Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

Contrabombarde

Members
  • Posts

    702
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Contrabombarde

  1. Whilst a virus by definition can't replicate except by hijacking the machinery in the cell of another organism, depending on the species a virus can be spread by phyiscal contact, transmission of blood products, sexual contact, aerosolised droplets (doctorspeak for sneezing) etc etc. The concern over the chalice would be 1. risk of transmission through the albeit tiny amounts of saliva left on the cup after each person has sipped; 2. risk of transmission through the albeit tiny amounts of saliva that inevitably get dropped into the chalice and swim around inside; 3. risk of transmission through virus particles from the hands of one holder being passed via the cup onto the hands of another person (unless the celebrant holds the chalice to the communicants' mouths and doesn't allow them to touch it. The risk of spreading influenza is mitigated by good personal hygiene (frankly from a biological perspective most people are pretty lax yet amazingly we survive regardless). So not shaking hands would be a sensible precaution, and probably welcomed by many on these forums! Actually I rather like the potential for creativity this epidemic brings - alcohol gel in place of water for dipping into on entry to the church could clean off a few germs, Sri Lankan greetings etc add a new twist to an otherwise tired peace ritual for some. Nigel's probably right about shaking hands with the priest! Contrabombarde
  2. It's true that silver ions have an antiseptic effect that is exploited in medical dressings, but I have no idea how effectively or how rapidly metallic silver kills the influenza virus. In any case the speed with which the chalice is passed from person to person would require almost instant killing to be of any use, and even microscopic secretions from an infected communicant could just as easily contaminate the wine, whilst contaminated hands could cause cross-infection when handling the cup, rendering the silver coating of the chalice useless. Given the ease with which the H1N1 virus is transmitted by hand-to-hand contact (let's face it, when was the last time you washed your hands straight after blowing your nose? No, I thought not), and the lack of immunity in the general population it makes hygienic sense to advise against shaking hands and sharing the chalice during the Eucharist. Churches with holy water for anointing at the entrance might reconsider that as a source of potential cross-infection too. Given that it's impossible to contain anything as easily transmitted and as infectious as H1N1, the public health aim has to be to slow down its spread to stop lots of people all going down at the same time and place. Writing as someone who is both an organist and a public health doctor, how should organists respond to the pandemic, and how will we be affected ourselves? Certainly if you're fluey it wouldn't be advisable to turn up to a service and play - even if you are physically isolated from the congregation you still run the risk of contaminating door handles, organ keys (both the lock type and the note type) and other church paraphenalia. Draconian public health laws could prevent large gatherings, so big concerts might temporarily face the axe even if services continue unabated, though I suspect that would be a last resort. There will be enormous pressure on funeral directors, crematoria and vicars for funeral services. Then there will be pastorial aspects - such as filling in for people who are sick, or who are caring for sick people. It could pose a particular challenge for churches with relatively older average age of membership, as older people are at greater risk of complications from flu. Meanwhile those of us in the health service run a fine line between causing unnecessary panic on the one hand and complacency leading to being taken by surprise by the pandemic's seriousness on the other if things do turn out as serious as in previous pandemics.
  3. I think he registered a response. A good try at least...
  4. Next time I'm practising at Namirembe cathedral I'll have to ask the senior organist there, Paul Lugya for his personal best. But they start weddings at 8am sharp every Saturday and the last one isn't over until 6pm. Couples have to pay a deposit, refundable only if they arrive on time (given the appalling traffic in Kampala i should think the church does very well indeed out of that arrangement...)
  5. I do always take the precaution of contacting the church beforehand if the wedding is an unfamiliar venue to make sure the organ will be openable! As for checking out the condition of the organ, that has been enhanced enormously since NPOR went online, though even that doesn't guarentee a suitable repertoire. One wedding I played at, the organ had a spec of 16 peds, Gt 8 8, Sw 8 4. Still the bride insisted on the Widor. I played it through with her in another church, first on full organ, then on just 8 flues. "This is how it will sound in your church". "Fine". OK no problem - as long as the couple are aware of the limitations of the instrument, it's their day and I'll play most things if I have to (notably recently Stevie Wonder, which was well received....)
  6. I would imagine that there are relatively few churches that employ a competent organist who would insist on being paid whether or not he/she played for the wedding, but that the majority of people on this forum who play the organ for weddings fall into the professional or at least pretty high standard category, hence why so many here are defensive of the practice of charging for not playing. In all the weddings I've ever played for I can't ever remember the matter of paying the church's regular organist their due having arisen. Many of the weddings I play for are for friends, often in evangelical churches that tend to lack their own organist, and for whom I don't charge a fee (as invariably I get invited to the reception I consider that due reward in itself!). Weddings I play for where I don't know the couple I would expect to be paid a fee at the going rate, though again these are usually not at my regular church but by word of mouth and I'm usually asked to play by friendly local vicars who don't have their own regular organist and need someone who can "play the Widor". Thus most weddings I've ever played at have not been in churches with celebrated music traditions and resident organists to consider. (The one time I've played for a wedding in a cathedral, it was a Catholic caethdral doing conveyor-belt weddings and the organist was only too happy to take a break...). In practice perhaps this matter doesn't arise in all that many churches?
