Vox Humana

Many thanks, Mathrafal. Here is a direct link to the relevant plainsongs for anyone interested. This should be interesting. Somewhere I have an old casette tape (but no longer any means of playing it!) of a BBC broadcast of both masses played by Michel Bouvard with plainsong sung by what was billed as the Maitrises of the Versailles Baroque Music Centre conducted by Olivier Schneebeli. The performance style of the plainsong, with its (semi-rhythmical?) stretched notes and ornaments, was quite unlike the evenly-flowing plainsong we normally hear. It was said to be the result of research, but it's not a field I know anything about.

Welcome, Mathrafal. Thank you very much for these two very interesting posts and especially for clarifying the situation regarding the sources. Gallica is such an interesting site! Please could clarify this link to the Gradual? Am I missing something? Page 117 lands me in the middle of the Propers for the Third Sunday after Pentecost. The chants for the Ordinary start here, but I don't see Couperin's cantus firmi amongst them - at least not the Kyrie Cunctipotens or the Gloria (the Sanctus and Agnus are on pages 144-5).

Good man!

"More than 70 songs for electronic or pipe organ, american organ, harmonium or piano." I only only person who silently screams whenever I see the word "song" misused in this way?

This - if your pocket can stretch to it. It's quite a voluminous book and not cheap (I don't think the book ever has been), but it is worth every penny, not just for the detailed information about Vierne, but because of the light it sheds on the whole organ world of his time. If you are into French Romantic organ music you'll find this invaluable. This study of Franck's organ music by the same author is also quite interesting, but more narrowly focused and perhaps of more scholarly than general interest (and why the paperback costs such a ludicrous sum is beyond me). Perhaps a book for later. For Bach, I warmly recommend this book by the late Peter Williams, even though it's not specifically about organ music. A more recent book by Prof Williams was published two years ago. I have not read it, but from the blurb I suspect it may be less broad in concept. Perhaps others can comment. The last volume of Williams's seminal three-volume study of Bach's organ music is still available, but now needs supplementing with the prefaces to the new Breitkopf edition (which are available free on the form's website). The New Bach Reader also ought to be on every organist's shelf too (and, as might be expected, is preferable to the original Bach Reader) - but at this stage it's probably one to bear in mind for later. It consists largely of primary source material for Bach's life (most of which is studiously avoided in Amazon's "look inside" facility). Stephen Bicknell's The History of the English Organ is an essential reference for its subject.

Excellent advice from Zimbelstern. I have a feeling that not everyone will agree with me, but, since it is important to learn the right notes and fingering/footing from the very start, I think it pays to begin by playing the music slowly, at a speed where you can guarantee accuracy and then gradually increase the speed to where it should be wile maintaining that accuracy. Bearing this in mind, there is one further consideration when fingering fast music. Often a passage will allow more than one perfectly viable fingering. Bearing in mind the difficulty in unlearning a wrong fingering, always make sure that the fingering you choose is one that is still going to work when you are playing the piece up to speed. I speak from experience!

Manual scales and arpeggios - but at the piano, not the organ - it's better for the fingers and the wider compass encourages greater agility; furthermore, only on the piano can you tell if your touch (and therefore your finger control) is smoothly even throughout. In my teens I was wholly self-taught on the organ and made the mistake of assuming that playing the piano would damage my organ technique. Because I had no one cracking a whip I totally ignored exercises of any kind. This was incredibly stupid and utterly wrong. When I got to the RCM it was, initially, compulsory for organists to take the piano as their second study instrument and my piano teacher (the lovely Dorothea Aspinall RIP) was utterly horrified to learn that I had never learnt my scales and arpeggios. So I spent the whole of my first term learning them all until I could whizz up and down the keyboard with ease. I can't begin to describe how much it improved my organ technique. Apart from Debussy, which I adore, I never did enjoy the piano repertoire, so I gave up the instrument as soon as I could - but I know for sure that my technique is very much the poorer for that. (This said, I have known players whose organ technique has been spoilt by bad habits acquired at the piano: i.e. lazy finger raising and an inability to play legato without a sustaining pedal.) Pedal scales, arpeggios and exercises ditto and for the same reasons - agility and fluency. You might find your own solutions for achieving this, but agility and an accurate aim are essential requirements for good pedalling. When practising pieces, be very, very hard on yourself. Be focused and determined. Sloppiness won't do. We all like to play through our pieces, enjoying the music as we go. After all, that's why we play, isn't it? We do need to enjoy ourselves so I wouldn't ban this entirely, but in general avoid it like the plague because it's not actually helping you to progress. The moment you make a mistake, stop and deal with it. Practise the passage until you have played it five times in succession without error. Try to understand exactly why it went wrong and what your weakness is at that point. E.g. is it a particular finger that's the problem? Do you need to practise a particular finger or hand movement? Is there a better fingering? Similarly with your feet. Don't feel that you have to play through the whole of each piece at every sitting. It is far more productive to set yourself specific goals: e.g. today I am going to sort out bars X -- Y until they are totally secure.

