gazman

http://www.bh2000.net/score/orgbach/organ10.pdf I agree with Vox and Paul's suggestions too!

Whereas Viscount used to manufacture awful electronic organs, modern Viscounts *are* in a different class. My home organ sounds marvellous through decent headphones and a while ago when I used it at a friend's funeral in a church where the pipe organ had broken down (and the congregation was actually into the hundreds), it sounded surprisingly convincing - and led the congregation and accompanied both choirs superbly - even though I was only able to use the internal speakers. Although what this has to do with wedding and funeral fees, goodness only knows!

Good idea! But I see three immediate problems.... i, How would he support the pipe? If he held it in his hands (the best way to avoid damage to the pipe, I would think), the temperature change of the pipe would affect the tuning. ii, In most organs, there's precious room for one tuner to work, let alone two! iii, The cost of employing an extra 'tuner'. An old Hunter at a church where I used to play several years ago was cone tuned - on the very rare occasion that the flue work needed any adjustment. Indeed, the flue work stood in tune superbly, and the reeds were the only part of the organ which needed the occasional "tickle" as the temperature changed. Several years ago the organ was partly "rebuilt" by the local firm of "Bodgit and Scarper" who - for some reason - fitted tuning slides. The first time I played it after this work, I was rather shocked. It was the first time I had ever experienced the flue work on this instrument being out of tune.

Yes, I can see where you're coming from. But how would that argument apply in the large number of cases where, say, the bottom couple of octaves of a double are already taken off the main soundboard and placed on their own chest due to economies of space?

My initial response was to think that it is perhaps misguided to restore the organ to its 1926 character, and that this was probably only proposed so as to achieve the HLF grant. However, having considered this more carefully, I can understand the reasons for this, although I still have some misgivings. Overall, I think the 1926 specification looks rather more attractive than the present specification on paper. Certainly the 1926 specification looks a better coherent whole than the present specification with its neo-classical additions which look rather incongruous. The 1926 specification was also reasonably equipped with registrational aids although, of course, general pistons would normally be expected in an 'eclectic' concert instrument such as this nowadays. Presumably the organ will revert to pneumatic action. Do we have many organ builders who have sufficient day-to-day dealings with pneumatic action to build such an action well and to maintain such an action for the next 20, 30 or 40 years or more? But I'm pleased to see that the organ is going to be rebuilt. I first played it a number of years ago when I sat the practical part of my ARCM exam there. It was in good order at the time, but I understand that the RCM later had to move organ exams elsewhere as it had started to show signs of failure. When I last gave a recital on it a year ago it had become very unreliable, and was obviously in need of fairly extensive work.

Yup, well, look at some of the policies our government were trying to push through a while ago about so-called terror suspects....

Yes, and I think that utterly ridiculous, and a symptom of the Nanny State.

Ok, so, tomorrow morning, I should make sure that none of my choir are likely to be child abusers before they sing. When I drive down to the church, I should find some way of ensuring that my car has actually been built by people who know what they are doing, and that my mechanic knows his stuff, and isn't some crackpot potential murderer who has cut my brake-cables in order to kill me. And, I should ensure that the people who have built the roads on the way to church haven't incorporated death traps. And that the builders who built the church knew enough about what they were doing so that the roof doesn't collapse on me. Likewise the organ builders. Sorry, David, but that is utter nonsense. You have to assume that people are decent, well-meaning and can do their job unless proven otherwise, or constantly make ridiculous checks before you do anything in life.

By the same argument, there's also a Biblical precedent about forgiveness, is there not? However, in one of my church choirs, I do have a convicted sex-offender. He's an absolute pain, however, and, if a CRB check would enable me to evict him from the choir, I could *almost* be persuaded to support CRB checks. How on earth do you think that filling in a CRB form makes you feel safe?

And how on Earth can it do that? A CRB check cannot prevent false allegations in any way, shape, or form. The only way to try and avoid false allegations is by taking great care to ensure that one is not in a situation where one could have allegations made, which includes having at least another adult around at all times when dealing with children and "vulnerable" adults.

No, the fundamental erosion of civil liberties comes when we presume that people are potential sex offenders until they can prove that they don't have a conviction for such a crime. That's utterly ridiculous. Why on earth should - for example - a priest be told that his organist has points on his license, say, 15 years ago for going at 40mph in a 30mph zone?

I feel that this is a fundamental erosion of civil liberties. It assumes that each of us are guilty of being child abusers - or whatever - until we prove that we aren't. Whilst I can understand, to a point, a possible desirability for choirmasters working with children to have this check, the thought of choir members having to go through this is utterly ludicrous. The Nanny State and Big Brother march onwards and upwards....

I think 65% fairly normal. PM sent.

Yup!

Indeed. In your situation, I think I'd tell them to take a running jump.

The board was slow this evening from about 1810 to 1822, and wouldn't display any pages. Other websites loaded without a problem, so the problem wasn't this end. Hope that helps.

Yes, indeed. It is this fact that decided me that I agree with those who would rather remain anonymous around here.

I thought you were doing a leg-pull when I saw the title of this thread! The only pieces I can think of are by Noel Rawsthorne viz. Hornpipe Humoresque, Chorale Prelude on 'The Londonderry Air', and a harmless little Air in F.

http://www.mander-organs.com/discussion/in...ost&p=42726

Merry Christmas to all!

Thank you Colin! The whole of that post has given me the biggest chuckle I've had all day!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremulant is a reasonable introduction. It's mainly used in conjunction with solo stops or combinations.

I wonder if they thought that the funeral directors shouldn't be paid either....

No, I don't think so! But I do share bombarde32's preferences!