaille-Coll.
It's very sad to think that so many "names" have disappeared in UK organ-building, just when a national style was proving its worth at home and abroad.
MM
-
No, of course, but we should know, and still have, genuine instruments.
The case "which organ for Reger" has given, and still gives, rise to endless dispute in Germany.
==============
I suspect that the real clue as to which style of organ is best for Reger is to be found not in the organs of Walcker, but in the work of Sauer. The great Sauer organ was the preferred choice of Karl Straube at St.Thomas's, Leipzing (1908).
It's a pity the Germans don't like German Romantic instruments. Personally, I rather detest most modern German ones tonally! (Ok, there is a lovely new German organ at Warsaw Cathedral in Poland, but that seems to be a glorious exception to the rule of simply dreadful reeds and characterless fluework)
Give me a good Mander anyday!
MM
-
Reger's music just becomes a jumble of sound on a typical Walcker, with those enormously powerful basses and restrained trebles.
This is precisely why I am concerned about such experimentations!
Sorry, this is not true. A german romantic organ is still, while of course
orchestral, a polyphonic organ.
If the basses are too strong, the fault lies with the registration.
====================
Is Pierre suggesting that we should never play any music on any instrument not of the exact period and country?
But Bach to Reger!
Is Pierre suggesting that all Walcker organs were the same, right across the history of the company, or that they were never different from the earlier romantic organs of Germany save for the introduction of the Rollschweller?
The organ at Doesburg Cathedral in the Netherlands, dates from circa.1914, and whilst the huge resonance of the building may contribute something to it, the lower registers are certainly not balanced by the brightness of the trebles at almost any dynamic level. Even using the metal basses and full pleno for the music of Bach, the effect is still bass heavy and indistinct.
Lest we forget, Walcker experimented with draughts in chimmney-flues in his attempt to get the gravity he was looking for, and furthermore, the Pedal reeds are absolutely overwhelming at Doesburg.
Make no mistake, it is a fine organ and makes many fine sounds, but Reger sounds a lot better elsewhere!!
The trouble is, Reger was never much of an organist and he relied on Straube a great deal. Straube himself was keen to move away from the heavy romantic German organ, and the organ at Passau Cathedral had much to do with him.
What we have to decide, as musicians, is whether we follow the ignorance of Reger as an organist (certainly not as a composer!) or the more enlightened understanding of Straube as a supreme organist and champion of Reger's music.
I am not a great musicologist, but I believe that Reger revised certain works on the advice of Straube, so we have to understand that Reger's wonderful music for the organ was something of a team effort between the two men. So if Reger listened to the input from Straube enough to re-write certain things, and Straube wanted the sort of sound associated with Passau rather than an organ like Doesburg, who am I to challenge that?
MM
-
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!
===================
Why shouldn't romantic music work at Haarlem, with it's wonderfully warm, rich tones and very "English" sounding reeds?
Only three things get in the way.....the lack of a Swell Box, the lack of pistons and a slight limitation in the compass.
What follows is going to tax my abilities at describing the sonic experience, but I'll give it a whirl.
For the classic English "Full Swell" with box closed, it sounds as if Jos van der Kooy (who knows this organ better than anyone) uses the 16ft Dulcian (I hope I get the stop names right, because I don't have the stol-list to hand), a 4ft Principal coupled to the "Great" (I'll stick with English equivalents), and then, to simulate the opening of the Swell, more 8ft "body" is introduced, then 8ft Trumpet tone and a Mixture, then 16ft Trumpet tone with bigger Tierce Mixture....all done seamlessly, with the aid of a registrant or two. "Closing the box" is just a reversal of the above.
It has to be heard to be believed, because the simulation is so nearly perfect.
Most German Romantic works do not venture far into the top octave, so I guess the problem of the limited compass is not so great as might be suspected, and only really affects English and French music. (I have heard the Cocker Tuba Tune played at Haarlem....the top A drops down, with the addition of the big Mixture, and it sounds quite acceptable, as the Mixture adds the top note required)
Combination "software" is replaced with combination "liveware"....you know....real flesh and bones, like we used to use before everyone became lazy. OK, there may be something of a crowd in the organ-loft, and they need to be briefed meticulously, but I've never actually heard a registrational mistake at Haarlem in about 20 years!!
