Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

david_forde

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About david_forde

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 05/04/1972

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Bristol

Recent Profile Visitors

1,745 profile views
  1. As far as I know, most organ-builders using CAD use 2D, and in addition to the aforementioned builders, P&S have used 2D (based on AutoCAD) for their work - like everyone else probably because before computers, most drawings were in 2D. I use AutoCAD for design work, and for most purposes this is ideal, though solid-modelling (like SolidWorks) is very clever and probably the way to go for the future (it seems the way that programme manufacturers are going, which will probably force our hands anyway). I'm inclined to think it is down to the preference of the designer - if one wants to mo
  2. This is an interesting proposition, but has been explored by many organ-builders with only occasional impact on the craft. 20th century organ-building is littered with examples of attempts to apply new materials and a ‘manufactory’ approach to the craft, but with little lasting success. As other have mentioned, Compton is the obvious example, applying as much innovation and standardisation to production as possible, but this proved unsustainable for a number of reasons. Notwithstanding the quality of most of Compton’s work (and the design innovations of Jimmy Taylor’s input), the key i
  3. I far as I am aware Alan Taylor is still in business, passing only the mechanical action component work to Renatus; the Taylor firm still producing outstanding transmissions and electrical components. Herewith a link to their fine drawstop unit - http://www.ajltaylor.co.uk/Drawstop/1947B/1947B.html Electric draw-stops usually have either one of two systems to produce a toggle, earlier forms using an electro-magnetic toggle, modern forms using permanent magnets. The early form (such as the Williams type) are not directly compatible with solid-state systems and are usually replaced with mo
  4. Uk - Symphony Hall 82 stops, though of course several sections are on electric action, and electric coupling I think, Bridgewater Hall 76 stops (with electric coupling?), Eaton Square 65 stops (mechanical coupling), Bath Abbey 63 stops....
  5. Possibly not that mad at all, though I doubt the current organ market would stand the cost of developing such a system...otherwise it would have been done by now!
  6. True - perhaps I am being a bit pedantic, but in practically all actions the train is hung from the pallet, against the force of the pallet spring and the wind pressure. The roller forms part of an action train and is used to move the action sideways as required by the layout. It is possible to have a key action hung from an independently sprung lever between the pallet pull-down wire and the roller-board – sometimes used for dual key-action systems, where one hopes to avoid moving the tracker action train when using the electric system. The problem with that sort of system is that one
  7. Wow – I didn’t think this would pick up as much as it did! The whole joy of mechanical action is that it encourages a level of precision that I for one can only aspire to (prompting the comment that I should be content with slow pneumatics, but enough of that). Even with limited technique (and a limit to the amount of time allowed to improve it), there is something very special about the experience of total control over the key action – yes a good action is exacting (at times embarrassingly so), but that is no bad thing…a bit like cabbage, not always appetising but very good for you!
  8. Do you mean the shutter front itself or the control system? On the shutter front, I don’t think you can beat solid timber shutters, though I’ve come across all sorts (apart from the metal versions apparently found in organs like Atlantic City). It depends on how important you think the transmission of sound through the closed front is - I think that solid shutters give the best closure. Most of the new organs I’m familiar with (largely the work of one particular builder) have swell boxes made with a timber frame, ply on the outside, with anything from painted hardboard through to wh
  9. That's a bit of an unfair generalisation about British pneumatic actions - the Willis TP action in Dundalk in Ireland has worked well for years with minimal attention. I think it is more of a case of the design and construction of the action - risking a generalisation, I'd say that if a TP action is slow there is a good chance that it always was. Damaged tubing has a lot to answer for too. I've played some early 20th TP actions (in the style found in German trade consoles of the time - favoured by several organ builders in the British Isles) that were pretty miserable after restoration
  10. Hmm - now that is something I hadn't considered - worth noting that the 128 steps are in a magnet travel of 8mm.... The idea is that after the pluck of the pallet has been overcome (and the note starts to sound) the travel (both distance and speed) from that point to the fully open position can be precisely controlled – thereby emulating the control available with mechanical action. Emulating because it is of course a stepped system (all 128 of them) rather than the infinite control offered by tracker action – though I imagine dividing 8mm into 128 steps means the steps are practically im
  11. oops - thank you for spotting that error!
  12. Hi all, Has anyone had any experience of the ‘intelli-key’ or similar systems for action control? In particular has anyone tried the “128 gradations” of control offered by Eltec Automazioni (see the ISO journal...or see http://www.eltecautomazioni.com/Eltecautom...i/UK-Eltec.htm)? The philosophical question is whether proportional control is appropriate for non-mechanical action organs – should we expect electric actions to behave exactly like tracker organs, or should we be happy with the ‘on and off’ control offered for the last hundred and a bit years? David
  13. Good plan (and similar to my suggestion in principle!), but how would you distribute the approx. 30 stops over four manuals and pedals? As for dual mechanism - I agree, hardly appropriate for the proposed layout, and far better to have one good action and console, and spend the money on pipes!
  14. Further thoughts on this - is the organ supposed to be a three manual with Great, Swell and Choir or a two manual with another section in the nave? What is it expected to do? The ideal (!) layout rather depends on the purpose.... David
  15. French perhaps - providing that the pipework is scaled and voiced in a French style - it always seems a bit triste to draw a Trompette and hear a Tromba… If the west-end section is rather far away I’d go for a two-manual Great II, Swell III and part Pedal scheme in the choir, with a third Bombarde/Resonance (yes French terms I know…total hypocrisy) and big pedal stops at the west – played from manual I. A thirty stop limit seems a bit tight but here’s my paper spec (I’ll leave the scaling, mouth widths, pressure, voicing etc. to your imagination): I’m assuming electric action given th
×
×
  • Create New...