The ARCO book was by Clifford Marshall and is indeed well worth getting. I'm no longer sure how similar the tests are to the current ARCO requirements, but that won't lessen their usefulness. The FRCO book was by Sidney Campbell. The sight reading exercises contain a fiendish toccata not altogether dissimilar in style and appearance from Messiaen's Dieu parmi nous. I once said to Campbell, "You surely can't expect people to sight-read that perfectly?" He looked at me sternly and snapped, "I certainly do!"

Does the ARCM diploma still exist? Googling suggests that it has been discontinued and replaced by degrees and an Advanced Diploma in Performance. I'm not sure what if anything is now available to external candidates. As I'm sure David will remember, in his day (and mine) both the ACRM and LRAM diplomas used to come in two guises: teaching and performing. The performing diploma, not surprisingly, required a higher standard of playing than the teaching. The LRAM still exists, but now comes only in one form that includes a teaching section. Trinity College offers an easier option to the LTCL diploma, the ATCL. When I was young this used to be ridiculously easy - about ABRSM grade 6 - and that might be why it was subsequently discontinued for several years. It has now been brought back and is "equivalent in standard to the first year of an undergraduate degree". http://www.trinitycollege.co.uk/site/?id=1587 Again, I don't know whether it is still available externally (the blurb might say).

I can't echo this enough. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that the pieces matter most and the keyboard tests are of lesser importance. This won't do for the RCO diplomas. You really do need to be just as adept at the tests as the pieces. Practise them until they are all second nature and completely fluent. I hope it goes without saying that the primary skill requirement common to all the tests at whatever level is fluent and accurate sight-reading - it's a sine qua non. Volume 1 of C. S. Lang's Score Reading Exercises is confined to four-part scores in G and F clefs. which is all that is needed for ARCO. Volume 2 introduces alto and tenor clefs as well, but these are no longer needed for the RCO exams (a retrograde move IMO, which removes organists even further from the orchestral world). There's loads of stuff on CPDL, too, that you can use. Any four-part contrapuntal pieces by Renaissance composers such as Palestrina, Victoria, Byrd will stand you in good stead. For figured bass there's a very good book by R. O. Morris and I am sure I've seen a few facsimiles of Baroque figured bass tutors on IMSLP. The assessment criteria for the diplomas are published in the syllabus, but really your goal should (ideally) be to be able to do the tests perfectly without having to think too hard. For the written papers I would hope that your school music tuition will be providing you with the solid grounding in the rules of classic four-part harmony. As for books, I have a great regard for Lovelock's First Year Harmony (available online via the Internet Archive). For a really basic introduction there's a short book by Stainer which, despite its age, is none the worse for that and is very clear. You need to develop the ability to hear written music in your head, but I'm not sure this can be taught. It's something that comes from lots of experience and probably few of us can ever hope to reach the exalted heights of Herbert Howells, who composed his Puck's Minuet straight into full orchestral score in the waiting room at Reading station during a three-hour wait for a train (although basic orchestration used to be required for FRCO).

There are some photos of the 20 April event on the abbey's website: https://www.buckfast.org.uk/photos/270/festival-of-sacred-music-grand-opening-organ-recital-20th-april-2018

Hopefully this one will work: http://www.worcestercathedral.co.uk/media/Assistant_Director_of_Music_recruitment_pack.pdf

I second this information. In addition to these volumes C. H. Trevor also issued two volumes of Seasonal Chorale Preludes for manuals only. A lot of them are extracts from partitas by Walther and Kaufmann, and as said are pruned of their ornaments, but the pieces are often charming. I do not recommend the volumes by AMT. Some of the pieces published by Trevor are available online at IMSLP. All of John Stanley's voluntaries are there, both in facsimile and in good editions by Pierre Gouin. Ditto the Ten voluntaries by William Boyce. Have a look at their movements for the Trumpet stop. As Martin mentioned, Franck's L'Organiste is also there and will provide lots of movements for use before a service. Pachelbel was an excellent composer and many of his chorale preludes are for manuals only, or require only minimal use of pedals. Of course the downside of printing from the internet is that you end up with reams of loose A4 sheets!