The point about it "being a waste of effort" is, I'm afraid, a comment which merely demonstrates that the writer hasn't heard Jos van der Kooy or someone like Bas de Vroome play Reger at Haarlem.....it is the most wonderful experience.
Becuase the tones at Haarlem are so warm, largely thanks to the building and the strong "middle" and "bass" of the organ, Reger's music loses nothing, but actually gains a certain contrapuntal clarity, Normally, Reger's music just becomes a jumble of sound on a typical Walcker, with those enormously powerful basses and restrained trebles.
As for dynamics, two registrants can do most, if not all, of the functions covered by a Rollschweller. German romantic organs do not rely on the powerful Swells enclosed in massive boxes, such as we find in the UK, America or France, but instead, on the addition and subtraction of registers.
Of course, the proof of the pudding etc........
The CD I mentioned says it all, and I would count it as among the top five CD performances I have in my collection....wonderfully recorded and brilliantly performed. Don't hesitate to buy a copy. You will not be disappointed, because this is seriously good organ-playing by any standards.
As for Cesar Franck at Haarlem, it may be just a little difficult, but perhaps not impossible. French music is so obviously written for a French organ....or maybe a Hungarian one......but that's another challenge to our pre-conceptions!
MM
-
Yes!!!
And there you have exactly the right choruses and mixtures.
==============
You don't have to go all the way to Latvia, unless you're into blond jokes and wonderful choral music.
Doesburg cathedral, towards the German border of the Netherlands, has a wonderfully authentic 4 manual Walcker.
As for extant Sauers and other German romantic organs by such builders as Schlag & Soehn....there are thousands of the things in N W Poland; the bit that Germany "borrowed" for about 140 years!!
The largest Sauer ever built, at the Centenary Hall (Jarhundrethalle), Breslau (now Wraclaw) forms the basis of the cathedral organ there.....and it's BIG. The electric action was designed by no other than Walcker.
MM
-
But, as a general point, it seems as though the present situation is unmusical. Perhaps, as M. Lauwers states, a return to the previous 17, 19, 22 composition would be more desirable. At Truro, the GO and Swell mixtures both have this composition and, in addition, they both break at F#1 (to what, I cannot recall).
However, as M. Lauwers also states, this is not a 'Bach' mixture!
=================
I held back a litle when I read the Tierce Mixture thread, since the great and good Mr Mander seemed to side with the conclusions of the "Organ Reform" lobby and M.Lauwers, who stated, and continue to state that only Quint Mixtures are appropriate for the music of Bach.
Well now, let's look at a bit of evidence to the contrary, but have a bit of fun on the way, just to tease the mind a little!
Let's start in England, with the traditional post-Snetzler organs of Hill, Willis, etc etc. THEY had tierce mixtures as we know. Snetzler organs almost always had Tierce Mixtures, and where did he get the idea from?
Well, it is believed that he worked on the organ of St.Bavo, Haarlem with Christian Muller, the builder, who was GERMAN and not Dutch. There are Tierce Mixtures on every division of that magnificent instrument, and most are not intended as solo registers, but as part of a Terz-chorus.
(Go forward a little in the Dutch tradition, and we come across Batz organs, with their distinctly "reedy" terz-choruses)
The Bavo organ is as different from the earlier style of Arp Schnitger as it is possible to get on a gnat's-breath of wind....warmer, less distinct....maybe just a wee bit "romantic" in concept. It anticipates the heroic "sturm und drang" period....a big sound for a big church. (Yes, I do know that it is actually less powerful than it used to be, and Marcussen have never done a big important restoration job in Holland since!)
In Hamburg, narrow tierces were quite common, whereas in the Saxony area, they were not.
Now, I don't know from where Christian Muller originated, but it isn't too important for the purposes of this reply, because if we trot across to the east of Germany and the area of Thuringia, where Bach lived and worked, there is a fine example of Thuringian organ-building at Altenburg; an organ built by Trost, on which Krebs played, and which was examined and played by Bach in 1739, to his approval.
This large 2m instrument has Tierce Mixtures, some unusual pipe constructions, a fair number of narrow, quasi-imitative Gambas and a rich, horny sort of sound .
