contraviolone
-
Posts
352 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by contraviolone
-
-
-
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
-
-
I agree.
If the Positif-de-dos case were to be returned to the tribune as it now stands, as Friedfich states, this would spoil the present proportions of the main case. In addition, the tribune is quite deep and the Positif would be some distance from the main organ. There would also be the problem of the console: should it be turned through 180 degrees, or left as it is?
Since the present Positif division (in the main case) is perfectly adequate, I cannot see any real need to re-instate the former case. (If it, and the main case, were also to be repainted white and gold - which was another of Cochereau's wishes - it would look hideous, if not actually gaudy.)
I am sure all the points you raise are valid, as too are Friedrich's.
However, I do wonder why Pierre Cochereau should suggest the return of the Positif de Dos? He must have had strong musical reasons for its re-instatement. On the colouring of 'white and gold', I certainly agree with that. I don't think that would look good at all in Notre Dame. But then in a similar vein, the new console to my eyes looks lurid as well.
It should also be remembered that the Positif de Dos was still in place in 1863, when the drawings of Viollet-le-Duc at this time included it. It was only at the very last minute, after the contract was signed, that Viollet-le-Duc suddenly changed his mind about it. Hence its exclusion, together with the subsequent changes to the tribune. Apparently Cavaille-Coll didn't mind, including the Positif as you say in the main case.
I still think the re-instatement of the Positif de Dos would still, from an aesthetic and historical viewpoint, look attractive. And I'm sure Pierre Cochereau had very strong reasons to include it.
-
I was wondering the same. This instrument has now undergone so many 'transformations' that it probably bears little resemblance to the organ even of Pierre Cochereau's time, certainly before the alterations of Boisseau.
I was listening to a recording made by PC from the 1950s, before the Boisseau alterations were made, and in most respects it sounds a completely different organ compared to today, let alone post-Boisseau. I also dislike the new console. It looks completely out of place with the rest of the organ loft. They may as well go completely digital in everything, and have electric buttons instead of drawstops that light up when pushed. They could have different colours for each division, and they could also flash when in use. It could be the equivalent of the light show of the Eiffel Tower!
I'd rather go listen to St Sulpice across the river, which is still, in my opinion, the better instrument compared to Notre Dame by a long mile.
-
I suppose even if it were possible, adding a Positif de Dos would make this instrument even more daunting! Still, we can looking forward to the more colourful effects of the new additions, particularly the Onzieme 2 10/11, playable from both manuals and Pedal.
-
I will also be interested to hear opinions of the Notre Dame organ.
However, for one thing I'm not sure how the addition of the Resonance will make any substantial difference to this instrument? Having said this, I will be interested to hear the effects of the new mutations Neuvieme and Onzieme (as discussed in the other thread).
I also believe it is a shame that the Positif de Dos still remains unrestored. The 'grand plan' of Pierre Cochereau was to restore this, and I think this addition to the specification would be much more effective than the 'new' Resonance division. Not only would the appearance of the Notre Dame organ be greatly improved, it would also provide a chorus at a lower level than the rest of the instrument, so benefiting from little or no obstruction from the tribune. It would also cover up the console and the untidy looking cabling, all of which detract from the overall appearance of this instrument.
I do wonder why the Titulaire's have not pushed for the restoration of the Positif de Dos? I'm sure it would be restored if they insisted. And the original woodwork for this division is still stored in the Cathedral. I can only assume it would just be too expensive to do it, as it would involve substantial alterations to the tribune. But from a musical viewpoint, it would be a distinct advantage to this instrument, restricted as it is to it's very high position at the West end of the Cathedral.
-
I'm not sure that a Sesquialtera would be much use in the Dome at St. Paul's, apart from as a colour stop. One would be unlikely to perform Cornet Voluntaries on it. George Thalben-Ball managed a superb rendering of a Stanley Voluntary on the West End end reeds accompanied from the chancel. Not everyone could bring this off, but GTB was GTB.
The addition of a Sesquialtera in the Dome flue chorus was considered some years ago, before the new Dome reeds were added, but nothing came of it. Also, I disagree with the potential effectiveness of a Cornet-style voluntary from the Dome. Sitting near or under the Dome, the Dome flue and reed choruses are surprisingly clear, with little reverberation. All the problems of extended reverberation emanate from the Chancel organ. If the Dome is played alone, the sound is very clear, precise, and bold, (apart from the Diapason II, which surprisingly unforced, almost delicate). I would really like to see the flue Dome chorus extended to something like this:
Double Open Diapason 16
Open Diapason I 8
Open Diapason II 8
Flute Harmonique* 8
Quint* 5 1/3
Octave 4
Principal* 4
Tierce* 3 1/5
Super Octave 2
Sesquialtera 12.15.17* III
Quartane 19.22 II
Fourniture 19.22.26.29 IV
Cymbal 29.33.36+ III
* New
+Replacing Mixture 22.26.29
Henry Willis III proposed in 1940 a striking Dome flue chorus, with its own independent Cornet stop, which if it had been built would have been quite exciting!
