Ian Ball

Don't mean to be a nerd, but wasn't the Lady Chapel organ by HW II?

Forgive me (after a long day's work and 2 bottles of Doombar) but I don't understand this thread. How does a stoplist help anyone to understand the music of Bach? It is a matter of historical record that Bach was dismayed by some of the choirs at his disposal. Few 'Great' Composers had/have the luxury of the 'ideal' instrument, choir or orchestra at their disposal. Bach knew full well what was going on outside his hectic parochial world. He also encountered organs of different national schools and styles. He was surely as alive to a French Plein Jeu as he was to the tangy Dutch equivalent. Just what points are people trying to prove here...? Bach, like all music, I submit, sounds better on organs with 'Gravität' (though please note that word can also have an interpretative implication). A discussion of whether the mixtures should or shouldn't have a tierce, or whether reeds should be in the manual chorus, seems to me irrelevant. Articulation, rhetoric and interpretation are what performers are ultimately interested in, in order to communicate with their audience effectively. Given that great music sounds great on a couple of flutes or on the Wanamaker organ, registration is surely pretty low on our list of priorities? Ultimately, a dull performance, bound by doctrine and lacking energy and understanding of the MUSIC, is simply dull.

OOOoo. I can just hear it: Full Fonds 16, 8, 4 (Ped 32 & full mutations) at the start of the second section. Nice.

As I thought - Bristol hasn't got a scholar this year, hence Dave's involvement, 3 days a week, as Sub Organist.

For the same reason as at Wells (where they have an AO and 2 organ scholars) and many other cathedrals with two choirs - one choir rehearses while the other is singing evensong. I imagine it also helps to ensure that staff can have a regular day off and everything still be covered. The standard and availability of organ scholars is also difficult to predict - this would ensure consistency. I don't think Bristol Cathedral has an organ scholar at the mo, but will double check and get back...

Actually, I can remember the exact performance that first excited me about the G*******er organ: a broadcast by Mark Blatchly of Mozart K608 in the early 1980s. It totally blew my mind. I taped it and played it incessantly. Sounded nothing like Notre-Dame Incidentally, MB was the first person (I'm led to understand - apologies to Mark's predecessors if not!) to use that organ like a giant one manual, setting the precedent for all subsequent successful performances on that organ. Of course this wasn't anything particularly revolutionary - I was taught to do this by William Morgan at Bolton Parish Church when accompanying choirs as a schoolboy, i.e. couple everything up to the Great; use the Choir and Swell as your bread-n-butter; add/subtract softer Gt stops as necessary. It works everywhere and helps achieve 'fake' tutti effects without swamping the choir with wodges of Gt diapasons and hohl flutes. Solo strings and orchestral reeds can likewise thus be eased in for sizzles and snarls. We joked at G*******er that the first thing needed at the rebuild was a 'coupler' piston à la Willis III: the first stops we always reached for were ALL the couplers, just to the left of the music desk Ralph Downes must have been spinning

I agree re University Church Oxford viz-à-viz apparent disregard for Anglican liturgy. Sadly, however, it is a very fine instrument; more integrity and less ‘eclectic’ than Trinity Cambridge, which I dislike intensely. Rather, I'd nominate the old/new kist-o'-whistles of St Peter's College, Oxford. The organ consultant had the audacity to publish a statement in The Organbuilder to the effect that its role accompanying choirs in Anglican liturgies need not be a consideration (whereas, he claims, it was at Magdalen). Consequently, the College was persuaded to purchase one of the worst instruments I have ever had the misfortune to play. A host of curious, reputable visiting organ builders were incredulous, declaring it ‘unfinished’ (among other things), yet on the back of this, his "first Oxford instrument", the builder was awarded a number of valuable contracts, to the eventually dissatisfaction of the purchasers. Coincidentally, I notice one of them in Paul's list. Thankfully, within four generations of organ scholars (each of whom directed an extremely able and dedicated chapel choir of choral scholars and volunteers), the Emperor's New Clothes were revealed in all their glory and the thing was binned in favour of the lovely Willis, which we always used for Monday night Compline services, 1987-1990, when the other instrument was brand new and the Willis apparently "unplayable" (don’t you believe it – a drop of oil on the blower and a few hours’ patience worked wonders). I'm not bitter I just did my best to break it! Duruflé Toccata eventually did the trick! Does anyone know what happened to the rejected instrument? Ian