I would also point out that at Alkmaar, the Frans Casper Schnitger/Hagabeer organ at St.Lauren's has two Sesquialteras which break back at middle C; thus negating and possibility that they were designed as solo registers. (It also has an fascinating Carillon register with a 4th interval in the make-up, which sounds a bit like tubular-bells)
Go to Poland, and one finds Cimbels with just a few pipes set on a small block, which shriek away atop the entire chorus, and yet have more or less random pitches, with no attempt made at tuning them whatsoever!! (I kid you not!!)
Now didn't John Compton wire up Aliquots in some of his larger "Mixtures?"
I believe that the "organ reform" people got it wrong right at the start, because when you add those narrow tierces, and pull out those majestic manual doubles, ultimate clarity goes out through the nearest stained-glass window.
And journeying back to England, what do we find?
The Thuringian, Edmund Schulze, installing numerous Tierce Mixtures with open-foot voicing.....just the sort of thing he knew so well when he tuned and maintained the old baroque organs in his local area!!
What goes around, comes around, as they say.
MM
-
Whilst I would be interested to hear this, I am still not convinced. Playing Romantic music on this organ must still be something of a compromise. (snip)
===================
The Bavo recording on which Jos van der Kooy plays romantic music, is entitled
"Spectacular Romantics" and is on the "Intersound" label No.DDD1013. The full track list is:-
Widor - Allegro fromSymph.6
Saint-Saens - Triosieme Fantaisie do majeur op.157
Reger - Introduction und Passacaglia in d minor
- Intermezzo in f minor (Nine pieces Op.129)
- Fantasie und Fugue Op.135b
Eduardo Garcia Torres - Saeta II
- Saeta IV
Marco Enrico Bossi - Theme et Variations Op.115
I wrongly suggested that it was Manuel Torres....my apologies. The Saetas are absolutely fascinating however, being based on Gypsy Marian cries, but I'm not sure that they are in print.
As Jos van der Kooy states in the sleeve notes, the romantic works have to be "transcribed" a little.
As for Pierre's comment about "trusting others" to register the organ, this would have been perfectly normal practice in Bach's time; especially on certain organs where the stops are in lengthy, horizontal rows; some of which are virtually beyond reach. It can be quite a social occasion!
Anyway Piere, I guess we play Bach on romantic instruments, so why not Messaien at Haarlem? (Messaien did!!)
I have fond memories of Virgil Fox murdering Bach at the Albert Hall, but with such conviction and panache, that it was actually enormously entertaining and impressive.
And the perfect Reger organ?
It's just got to be Passau, in which Straube had a hand, but I guess the purists will argue the case for a great Walcker or Sauer instrument of the period. Others would be perfectly happy to play it on the splendidly re-built Albert Hall instrument.
MM
-
.......A cinema organ isn't about choruses. It's another instrument; but who will dare tell what a "proper chorus" is?
I still do not know!
================
I always liken chorus work to a consort of Viols, where each complements the next in such a way that there is musical empathy and integrity. This is something which was clouded by the introduction of more powerful, less homogenous instruments such as the Viola, Violoncello, Double Bass and Clarinet.
I personally love theatre organ, but then, I do play them from time to time....even in public!
Theatre Organs DO have choruses.....Tibia and Reed ones, but never Diapason ones. If we think of them as the earliest synthesisers and a development of the Fair Organs which Wurlitzer, the Belgians, French and Dutch made so beautifully, then they start to make sense. They succeeded in being the "one-man orchestra", whereas Hope-Jones instruments failed to be "church organs".
Of course, many theatre organs are very badly played, but hear a master at work, or the old recordings of Quentin Maclean (a student of Reger and Karl Straube) or Reginal Foort FRCO, and it soon becomes apparent that they are very musical instruments in the right hands (and feet).
MM
-
Actually, to the question "who took ober H-J's interests", you have of course Wurlitzer, where arised a genuine, interesting and worthwile instrument, the cinema organ.
===============
Actually, when I stated that Norman & Beard took over the Hope-Jones interests, I meant the company interests. They finished some of H-J unfinished work, such as the instrument at Lambeth Town Hall, London.