There's so much to say about this! I'll offer one or two personal views about hymns. The main thing to bear in mind is that hymns are about herding musically unsophisticated (if not downright lazy) congregations into some semblance of discipline. Whatever else you may do in a hymn, never forget this. When playing over a hymn there are two main things you need to do: 1) remind the congregation of the tune they are to sing; and 2) set the exact speed at which they are to sing it. Since, in general, congregations are rarely very alert it is, IMO, best to play the opening of the hymn rather than the end. Playing the last line or two of a hymn is of no practical help to a congregation and even I sometimes find myself struggling to recognise a tune when this is done. If you want your congregation to sing well it's as best to make it as easy for them as possible. That said, you had probably better do whatever is normally done in the chapel you're playing in. The play-over absolutely must be at the same speed you want the hymn sung and there should be no rallentando at the end of the play-over. Some organists like to maintain rhythm throughout the hymn by counting beats in the gaps between the verses and coming in on a beat. Congregations seem to get used to this and it does seem to help in a subliminal sort of way, but (unless it's already the established practice where you are) I wouldn't worry about it until you get used to making registration changes quickly. The speed of a hymn should be consistent with its general mood and never so fast that people don't have time to breathe. If the people in the congregation don't have time to get good lungfuls they're not going to sing well, are they? Keep the rhythm steady throughout the hymn and don't make rallentandos except at the end of the last verse. It's really impossible to give advice on registration without knowing the organ, the chapel and how well (or pathetically) the congregation sings. From the way you worded your question I take it that the services are "hymn sandwiches" without a choir. However, even in places with a strong, good quality choir, they are unlikely to be heard at the back of a church over a singing congregation, so the primary responsibility remains yours. In general you want to keep up a volume level that supports the singers adequately and gives them confidence. (Some people can be very self-conscious about actually being heard.) I would avoid accompanying verses just on the Swell. (There are circumstances when you might possibly get away doing this, especially with a good choir, but stick with the rule of thumb at first.) Upperwork is helpful in leading a congregation because they can hear the higher stops better, so think of registering "vertically". So a chorus of 8', 4' 2' will do the job far more effectively than three 8' stops. A Swell chorus coupled to a Great 8' may suffice for less loud verses. If you have a Choir manual how much you use it will depend on how much "body" the stops have. Most traditional English Choir Organs I know are far to delicate to be of much use in accompanying a congregation. Try not to play a whole hymn on the same registration throughout. While always providing "body" for the singers, volume and brightness should ideally reflect the words. Few hymns need anything very fussy in the way of registration. Most of the time you should not need to change any stops during a verse; they can be changed between verses. Transposition. Unless you are using a really old hymn book, you should not need to do this as all the hymns will have been transposed to a suitably "congregational" pitch. (In fact some have been transposed down too far and could do with going back up a bit.)

Members might be interested in this newly published Elegie from 1918: http://imslp.org/wiki/Elegie_(Parry,_Charles_Hubert_Hastings)#IMSLP520577

The programme for the 2018 Proms season is out. Prom 10 is an organ recital by the Latvian organist Iveta Apkalna: 22 July -- 11.00 Iveta Apkalna Symphony no.5 -- Widor Trois pièces pour grand orgue -- Franck Pavane -- Fauré, arr. Apkalna Fantasia in G major BWV 572 -- Bach, arr Arnold Bax Variations on a Theme of Paganini (A Study for Pedals) -- Thalben-Ball Deux Évocations --Escaich Also, Prom 17 (27 Jul) includes Parry's "Hear my words, ye people", although since no organist is credited it may be with orchestral accompaniment.