  7. The answer being..... ????? Are they rebuilt through revoicing? Changed specification? Enlarging with electric action to new chests? Totally new action and internal redesign? Enlighten those of us who haven't had the luxury of playing any recent German organs!
  8. I can understand why at times one might feel irked that a fee is charged by the regular organist. My mother was a member of a church with a fine choral tradition but asked that her funeral be at the church where she grew up. The organist of her regular church - a very celebrated recitalist and professor of organ studies - played for the funeral yet refused any fee, whilst the organist of the church of the funeral happily took the fee despite not knowing what those funny note-looking things on the floor of the console were for...
  9. Thanks for these reflections! Another point to throw into the debating chamber: will recently built mechanical action organs be less likely to be rebuilt in future than electropneumatic action organs? Will the Marcussen in Manchester's Birdgewater Hall, which has suffered (IMHO, undeservedly) bad press be more likely to end up being totally rebuilt in a few decades, major changes to specification, voicing, scales, action, than the lovely new Tickell at Worcester (direct electric action, hardly difficult to enlarge, connect other new sections placed around the building as funding permits)? The history of organ building over the past couple of hundred years in the UK at least has seen many organs progressively enlarged from humble origins thanks to the "innovation" of not having to directly mechanically connect console to soundboard with the resulting perceived strictures and limitations of tracker action. Organs would thus be enlarged and put on heavier wind, requiring assisted action. But with the large modern mechanical instruments that have been installed over say the past forty years in this country and elsewhere, i am tempted to wonder if they are as large, complex and complete as they will ever be, or ever need to be. Does having mechnical action insure that you limit the chance of significant future reconstruction? That's certainly not to say that all rebuilds result in a bigger instrument, and nor would I advocate that they should (one only has to follow the recent thread about the five manual R&D in a Scottish monastery which was sensibly halved in size and manuals in its latest rebuild). But one might ask, why rebuild an instrument at all, especially a modern mechanical action organ? Or is that daring to suggest that its initial appearance is the finest it will ever be for that building and that it can never be improved upon or changed except for the worse?
  10. An interesting question perhaps: how often are new organs built by firms from outside the country to which the organ is being delivered, compared to existing organs being restored or altered by firms outside the country the organ is located? I'd have thought it would be much more common for new organs to be built by foriegn builders, then later amended by local builders. For instance we have many wonderful examples of Mander's work being exported to the USA, Japan and elsewhere, but I wonder how many rebuilds are undertaken by British firms outside of the UK (the Harrison restoration at Stockholm being a recent example)? Just as the number of times that European firms rebuild or restore, as opposed to newly construct, organs in Britain would seem to be small in comparison. Is it because the cost, or the prestige of a new instrument is greater than that of a rebuild? Perhaps firms that undertake rebuilds are better known for their rebuilds in the country where they are based? Or they have a better understanding of how to rebuild effectively? Just curious...
  11. I'm not so sure....I heard somewhere that the great JSB knew a good 32' reed when he played one! Contrabombarde
  12. I'm not so sure....I heard somewhere that the great JSB knew a good 32' reed when he played one! Contrabombarde
  13. Amazing how quickly a thread about Worcester Cathedral organ can escalate, one only has to think back to the original thread on its controversial construction (not having the time to flick back through 36 pages or so, can anyone remind me what exactly was so controversial? having played it for myself I can only add to the chorus of praise for Kenneth Tickell's outstanding creation.) One of the things I love about the Mander Forums is the total randomness along which a thread can migrate too. Having read comments above about the relative uselessness of 32 foots, I would add my own opinion, which I'd be happy to have refuted or confirmed. That is, if money genuinely was no object and the brief was to build the largest organ possible that was still musical, what "luxuries" might I be tempted to add? For me I'd say a 32 foot flue on the Great and a 32 foot reed on the Swell. Am I really being serious? I have now played two organs with such a specification (Lausanne Cathedral and Lake Avenue Pasadena) and whilst the number of instruments with a 32 foot Swell reed must be vanishingly small, there are times when it just adds something intangible but palpable to full Swell (that otherwise would be muddied by having a suboctave coupler and 16 foot reed) and ditto Great . On the other hand I have yet to find a use for a 64 foot on the pedals... Finally, I can heartily recommend the 64 and 128 foot "self destruct" digital stop on the Hammerwood organ, of course it's absolutely over the top nonsense from any musical or harmonic point of view but is enormous fun nonetheless (so long as you promise to only use it for the last note of your encore)! Contrabombarde
  14. A useful start might be to recreate the 64 foot that the old Hope Jones had, I think I'm right in thinking that Liverpool Anglican Cathedral is now the only cathedral in the country to sport a 64 footer. In fact a friend of mine has a digital 64 foot (actually combined 64 and 128 foot frequency) stop on his extraordinary five manual toaster, appropriately called "Self Destruct" (the stop that is, not the toaster). Maybe that would be the most appropriate addition for what remains of the old Hope Jones???