I can also inform Pierre and others, that the earliest experiments in Tibia tones were done at the Norman & Beard works in Norwich, and Hope-Jones was somehow involved in it, but I forget the exact details.
Another extant H-J organ (1898), which was "improved" only three years after being built, by Norman & Beard Ltd (1901) and subsequently re-furbished rather than altered, by Hill, Norman & Beard in 1935, is the organ of Ambleside Parish Church, Cumbria, in the English Lake District. I assume it is still in use?
The fascinating thing about H-J was the wonderful quality of the voicing. The Flutes are lovely, the Tibias full and typical of the sound, the keen strings are beautifully voiced, the Diapasons are also good, whilst the reeds are generally magnificent.
The problem is, that nothing blends too well which might yield a proper organ-chorus sound.
I have played it, and enjoyed it for what it is.....but a proper organ it isn't!!
This instrument also has a Diaphonic pedal rank. Diaphones produced ultra-smooth, very powerful bass tones, as may be heard in many Wurlitzer organs, where the buildings often shake when they are introduced.
If Pierre really wants to hear a big Diapahone sound, he should travel to Hull City Hall to hear the 32ft version there. (John Compton) Interestingly, this diaphone simply does not blend at all with the hugely powerful 16ft extention of the Solo Tuba on 20" wg wind. A curious and very unpleasent hetrodyne, or harmonic "wobble" results when the two are drawn at the same time. Consequently, no one ever uses the 16ft Tuba with the full organ, but if they do, they usually make sure that the 32ft Diaphone is replaced by the wonderfully effective 32ft Harmonics....a type of pedal Cornet, which gives the effect of a 32ft reed very convincingly.
I also "Hope" that a few H-J instruments continue to survive in more or less original condition, for they are an important part of British organ-heritage and history.
MM
-
But...
This splendid theory needs certainly to be internationalized, because of a man named William Hill. (SNIP).....
"Beginning in 1829, the firm was responsible for a series of instruments which for size, mechanical ingenuity and tonal novelty, were unprecedented in english experience. (snip)......
Among these features were Pedal pipes, German pedal boards, CC keyboard compasses, manual doubles, unprecedently wide scales, Posaune and Cornopean reeds, imitative registers, large Swell divisions (some of almost full compass) and duplication of chorus ranks..."
So the period is remarkably the same as E-F Walcker's. A german influence seems to be possible ........(truncated)
==================
One thing is sure, William Hill never travelled outside Britain, so any German influence would come to him indirectly.
How could this be?
Well, other people certainly travelled, and brought back ideas and reports. This was especially true even whilst Hill was working on the re-build/enlargement of the Ward organ at Doncaster Parish Church.
However, perhaps the key to much that we now call the English "German movement" is to be found in the personages of Prince Albert (the Prince Consort to Victoria, and from the Thuringian region of Germany) and, of course, in the immediate fame of Mendelssohn, who had arrive in Britain in 1829. Prince Albert was an organist, and Mendelssohn was a brilliant organist and recitalist. (Many were the times that planned organ-recitals had to be cancelled due to the restricted nature of English organs of the period)
Enter the melting pot the name of Dr.H J Gauntlett; a friend of Mendelssohn, who in turn, was often the private guest of Queen Victoria and the organ playing Prince Albert.
Ganutlett was a fine organist and tutor; being involved with the musical expansion of Congregational Church music, and repsonsible for some very interesting English "German" designs, such as the fine organ of George Street Congregational Church, Liverpool.
Will we ever know the proper answer? Possibly not, unless documents turn up which may throw further light on the subject.
I think that the role of Prince Albert, who single-handedly arranged the Great Exhibition of 1851, and invited Schulze to install an organ there, has never been fully acknowledged. Certainly, it would have been very interesting to be a "fly on the wall" to the fascinating conversations which Mendelssohn, Prince Albert and Dr.Gauntlett enjoyed.
London was, at the time, incredibly international, and the "grapevine" among organists was certainly very well-established.
The humble Mr Hill would doubtless have been approached, and told what to do!
MM
-
This is an area with which we are not yet well acquainted, so more information would definitely be of interest.
