sotto
-
Posts
129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by sotto
-
-
I do not. This said, I do not share the criticisms against the british Cuisine;
it is very close to many others in Europe, in areas where it is not possible
to grow anything one wants, like they can in France or Italy. To have to do with less
ressources is a plan which might have some future indeed...
Pierre
It was meant as a joke Pierre, because contestants on the programme, who are ordinary people hoping to win a career as a professional chef, are often criticised for putting too many ingredients on one plate, and for trying to combine flavours that just don't go together. So it seemed very close to the example you were using for eclectic organ design.
-
One day, maybe, it will be realized to play ancient, romantic and modern
"repertoire" (i.e., the music we momentarily like) on the same organ, is a chimera,
as would be chips, Caviar, Strawberry cake, Plum Pudding, oysters, corned beef,
banana,Chili, pork and eggs cooked in the oven in the same plate, and then served
with Chantilly, mint sauce, W... sauce, vinager and ketchup, with as drink a pint
of Ale mixed with Sauternes and Vodka.
(Well, sorry, I have to go to the tiniest room....)
Pierre
I didn't know you could get the BBC's "Master Chef" series in Belgium!
-
The protracted Worcester saga certainly gave us all plenty to talk about. Initially some contributors were able to express their fondness for the old organ, subsequently we were able to follow in considerable detail progress on its replacement, and finally members were able to comment on, and in some cases, play the new instrument.
It all seems to have gone a bit dull now! A bit a controversy certainly makes life interesting! Cant someone persuade Salisbury that they really need a new Klais, or Truro that neo-baroque is clearly the way forward. We need a cause to get behind I feel.
How about suggesting a campain to drop a bomb upon the west end organ of St Mary's Warwick, or is that just too radical?
-
Well it will be interesting to have an example of the work of another builder but, to me, that seems a very confused stop list unsure of its nationality. On paper, not my cup of tea.
-
And one hopes you never should hear them.
I am constantly of the opinion that should the Tuba on the Solo be drawn, a cut-out (if electric stop action is present) must stop it arriving to another manual through a coupler that has been inadvertently been left out. The unholy racket caused when it has, is neither musical nor necessary ...
Are you familiar with the organ in Bristol Cathedral, the Tutti pistons certainly couple the tuba (labelled tromba I believe) through to the great. This splendid, if somewhat thick, tutti is very much "The Bristol Sound".
-
Headphones - you can't hear what the conductor is saying very clearly from the organ loft during rehearsals, so the headphones help a lot. They are linked to the pair of microphones permanently suspended across the Quire for recording the organ and choir.
I find that a little surprising. I do a lot of accompanying in cathedrals and other "great churches" in the South West and fully appreciate how difficult it can be to hear what the conductor is saying. Heavy accoustics like Gloucester, are particularly difficult, not helped if the conductor is facing away from you. Places like Bath where the organist in the transept is some distance from the choir stalls can also present problems. But with the set up in Worcester where the console is close to the choir stalls and the accoustic is not over resonant, I would have thought it should be a bit easier. I wouldn't want to play with the headphones on and would imagine it would be a bit of fag to have to keep putting them on and off during rehearsal.
-
IMHO:-
Indisputably there is no indisputably Britain's greatest composer
-
Are we aiming for the Church Times on Friday?
-
Favourite wish? To hear the Elgar Sonata no. 1 in the Cathedral, on an instrument that can finally do it justice!
I think thats a little unfair on the old machine, but agree that the new organ would do it proud
-
The question of good will is relevant here. But only you are in a position to judge the level of good will from the other side (wedding party, soloist/family &c) and the level of good will due from yourself.
I don't see it quite like that. From my point of view one is providing a professional service for which a fee is quoted based upon a reasonable anticipation of the amount of work, and time, involved to fulfil that commitment. Accompanying a guest soloist can involve a considerable amount of additional work. Private practice, possible some hours, may be required to learn the accompaniment, then an additional private rehearsal session in the church may have to be booked, and this for many of us will involve a return journey, possibly of some miles, from home. This is likely to at least double the amount of work involved, probably more than double....
-
It is not unreasonable in the slightest to charge a supplementary fee in these circumstances. We have a leaftlet which is given out to couples with guidance for wedding music in which it clearly states that the organist will charge an additional fee if a separate rehearsal is needed in advance with a soloist.
-
The JSB "Giant" is always a winner - arresting and sounds good on full organ
A frightening statement, goodness knows I'm no purist, but I cannot imagine wanting to use even a single 8' great chorus reed on the manuals for this piece, let alone, were they available, the 16' bombarde and the clarion.
I learnt this piece as one of the very first pieces where I changed teachers and began lessons on a (now defunct) cathedral organ which at that time had 6 pistons to each of great and swell. I remember carefully selecting stops for what, I hoped, would be an effective Bach registration, only to be told by my teacher (a former New College organ scholar, not averse to the less romantic instuments) that "on an english cathedral organ you just couple swell 5 to great 5", good advice, but note not "swell 6 to great 6".