Double Open Diapason 16
Open Diapason I 8
Open Diapason II 8
Principal I 4
Principal II 4
Quint & Terz 5.10 II
Mixture 15.19.22.26.29 V
Cymbale 31.33.38 III
Cornet III-V (breaks: 12.15.17/8.12.15.17/1.8.12.15.17)
[source: A history of the organs of St Paul's Cathedral, Plumley and Niland 2001, pp 151-153].
So the idea of a strong Dome flue chorus, with even an independent Cornet, has been about for quite some time.
-
In Belfast, one tended to rate a tuner's skill on whether he/she could make a good job of the St. Anne's Cimbel. We were lucky in having Philip Prosser (who voiced Gloucester for Downes), and his son Steve, although there was usually a bit of banter about who was going to do it.
'Get up there and do the Cimbel.'
'Come on! I did it last time!'
David McElderry of Wells Kennedy was also good, and so was Rachel Adams, who trained with WK and later spent some time with our hosts before returning to Northern Ireland.
Apparently, before Philip took over the maintenance, the tuning was done by Charlie Smethurst. During the Troubles, a lot of firms were reluctant to work in Northern Ireland (not just organ builders - one of the first results of the Good Friday Agreement was the advent of Sainsbury's, Tesco and McDonalds'), but Charlie liked the place, to the extent that he retired to Dunmurry on the outskirts of Belfast. Charlie was really a console man (trained by Harrisons'). He tuned mixtures in equal temperament and, at St. Anne's, was found to have pushed in the mouths of the smaller pipes so they didn't have to be tuned at all.
This diversion apart, we know that the function of a cymbel is not just to add extra top but to clarify the bass and tenor. Indeed, because of its many breaks, such a stop may not be any higher than the other mixtures by the time it gets to the treble range. I don't know how well the St. Paul's Cymbel performed this function, but maybe the present arrangement works better. After all, Donald Harrison provided a 'Klein Fourniture' which duplicated ranks in other mixtures and no one seems to have regarded it as a waste of space.
I can confirm the St Paul's cymbal worked very well. I suspect it was demoted by an octave through practical expediency, rather than pure musical considerations.
-
I agree entirely.
I also wonder what the thinking was behind these mixture schemes.
Although the organ of Lincoln Cathedral does not possess a cymbal-type mixture, the last time I played it, I could not help but wonder if the Choir Mixture (ostensibly 22-26-29) had been re-cast as a 15-19-22 Mixture. The stop lacked any kind of brightness or definition at all. I realise that it is around the corner from the console - but so was the former Cimbel (26-29-33) on the Choir Organ of Exeter Cathedral, and this stop gave a beautiful, bright sheen to the Choir chorus. I also think that removing this stop (and re-scaling the Twenty Second as a pointless Larigot) was a grave error. The Clarinet which took its place is on an open soundboard, so is inexpressive and a Larigot could easily be obtained by the use of the Lieblich Bourdon, Nazard and Octaves Alone - with or without the 8ft. and 4ft. Gedeckts.
For that matter, I wonder if Harrisons have taken the opportunity to swap the positions of the Choir and Solo organs in their current re-ordering of the Exeter organ. If not, I would also regard this as a completely wasted opportunity.
I would have suggested that the following was a more sensible arrangement of resources:
SWELL ORGAN
the Stopped Diapason and [Nason] Flute would go to the CHOIR ORGAN; in turn, the CHOIR Lieblich Gedeckt and Lieblich Flute would go to the SWELL ORGAN (where they would be re-united with the mild strings, which were formerly on the CHOIR ORGAN, prior to 1965). The CHOIR ORGAN would also lose its Lieblich Bourdon (which is seldom used; in any case, the lowest twelve notes come from the Pedal Bourdon).
The SWELL ORGAN would lose the Twelfth and gain the Vox Humana from the SOLO ORGAN *
The SOLO ORGAN would lose the Vox Humana (to the SWELL) and the Piccolo (no great loss - it wobbles unpleasantly) and thus be slightly reduced in size. However, the CHOIR ORGAN would gain two slides.
The CHOIR and SOLO organs would swap places.
This would give:
SOLO ORGAN (Now facing East, but with shutters in both directions)
Viole d'Orchestre 8
Viole Céleste (C13) 8
Claribel Flute 8
Harmonic Flute 4
Orchestral Oboe 8
Corno di Bassetto 8
Tremulant
Tuba 8
Trompette Militaire 8*
(*The latter stop to have its 1965 voicing re-instated.)
CHOIR ORGAN (Now facing West)
Stopped Diapason 8
Viola 8 (Slightly re-voiced and broadened)
Prestant 4 (New)
Nason Flute 4
Nazard 2 2/3
Fifteenth 2 (New)
Open Flute 2
Tierce 1 3/5
Twenty Second 1 (Re-instated)
Cimbel (26-29-33) III (Re-instated)
Cremona 8 (New)
Tremulant
Having known this instrument since I was fifteen, I would regard this as a more versatile and sensible scheme than what was actually in place. The Swell flutes are more robust than those on the Choir Organ, so they would make a better foundation for the new chorus. The new Prestant and Fifteenth would help this division to function as a more realistic foil to the G.O. The Cremona, by being a full-blooded specimen would provide a voice which has probably never been present on this instrument. However, it would be English, rather than a French Cromorne - although it would contrast from the superb Willis II Corno di Bassetto on the Solo Organ.