John Pike Mander
=============
Oooops! I've probably mislead a little here. What I should have said, was that the 1841 St.Deny's Cavaille-Coll was anticipated by the Buckholz organ at Kronstadt, Romania, (1839 completion) which has two swell boxes; one of which contains a full reed chorus. Not that the instrument is remotely like those of Cavaille-Coll.
Buckholz was a Berliner who seemed to largely eschew the affects of Vogler; instead following and respecting the organs of Wagner, which were the staple style of German organ-building of the immediate pre-romantic period.
MM
-
The distinction between manuals by their loudness, with the great (Manual I) supreme,
then II, III, Fernwerk, each a bit softer, is typical for the german romantic organ.
It was done for the first time at Pauluskirche Frankfurt (Walcker 1829).
The other countries were inspired by this, but quite loosely. The french and british swell
could be actually as powerfull as the great.
Hans Gerd Klais explained me this, with a name: "Abschwächungsprinzip" ("Softening principle") as opposed to "Werkprinzip".
German romantic organs in Belgium often had their "Swell" enriched with big-sized
Trompettes, which took the place of gentle, free-reed Clarinettes.
Best wishes,
Pierre Lauwers.
=================
Maybe going off at a slight tangent, it is interesting to note that Charles Brindley, who worked closely with Schulze at Doncaster, built instruments in which the Swell was usually very much softer than the Great, and the Choir organs more in the manner of Echo organs.
There was a magnificent example of Brindley's post-Schulze work at Centenary Methodist Church, Dewsbury (W.Yorkshire), which had a similarly wonderful Great plenum to that found at Doncaster.
MM
-
The recent H&H restoration at Armley dispelled the long-standing myth that the metal pipes were the work of an English maker, possibly Violette of London.
The style of handwriting in these markings shows conclusively that they were of German origin. Whether that points to Schulze himself as the maker, is, of course, another matter.
===========
Possibly so, but as I understand it, Schulze did not have a metal shop at the Paulinzella works.
The organ arrived in large crates from Germany via the port of Hull, so it is quite possible that the pipes are of German origin.
I suppose it is a bit irrelevant really. The point is, they were obviously made to Schulze scales.
MM
-
This thing about British reed styles is quite interesting, because the original question was about the use of "French" and "Close toned" reeds on the same instrument.
Well, maybe the answer is most obviously to be found on the organs of Arthur Harrison, where the flambouyant Swell reeds have real devil and splash, not far removed from French reeds or those of Fr.Willis, and yet, on the same instrument, those fairly close-toned Trombas, over-powerful Tubas and Pedal Ophicleides.
The point about the Harmonics resgister (a type of Cornet with an added Septieme at 1.1/7th pitch....17.19.21.22) is interesting, for it did limit the brightness of the Great choruses; reducing the effect of the higher pitches to almost a gentle tinkle, and in no way offending the blend of the Trombas.
Arthur Harrison got away with this simply because he regulated his pipework to the n-th degree, and thus avoided a clash of tonal personalities....but was it ever ideal?
I know that great discussions and experiments took place at the Norman & Beard works when close-toned reeds first became fashionable. The voicers were very aware of the problem of blend bwteeen them and the flue registers.
All's well that ends well........we got cinema organs and endless hours of fun! (Marcel Dupre played one in Paris for a little while!)
Who else could blend keen strings, mild Diapasons, heavy Tibias, thin Vox Humana sounds, spikey sounding Kinuras, Oboes, Clarinets,gentle Flutes, Dulcianas, Celestes, cloying Tubas and brash, flared Post Horns?
It just had to be Hope-Jones and Wurlitzer!
And who took over the Hope-Jones interests?
Norman & Beard of course, who went on to make "Christie" theatre-organs when the company became Hill, Norman & Beard.
MM
-
I think they will find the journey worthwhile. But, arguably (and for different reasons), it has the same problems of restricted repertoire that one encounters at St. Bavo, Haarlem. I know it plays Baroque and modern music well, and it cannot reasonably be expected to play the entire repertoire without compromise. But - no Franck, no Widor, no Vierne, no Reger? No thanks! (Apart from problems of compass, one would need at least two registrants, a personal fitness trainer and a large bottle of Vodka in order to accomplish such a feat.)
==============
I gulped when I read this!