Shame - you must have come on the wrong days, Paul! I can't comment about post-2002, but it was used a fair amount in our day. DJB and I both played a fair amount of French classical music, both liturgically and in recitals; it was also heard in Sweelinck, Bach, Purcell, Handel/Stanley etc, and of course in contemporary music when appropriate. It forms an essential part of the 'symphonic' grand jeux too, not to mention the 18th century one, and was also used in improvisation, often in dialogue with the Schalmei, or indeed coupled to it. Of course a nice enclosed Corno di Bassetto or Clarinet would have been useful, but then so would a French Horn, a chorus of Violes, or a real Flûte Harmonique (tho we did tweak the Spitzflute voicing to try to get close), but we got by... and for nave services, it worked well as a soft Clarinet, usually coupled to a spare 8' flute in the main case. Please understand I'm not uncritical of the Gloucester organ, but a lot of visitors take fright at the much-maligned Cremona, hence me running to its defence! If they heard a real one to Clicquot scalings they'd probably run a mile! Having said all this, I suspect the Gloucester Cremona was intended to be more English than French. Kind regards Ian

The Gloucester pedal mutations utterly transformed the organ, adding not only much-needed gravitas, but also considerable definition and 'bite' to the pedal line. Speaking more quickly than a 32' flue (and at a fraction of the cost), they are incredibly useful, sounding like a good 32' Violone when carefully blended with 16s and 8s. You need to be brave with them: when effective downstairs, they can sound too loud from the console when supporting pp to mf manual mélanges. As Paul implies, they certainly broadened the reed, the one part of the rebuild that disappointed, especially having encountered the wonderful half-length 32 (by Austin) at Springfield Cathedral, Massachusetts whilst on tour with the choir that same year.

Have just spent a happy 2 hours registering Saint-Saens and Wagner on Bristol's Colston Hall organ: Solo strings 16, 8, 8, 8, 4, Cornet des Violes; French Horn; seering hot Orchestral Trumpet; subs and supers galore; Open Woods you can actually use, 32' reed to die for...sheer bliss. Took me right back to my postgrad year at Manchester Cathedral - surely this is the sister organ, but with a much finer/bigger Great chorus. Shame about the 16, 8, 4 Trombas tho - not on a par with Redcliffe. Perhaps the pressure's too low? On top of full Gt & Sw choruses it's just like adding a cloying leathered diapason. Good on their own but pretty useless otherwise. Better to use the Solo Orch Trumpet with sub & super as Gt reeds - awesome - and a perfect balance for the mixtures. Shame too about the console - battered, scratched and unloved. Must be worth at least £40K alone? If this were in Germany or the US, it would have a padded cover and be treated with as much respect as a concert Steinway. Anyway, if anyone's about: Sept 25th - featuring members of Bristol & District Organists Association; 7.30pm; FREE admission. This organ deserves wider attention! Ian

Thanks Paul. Cheque's in the post.

On some days, Briggs's talents were so supernatural, he cast no shadow....mwahaha

That's very kind of you to say so - all undigested Hakim and Debussy at the time I suspect, but no less heartfelt! As for being no longer 'part of the cathedral world', I miss the team spirit of my choirs and the daily bliss of conducting psalms (yes, I'm a bit of a nerd like that) but I can't say I miss the job itself; I feel I'm doing a wider/worthier/better paid service as an employment lawyer. Still keep my hand in music tho, having been DoM at Gloucester City for 5 years now, although am about to quit that because my 'dayjob' now requires so much driving. Couple of CD projects lined up too. Which is nice. Come to think of it, very few of my friends and former colleagues have stayed in cathedral music, and the very best organist/conductors I was an undergraduate with point-blank refused even to go there...