  15. I know that our very kind hosts don't normally approve of prolonged discussions about the merits of electronic organs, but I wonder if the Hauptwerk system has the potential to change we way we think about practising and designing organs. That's to say, once you've bought several different organ sets and a fast enough computer to run them, you can change at the flick of a switch, from playing (complete with a mock up of the real console on your LCD panels either side of the keyboard), between a real Silberman, a Cavaille-Coll, a Father Willis...and experience, without leaving your practice room, multiple styles of organ building. It poses interesting questions for practice, teaching and organ design about what additional benefit there is for being able to practice or teach on a digital replica of a real and historic organ for which the music being learnt was originally composed for. Plus it raises the question about creating a very detailed record of the sound of these historic instruments. Perish the thought that one should be lost in a fire or other catastrophe; but should the unthinkable happen, every pipe will have been faithfully recorded for posterity (though one hopes the pipe scales and materials would also be recorded, that I don't know about). Could there be potential for aiding organ design - when planning a new instrument, first design the instrument in digital form using real samples, maybe from the builder's own instruments, then play the samples in the church in which the organ is to be constructed, and hone the voicing, the scaling etc based on how it sounds, what works, what doesn't work so well etc. Is that so radically different from using CAD to model how the organ will look and fit into the building it's being designed for? I have no conflict of interest here; I don't own a Hauptwerk system nor do I have anything to do with it. And I'm not trying to promote electronic organs per se. But from what I've read I can see a flexibility that hitheto digital instruments haven't possessed, and wonder if any others feel this is such a radical departure from the conventional digital toaster that we finally have a digital option that will enhance how we learn the repertoire that was written for the organs that have been sampled and so help us better perform them when we are eventually given the rare luxury of playing them on the "real thing"? And could it be helpful in avoiding expensive errors or regrets when designing pipe organs, since the client will have a better impression of how the pipe instrument will sound if a "mock-up" digital version has already been field-tested in the building in which it is to be built for?
  16. Shame to hear that Steve has left Blenheim - what a fantastic job being the under butler if it entitles you to play that organ any time you want. As it was, I met him whilst wandering around the palace, introduced myself and was flabbergasted to be allowed to spend the rest of the afternoon happily playing away whilst the tourists milled around. That tuba has to be one of the finest ever made.I hope his successor is as generous to visiting organists! Contrabombarde
  17. Whilst we're on the subject of 32 foot flues, how long should you have to wait for a pipe to "warm up" or "speak" in the bottom octave? I had a recent unfortunate experience with a very large new electronic organ in a large resonant church. Something just wasn't right...then when I tried the bottom few notes of the 32 flue individually and without any other stops drawn I discovered something. They spoke very slowly and the sound "welled up" over a period of literally several seconds before fully speaking. Now I'm not given to testing CCCCs on a regular basis but it did strike me as odd. Is that normal? How quickly should a CCCC come to full volume, and to what extent does it depend on the stop (violone, contradiapason, stopped bourdon etc)?
  18. Another organ recently rebuilt with a new 32 foot reed added: Christ Church Clifton. Contrabombarde
  19. Unfortunately I don't have the financial means to afford to sponsor all 3000-odd pipes, though if I did, I'd certainly want my generosity rewarded by the chance to play them all afterwards!
  20. I'd happily sponsor a pipe if it guarenteed me the opportunity to play it after the restoration
  21. I asked that very question not more than a couple of weeks ago. Please can someone enlighten us further, as long as it doesn't risk the lawyers' anger given the story on the Fort Augustine website!!! http://www.mander-organs.com/discussion/in...l=fort+augustus
  22. What a wonderful resource NPOR is, and what an incredible instrument! Mr Holmes must have been quite someone to be able to afford a large four manual organ in his house in central London. But then the plot thickens - after its removal and second transplant to a Scottish monastery it ended up being a five manual 74 stop beast, down to two 32s. What an inglorious ending to have been transplanted a third time and now be a "mere" 38 stop three manual relic, in which the beautiful Choir has been replaced by a neobaroque squeaky Positif! Contrabombarde
  23. Glad to hear the socks idea seemed to work. Meanwhile I've heard back from a couple of medical colleagues on a doctors' forum and it was suggested that maybe you should start off with those pieces that you were most intimately familiar and confident with before your assault. Can you drive, that requires considerable hand and foot coordination and knowledge of ankle joint position. Do you listen to music whilst walking, given your need to find cues when walking. As for practising, it would be dishonouring to the rules and founder of these forums to promote electrinic organs, but I would hope to get away with mentioning that they do tend to have much lighter pedal actions than those on pipe organs, even those with electric action, so extended sock practice is perfectly comfortable. And if you feel embarressed to play in public but want the experience of playing different organs, then the Hauptwerk system springs to mind, with its flexibility for allowing you to play a wide range of digitally recorded instruments as though you were playing the real thing. Contrabombarde
×
×
  • Create New...