gazman

Thanks, Vox. I do! I was just doing something else at the time!

I guess I logged on just a few minutes too late to see the exciting stuff then! Now I'll never know.....!

Why not just have the Seventeenth drawing independently? Then you can colour the quint mixture, and use it for Sesquialtera effects in conjunction with a Twelfth.

Blimey, MM, I've only one lifetime in which to learn pieces.......!

Me too, Vox....

Cynic by name.......

Thanks for all those suggestions, folks! I'll certainly look at some Eben. G

Yeh, I forgot about this, and only conducted it last Christmas! (Maybe that's saying something!) However, I seem to remember enjoying the experience....!

Coincidentally, we had a discussion about Rutter at choir practice last night. I asked the choir to come along with suggestions of what they would like to sing for Christmas and at least half of what they brought along or suggested was Rutter. This was done rather apologetically as they know my usual response when they ask to sing Rutter! They're quite a good amateur choir too. I guess that, despite Cynic's valid observation, Rutter's style is found attractive by a number of singers, although I personally tend to find his very formulaic style uninspiring. However, I have to take my hat off to him for his Requiem which I find a very atmospheric and moving work.

Yeh, but the more you practise it, the less the risk becomes!

Why not aim for high quality accurate playing AND the "panache"? That would appeal to your organist, yourself, and the audience who want the "wow" moment!

I think you've hit the nail firmly on the head there, Vox. The way that bad performances sometimes elicit praise is something which has had me irritated on a number of occasions. I remember a recital by an eminent female organist which was very disappointing in its untidyness, which was most unexpected due to her normal virtuosity at the organ. The untidyness was readily apparent and, I would have thought, anybody with a musical ear would have been distracted by it. However, afterwards, I spoke with a fairly big name in the organ world who was in the audience (who had studied under this lady, and held her in absolute awe), and he said that the recital had been one of the greatest musical experiences he had heard in recent times! Likewise, a couple of undergraduates studying organ also thought the recital splendid. I started to wonder if my senses had deserted me. However, I spoke to another organist and he said how glad he was to find somebody else who agreed about how bad the performance had been. He had begun to wonder whether his senses had deserted him too! Were we the only ones in the audience who actually listened?! Were the others just in awe of hearing such an eminent organist perform?

I don't think it's merely a case of recreating the intentions of the composer. If it were, why not just program a computer to make music and then call that the definitive performance? Surely all good performers bring their own interpretation to the composition - and aspects of their own character - when they play. This is what makes hearing different performers play the same work all the more interesting. I've heard it said that performers sometimes discover aspects of the composition which were never directly intended by the composer, but were approved and enjoyed by the composer nonetheless.

I've never actually got around to learning any of his organ compositions. Which works would people recommend?

I agree entirely, Vox. But it does seem to be the case that slower playing of Bach is coming into vogue, whereas brisker playing seemed to be all the rage a few years back.

Perhaps Bach would have changed his ideas of tempi throughout his musical life too!

So, Pierre, are you suggesting that none of Bach's organ works should be played briskly because the organs he played made it impossible?!

But I wonder how much that has to do with the age of the mechanism.

Why? I fully agree that Andrew is a superb organist, but I wonder why the tempo seemed exactly right if it was "on the leisurely side". A few years back, many of us seemed to think that the tempo was exactly right if playing of Bach was "on the brisk side" (as, I feel, were some of Hurford's tempi despite the musicianly playing)! I wonder why the change....?!

I quite agree with you Pierre. His playing of Bach's organ music is exemplary.

Well, go on then.....!

Are they intending to replace the present pipe organ at Ridgeway? I was asked - probably about 12 or 13 years ago - to "rubber stamp" this "new" instrument after it had been moved from the old Ridgeway Methodist Church to the modern building. It was awful! The Swell had a chiffing - one could say unvoiced (certainly un-nicked) - Fifteenth added to it which wouldn't blend with the other (Victorian) material, and the Great soundboard had been removed and the Open Diapason and the Claribel Flute had been put on extension chests to make an extended Great organ, extended as far as possible - and further! It was a pretty awful example of this sort of thing. Needless to say, I said a few things which upset the "organ builder" who had moved it and carried out this work.

Is this the sort of stop given by an impecunious donor?

It smacks of idiotic bureaucracy to me.