* Clearly the soundboards would require re-planning (which is presumably one of the things which Harrisons have undertaken); one would not want to encounter (or tune) a Vox Humana in the middle of the Swell upper-work.
It will certainly be interesting to hear the final results at Exeter. The Trompette Militaire was quite an exciting stop when I heard it in the 80s, and was certainly quite powerful. I didn't know that had been subsequently changed.
I also hope that the voicing of the stops isn't adjusted too much in order to make them more powerful. I was recently listening to the organ in my local cathedral, Bury St Edmunds, where the organ has been recently 'revamped' by Harrisons. The work is clearly excellent, and the new organ cases very striking. But I can't help feel the voicing of the Great flue chorus is really extremely bold, even over the top. I know the organ is confined high up within the Chancel recess, and projection of sound is important down the nave, but sitting in the choir stalls, the volume is extraordinary. I mean, the diapason chorus virtually knocks you off your feet, even when the building is full!
No criticism intended to the Head Voicer at Harrisons, but I do hope this doesn't happen at Exeter.
-
Regarding the St Paul's Dome Chorus Cymbal, I agree that this had a thrilling effect - you hear it once or twice in some Dearnley recordings - but I think I read somewhere that this stop's composition was altered because it was difficult to keep in tune. Could that be right? Might JPM possibly comment?
If that's true (which no doubt it probably is), I think that is a regrettable reason for getting rid of an important stop that was integral to the design of the Dome chorus in the first place.
-
Thank you. Yes, I got that. Two of the Great reeds have been moved down to the lower-pressure chests, displacing the Cymbel and Cornet.
But that leaves two empty slides on the upper chest, doesn't it? Are they to be left unoccupied, or will they be installing a couple of new stops?
Edit: ...assuming that the 'experiment' is successful and the trumpets are left in their new positions.
Yes, I take your point. Reading through this again I think it is inferred that all four G.O. reeds have been moved back to their old positions, and four existing flue stops have been displaced. Two have been identified by pcnd5584 (the Cornet and Cymbel sitting below the reeds), the other two as yet undetermined. So presumably the raised chest remains unused?
I think that's what has happened. If so, I think the loss of the four flue stops is a shame, except perhaps the Cornet, which sounds dull and uninspiring to me. I'm not sure what John Scott Whiteley would think of this, as presumably he was one of the supporters of the Coffin additions in the 1993 work?
-
Yes - the same thought had occurred to me.
I think that I would miss the Cymbel, though; particularly since the smaller version on the Choir Organ was removed at the time of the 1993 work. Personally, I regard it as a mistake to remove these stops from larger instruments - particularly those which stand in resonant buildings. The cathedrals at Carlisle, Chester (several compound stops have had ranks removed or silenced), Dublin (Saint Patrick's), Exeter, Lichfield, Saint Paul's (London: Manual V - pitched an octave lower) and York Minster have all lost high mixtures in one form or another. At least three of these have had the Choir cymbal-type mixtures replaced with somewhat pointless 19-22-26 compound stops. Such stops I heartily dislike, partly due to the presence of the uncovered quint and partly because this type of mixture rarely fulfills any useful function. Generally, it neither gives clarity to the bass register nor brilliance to the upper range.
With respect to the former Cymbal III 29.33.36 on the Vth manual at St Paul's Cathedral. I really don't know why they changed this in 1993/94. The Cymbal imparted an attractive brilliance to the Dome tutti, and it's lowering by an octave to a Mixture 22.26.29 is regrettable. The current mixture composition in the Dome makes no sense to me at all:
Quartane II 19.22
Mixture 22.26.29
Fourniture 19.22.26.29
That simply looks like duplication to me, and I don't understand it. I would have thought a Sesquialtera II 12.17 (or III 12.15.17) would be more useful, with the possibility of a Cornet 'Separe', rather than what we have now. I've always thought that the absence of the Cornet option in the Dome rather strange - the clear fluework is there, and the Diapason II being quite unforced, so why they haven't done this is perplexing to me.
-
I think it's a shame to lose both of these stops. If they really must go, with what are they replacing them? Who just disposes of stops without replacing them with something?
I refer you to posts 2 and 3, which explains perhaps what has happened.
-
.
-
So from the photo of the stops it appears the Cornet 1.8.12.15.17 and the Cymbel 22.26.29.33 have at least been put to one side.
In a recent recording of the Minster organ, John Scott Whiteley demonsrates this Cornet stop. Compared to the 'Cornet separe' also available on the Great (possible with the addition of the Sequialtera II 12.17, also added in 1993), I'm not sure if we should lament the loss of this Cornet stop. It sounds quite unexciting and dull to me, compared to the Cornet Separe version, which sounds a great deal clearer and much more useful, particularly for Bach.
Here are the two Cornet sounds, one after the other, commencing from approx 1:10 -
-
.
-
-
-
.
Goodbye King's
in General discussion
Posted
.