-
Yes, I commented earlier that the strange lighting conditions, and inconsistent variations in the lighting, are one of the give aways.
I certainly wasn't trying to suggest any great conspiracy or underhand dealing on the part of either the BBC or Kings, but nevertheless I'm sure that there are a great many people who believe that they are watching a live annual event from the chapel of Kings College each Christmas Eve, and not some carefully crafted conconction, including goodness only knows how many retakes, recorded at some earlier date. Given that some of this years carols were also in last years broadcast one begins to wonder whether the whole thing could not be done by re-editing.
-
It is fascinating to feel the hot air that has been expended on this subject over the forty years that have passed since I was a schoolboy. As a parish church organist since I was fourteen I have played organs with Victorian tracker action, trigger swell pedals, balanced swell pedals, electro pneumatic, direct electric, barker lever etc etc. If done properly, they can all work very well, but it really doesn't matter at all which is used because the people listening can't hear the difference anyway. What matters is the siting of the instrument and the quality of the scaling and the voicing of the pipework, plus competence in winding and making it all work properly. After that, accessibility and ease of maintenance are critical.
A lot on money has been wasted recreating ingenious and marvellous solutions that can now be done much better in other ways. Surely it's as simple as this, isn't it? If the layout permits, use a properly designed mechanical action. If not, use a good electro-pneumatic or direct electric. The dual console arrangements that we seen over the past couple of decades are just a stupid waste of money, aren't they?
Ha ha, "but don't you see, he's wearing nothing at all!"
I have a lot of sympathy for what you've said, and with due deference to out hosts, it this sort of attitude that leaves us with farcical situations like a major, and wonderful, cathedral organ in the South West of England upon which it is impossible to make pipes from coupled divisions speak in sync with each other. So actually in some cases what you've said is wrong, if proper modernisation was allowed to take place instead of pedantic maintenance of historical curiosities, the man or woman in the pew would hear a difference - an improvement because the instrument would function better as a result of the technilogical progress.
-
How about the Andriessen Theme & Variations, quite impressive sounding, or the Pastoral from Rheinberger 3. Mendelssohn 2 (complete) is quite aproachable.
-
Times move on, standards and expectations change. Take this into account & the Kings recordings under Willcocks are quite remarkable. Still hard to beat IMHO. I have the 3-disk Stanford series done by David Hill at Winchester, and these are also quite superb. I also have a couple of LPs (but nothing to play them on) of St. Paul's under Barry Rose that I think are sensational.
-
I am assuming the latest NPOR survey is accurate? That gives a stop-by-stop "history" of the origin of the pipework. Why did I think the Tuba was new Klais? Or am I thinking of somewhere else?
Thanks for the NPOR suggestion, now why didn't I think of that. It certainly is a lot of old pipework reused so I fully retract my criticism on that score. Some of it must be a little forced compared to how it used to be though. I certainly can't think of another organ (well maybe St. Mary Redcliffe but thats a bit different because of the echo organ) where the swell strings are so loud. Sw1 with the box closed is really much louder than what you would normally expect.
-
This isn't entirely accurate for the reasons Cynic has already mentioned - a huuuge amount of the old pipework was kept. Also, it wasn't exactly a whim of a new DOM - PK has been there since 1986.
OK, I stand corrected. I wasn't aware how much pipework had been reused, I'll have to buy a book on the history of the instrument next time I'm there.
Also agree that the new instrument is of great quality and integrity. Its a bit agressive for my personal taste but that's subjective of course.
-
I used to reckon it an exceedingly fine instrument and I was sorry to see it go. Dudley Holroyd loved it.
Here's the shame of the thing. (This is in no way a comment on the qualities of the new instrument.) That a very fine and effective organ can be, too all intents and purposes, scrapped on the whim of some new DOM who just doesn't like it, despite the fact that many more people, including a long serving and destinguished predecessor in the post, have found it to be superbly equipped for the job in hand.
I've been encouraged by the responses on this thread. albeit off the original subject, in support of the old Bath organ. However fine a new organ may be (or however limited!) this doesn't in itself justify scrapping its predecessor. See you on Saturday!
-
I beg leave to alert all contributors, readers and national publications that the Minster organ is not perfect, and you heard it here first!!
I too have ultra fond memories of the HN&B. It was comfortable and a good deal quieter, just a complete mess mechanically and fairly structurally unsound. Sheer volume is of course not the only contributing factor in how much you can use in accompaniment; tone quality has much to do with it. The old thing was so leaky that I don't suppose any of us knew what it was really capable of towards the end.
Mr Klais, in discussion with a British organbuilder at the opening of a new organ of his in the London area, was asked if he thought the instrument was, er, a bit loud. "Oh yes, we always voice our instruments as loud as possible so the client thinks they are getting the value for money" is alleged to have been the response, though I cannot vouch for the source.