I go to Holland most years, and ALWAYS try to hear the Bavo organ in all its' glory.
There is a very good CD recording available of Jos van der Kooy playing romantic organ music at Bavo. IT IS STUNNING!
The music includes music by Manuel Torres (Who?), Widor, Reger etc.
Now having played this wonderful....superlative instrument, I can assure anyone that it is not too heavy to play in spite of its huge size (about the same number of pipes as the RFH), and the key action is spot-on. The biggest problem is in registering music of the romantic repertoire, which does really call for one page turner and two stop-assistants fully briefed beforehand.
Jos van der Kooy can even replicate the effect of a Swell Box on this organ, which has to be heard to be believed!
I'm delighted to report that I have one reason, and one reason alone for going to hear the Bavo organ. It is to hear the music of Reger brilliantly played on an instrument which probably suits the music better than almost ANY Walcker organ of the period. (I've heard Reger played on the 4-manual Walcker at Doesburg, Netherlands)
That's the thing about the Bavo organ.......it is not just good, it has real musical presence and a capacity to embrace more than that for which it was designed; at the same time, inspiring the soul like almost no other instrument in Europe.
OK....it's probably as much Marcussen as it is Muller these days, but it was good enough to have me flowing with tears when I first played it !!
MM
PS: Last year, I heard Frank Bridge played on the Bavo organ!!
-
As far as the continental romantic organ is concerned, we may assume with a fair confidence it ermerged from a synthesis of the southern german baroque organ (with for instance Josef Gabler, among others) with Abt Vogler's ideas.
===============
Mmmmmm!
....and what about the famous romantic organ in Romania, which pre-dates them all? (Two swell boxes and reed choruses!)
More info on request ;-)
MM
-
St.George's Doncaster: ..... The pipework has been respected (which I suppose is the main thing) and the people of Doncaster have dipped their hands deep into their pockets in order to get an honest job done, but what about the console?
To be fair to the organ, I still think that Full Great at Doncaster (with or without the reeds) is the most glorious Plenum I have heard in this country.
==============
Well now, we are into dangerous/erroneous territory here. The tonal changes wrought to the Doncaster Schulze over the years have not exactly been minor it would seem. For a start, the foot-holes of the original Schulze pipes appear to have been coned to some degree, and it is known that Schulze would just normally slice them off square and deposit them on the chest; all voicing and regulation carried out at the mouth.....open-foot voicing in fact.
Furthemore, the Swell and Great reeds were completely re-voiced by Norman & Beard on increased (6" wg?) pressure, in addition to the Solo Tubas added at the same time.
As regards the "balance" of the Great with other divisions, one has to go to Armley to fully comprehend the reason for this. The Swell organs of German Romantic instruments are not powerful affairs, unlike those of the English organs which developed under Hill and especially Fr.Willis. The other divisions, like the Choir, Echo and Solo, are there merely to add great contrasts of colour and subtle sounding effects. In ANY true German Romantic organ, the Great and Pedal absolutely dominate the instrument, and that is exactly as it should be.
Some will be interested to know that Schulze purchased all his metal pipes from outside suppliers, and only made wooden pipes himself; some of which are sometimes of cylindrical section.
It is also relevant....perhaps vital....to know that Schulze was assisted by Charles Brindley of Sheffield in the building of the Doncasetr instrument; the two companies sharing workmen when Schulze arrived on these shores.
Another curious fact.....there was another Schulze by the name of Karl, who worked for the German firm, but stayed in this country to become the head-voicer of the Sheffield based organ-builder, Albert Keates.
An even more curious fact, is that the 32ft "free" reed at Doncaster, is an absolute travesty of scaling, and sounds suitably ridiculous as a result.
So Doncaster is far from original in many ways, but perhaps it is actually better for that as an accompaniment instrument rather than as a purist's delight. The chief glory of the instrument rests in the superb plenum and the quality of the fluework generally, and even now, it can inspire like no other, just as it did T C Lewis, who regarded Schulze as the greatest-ever organ-builder, and on whom he based much of his own work.
Finally, it was Doncaster rather than Armley which totally dominated British organ-building in the north of England thereafter.
Bristol Cathedral - Organ Restoration
in General discussion
Posted