I vaguely recall that this subject came up here (or was it somewhere else?) a few years ago and the general opinion seemed to be that "prepared for" stops often did end up getting installed. I have to say emphatically that that has not been my experience. Unless the church is musically enlightened, or has a particularly persuasive organist, the attitude usually runs along the lines of, "the organ supports the congregation perfectly well as it is, the tuning already costs us an arm and a leg (and why do we have to pay so much when Ruth and Mary do the flowers for free?) and we have more pressing things to spend our money on," so nothing ever happens. My local parish church used to have a three manual console, but the Choir section was prepared for and the keys of the bottom manual did not depress. Forgetting this and moving inadvertently to the bottom manual was like diving into a swimming pool without water (or so I imagine). When the organ was renovated a few years ago at considerable expense the firm removed the manual - the only thing they did efficiently. I was never faced with the problem myself, but privately I always swore that I would never countenance agreeing to "prepared for" elements.

Wasn't the Leduc edition edited by Marie-Claire, based on what she believed her brother intended? According to the critical commentary in the Bärenreiter edition, the MS used for the 1943 Leduc edition doesn't have any registration directions. Since 1943, three more MSS of the piece have come to light, one of which was used as the copy text for the Bärenreiter version and it's one or more of these "new" MSS that specifies the registration.

Really? I'm a little surprised by that. In Campbell's day the organists managed perfectly well without. There is a slight time lag from the quire and a bit more from the nave, but these soon became second nature - though I agree it takes a while to adjust. I have played in some situations where speakers have been essential (e.g. west-end organ + east-end choir, or sheer volume of organ), but I always used to feel more comfortable with a "live" sound where practical. Each to his own though.

I was surprised a year or two ago to see a local parish church organist billing himself as an 'International Concert Organist', mostly because the event in question was the only time I have ever known this person to give a recital. Perhaps all his others are given abroad, but since he is at his parish console every Sunday, I'm not sure when those could be. I was once handed a business card on which another local organist (now deceased) described himself as an FRCO, amongst other things. I know for a fact that he had never been even a member of the RCO. A friend who knew this organist described him to me as a complete charlatan, which would seem to have been the case. That was plain dishonesty, but 'puffery' is everywhere, as in that over-used phrase 'one of the most sought-after organists...' As far as the great and good are concerned it's no doubt merited, but in other cases one can only assume that it means that the police haven't caught up with them yet. Exaggerated claims do tend to get quickly spotted and ridiculed by other organists.

I was excited to discover that a piece of Guilmant I had been given as a youngster had his signature inconspicuously at the bottom of the front cover. Then I spotted other, digitised pieces of his on the net with precisely the same 'signature'. I rather suspect that Guilmant's publisher had a rubber stamp!

Thank you, Richard!

Badura-Skoda had an article published a year or two ago in 'Early Music' entitled something like 'Let's get rid of the wrong Pralltriller', which, so far as I could see, was based on nothing more than personal feeling. His argument is certainly contradicted by some ornament tables from the period. I'm certainly no expert, but I understand that Bach's ornament table for W F Bach (?) is based on French practice and some argue that it is not necessarily applicable to music in other styles - although again I'm not sure whether there is any substance behind this. What does need consideration in O Mensch (and elsewhere) is whether a distinction should be drawn between a trill indicated by a wavy line with a vertical slash at the end and one with a wavy line without a slash but with a turn of two demisemiquavers written out at the end. Bach writes both forms in this piece. Why did he make a distinction? Did he intend one?

Surely "the" Widor is guaranteed a favourable reception?

I don't suppose that this is susceptible to proof either way. However, I find John Sheppard's hymns interesting. Rather like Morley and his endlessly inventive variations on the same "plainsong" phrase, so Sheppard seems to have had a bit of a thing about a point of imitation consisting of (in solfa) sol, sol sol, mi, ut, often flexed as sol, sol, sol, fa, re (along with several further variants thereof). Alas, few of these hymns are available on CPDL, but there are a few there (not all under the "Hymns" heading). Mostly the uploaded settings are the more interesting ones that avoid this figure, but Beata nobis gaudia uses it extensively. So, to a lesser extent does his Jesu salvator saeculi. From these and other similar treatments, one could certainly argue that what interested Sheppard was the musical phrase and that he didn't mind the occasional misaccentuation here. It's worth pondering because, as a general rule, it is quite obvious that Sheppard normally did go out of his way to accentuate words correctly so that strong syllables fell "on the beat". I might add that, so far as I know (and I have asked people who should know), no one has yet discovered any evidence of Tudor choirmen rehearsing and I'm not at all convinced that their standards were as high as we might like to think.