Interesting again, even if we have strayed 150 miles west of the original topic. It must be at least 20 years, probably 25, since I played the "old" Bath instrument and I'm quite willing to admit that memory is subjective and often rosy tinted. You refer to the HN&B as being "a good deal quieter" and yet I remember it as being a very imposing and impressive instrument. Certainly in terms of tonal quality it was less agressive and therefore much easier to use for choral accompaniment. I once played Bairstow "Blessed City" on it, most enjoyable. Whilst one could still let rip in the organ-only passage just before the final quartet on the present instrument the sound would hardly be what Bairstow had in mind.
It still seems a shame that a bit of wind leakage should result in an instrument being scrapped rather than restored.
-
No, I found it less comfortable than it was as HN&B left it. I could not see the point of the mechanical action on this instrument - I could play Cochereau-type repeated chords faster than the Solo action could manage, for example. I also preferred the sound (and specification) of its previous incarnation.
I do not recall having particular problems with the pistons, but then, the Minster toe pedals are not user-friendly, either.
Interesting.
I don't recall there having been a great debate as to why the "old" Bath instrument was not worthy of restoration. Perhaps it predated this discussion board. As is the case with another instrument only some 90 minutes at most away on the motorway network, there's no use crying over spilt milk, and the new instrument has many virtues. As a personal preference I think I preferred the HNB instrument which always seemed to me to be some way beyond "fit for purpose".
With respect to the thumb pistons on the new console, I particularly noticed on this last occasion that they are both:-
- very deeply recessed due to the unusually deep overhang on each manual keyboard
- very small, of a size that one would associate with the bottom end of the electronic market
- very deeply recessed due to the unusually deep overhang on each manual keyboard
-
I have managed this at Bath Abbey, with the Minster choir (during parts of Stanford, in A). In fairness, I should also mention that we had both the boys' and the girls' choirs, together with twelve to fourteen gentlemen. In addition to a few loud boys, some of the girls also managed successfully to match the noise I was making upstairs.
In defence of any perceived lack of taste or restraint on my part, my boss at the time would have been the first to tell me if the sound was organ-heavy downstairs.
And, no, of course I did not use the Tuba....
That's pretty remarkable. I was playing there only last Saturday for a big choir (Jackson in G & Rutter Winchester Te Deum) and didn't go much above Gt2. Its a very loud machine and I, not for the first time, found it unsubtle. It reminds me a lot of another instrument which you very much like (but I don't).
Did you find it a comfortable instrument to play, perhaps you've played it before. I've had a few goes now and remain of the opinion that it was far more comfortable, and better suited for choral accompaniment, pre Klais. Having played it a few times now I've sort of got used to the odd positioning of the pedal board, but hadn't quite realised until this last time quite how deeply set the thumb pistons are and how awkward this is. The toe pistons are IMHO for the occasional visitor too strangely positioned to come into consideration.
Not really my cup of tea. But an impressive instrument none the less and one that it feels is a priviledge to experience. Not quite sure how you'd play the Elgar Sonata on it, perhaps some people would see that as a virtue.
-
That said, whether you prefer the sound encouraged by Willcocks, Cleobury or even George Malcolm at Westminster is a matter of personal taste and the subject of endless argument. No doubt Cleobury was influenced by the legacy of George Malcolm when he was at Westmisnter himself as well as by that of his own mentor, George Guest.
I believe the Cleobury brothers were both choristers at Worcester Cathedral, is anyone aware who would have been DOM at that time, would Willcocks himself still have been at Worcester at that time, or was it perhaps Christopher Robinson?
-
I may be wrong, but I had understood that the practice still continues.
It probably does, but knowing its all been recorded months before this doesn't seem quite the same context as would be a live broadcast. After all if the chosen boy were to fluff it they can just do a retake.
At Least It Was Interesting
in General discussion
Posted
I'm very much in sympathy with the visiting organist. I'm reluctant to be too forthright because I have in the past upset another prominent organ builder which I don't set out to do. It is fair to say that when the instrument in its present form was first heard it was immediately very contraversial and attracted a great deal of negative criticism. A former teacher of mine was DOM there for a while a few years later and I believe it would be fair to say was not a great lover of the instrument.
My subjective opinion is that the east end organ is too quiet to be of much use, inadequate for accompanying a full sized choir (I played "The spirit of the Lord" on it a few years ago and it was impossible not to use some of the west end organ, but equally impossible to marry to west and east end sections satisfactarily), whereas the west end organ is very harsh and brash in its sounds. Again a subjective view, but I find it unpleasant.
pcnd is quite right in saying that the console is odd too. I can forgive the unusual stop knobs, but the overall layout, and particularly the piston placement as he has commented, make it very difficult to play. There's been a new DOM and new assistant since I last played it (actually I shall be accompany evensong there in a couple of weeks time - Watson in E and Joubert "O Lorde, the maker" (which is bound to need west end for the trumpet)) and I can only hope that the console is in a cleaner and tidier state than on previous visits!