Well, my short answer would be: proper preparation coupled with a willingness (and technical ability) to take risks. If one of these ingredients is missing, it rarely works! However (and with apologies), here are somewhat less concise thoughts, in response both to this thread and the one that spawned it, '‘Historical Awareness – who needs it?’: These are interesting questions. They should ideally be at the front of any performer’s mind every time they play. But the answers are not easy to find. In respect of pre-1800 music, I used to believe they were to be found in period fingering/pedalling, ‘correct’ articulation and registration, but of course that’s nonsense and I was just looking for something to hide behind; ‘authentic’ smoke and mirrors to justify my performance and add ‘integrity’. Unfortunately, it was an approach endorsed by a number of eminent British organ teachers when I was younger. ‘Expressive technique' was often used to describe a dry-as-dust approach to playing mechanical action instruments when I was at university in the late eighties, yet my experience of listening and trying to discover the closely guarded secrets of making music on neo-classical tracker organs left me cold – it was certainly far from expressive in the way I appreciated that word! Incredibly, words like ‘elegant’ or ‘beautiful’ were never used by my teachers (in terms of goals or ideals!) until I studied with Naji Hakim in my early thirties. The ‘authentic’ approach to anything is anathema to him, even in his own music or that of his predecessor, Messiaen. Seated in the tribune of La Trinité, Hakim would occasionally look over his shoulder and then say in mock confidential tones “It does not matter; he is not here” whenever I asked him about ‘correct’ tempo or registration. Why? Because they were probably the wrong questions to ask. When I asked Maitre Hakim about rubato, of course there would be the initial subjective French approach, paraphrasing his teacher Langlais: “Has your heart ever been broken? You can play Franck then!”, but it would immediately be followed by practical advice: “You must decide OBJECTIVELY what you want to say and where in the phrase you want to say it….tenuto here at the top….accelerando here…rallentando there. Mark it in your score!” In other words ‘feeling’ must not be left to the day. Expression in music is as much a technical thing as good fingering and must be rehearsed. Obviously, it eventually sinks deep into the psyche and then informs your playing without having to grab your pencil every time you wish to ‘stretch’ a phrase, but it was a good approach and had a huge impact on everything I did, especially (bizarrely) conducting Anglican psalms! This was because it instilled a discipline of consideration during the preparation stage: composer's likely intention, fingering, posture, tempo, venue, acoustic, instrument, action, colours, audience, caffeine intake and so on; most importantly, expressive content. Why do we think there are (at least) two schools of thought vis-à-vis the ‘authentic’ performance of César Franck, for example? Well, for a start, none less than the composer himself gave his blessing to quite different approaches to the same pieces of his. I honestly don’t think Bach or Krebs, or whoever wrote it, would give two hoots whether one ended BWV565 with a major or minor chord – he’d just be pleased that it was being played, and (I like to think) would be delighted that the full resources of a modern organ were being used in the service of his music, tempered by ever-indefinable ‘good taste’, of course. I thought John Scott’s RAH Proms Buxtehude was superb, and I’m glad he didn’t shun thumb pistons and high pressure reeds here and there. However, microphone placing meant that his articulation (particularly the pairings) sounded far less subtle than they are, say, on his recordings from St Thomas Fifth Avenue, where he could obviously relax and not have to fight two conflicting aesthetics (not to mention electric action). Most recently, playing a recital of largely Baroque music at Christ Church, Bristol (a gently romanticised 18th century organ tracker action) I played the final Ricercare from Bach’s Musical Offering. I had preceded it with some Brahms, and simply couldn’t help playing the Ricercare more ‘like Brahms’ in order to communicate what I felt the piece said on that organ. The result was shattering, for both me and the audience, and I believe, utterly convincing. Of course, the piece would have worked in our ‘received authentic’ detaché style, on organo pleno throughout (cutting 16’ pedal stops as appropriate, to make sense of textures/pitch etc), and I’m sure that’s how I’ll play it at Malmesbury Abbey on 22 Sept (quick plug: 7.30 pm kick off). I think the key to a ‘great performer’ is one who is utterly convinced of what s/he is doing and can communicate that with total conviction to the listener. Or, as Briggs says, paraphrasing Mozart, one who can make every performance sound like a great improvisation. I have never had any truck with the uber-cautious ‘ooo-careful-now-that’s-a-bit-too-exciting’ brigade that sadly plagues the organ and Anglican choral world. One rarely finds it even in period instrument circles, for example, where no rhetorical gesture is considered too much! Ultimately, we are playing the music of dead composers, having ourselves encountered Mahler, Schoenberg, Ives, Stockhausen or Mantovani (not to mention Miles Davis, The Beatles, Sex Pistols or Oasis), on organs blown by electricity, beneath electric light, from nicely printed scores, using prescription contact lenses, to a Mondeo-driving middle class audience, some of whom even enjoy nice snippets of Classic FM and Graham Kendrick on Sundays. You can’t ‘unhear’ such music or forget contemporary influences. There’s no such thing as an ‘authentic’ performance and I’m not sure whether such a thing would be particularly desirable anyway. As for what makes a ‘great’ performance, on one level, our job is to understand, and then to referee, often competing aesthetics, and make the best job of it. I agree with the earlier contributions that extol the virtues of what performance practice and analysis can teach us – indeed, we have a duty as musicians to learn as much as we can in the service of our art – but ultimately, if we don’t MOVE people, or at least make them actively LISTEN to what we’re saying, then there’s little point and the organ will continue to be regarded as a cold piece of Gothic machinery driven by megalomaniac train spotters with no people skills. I absolutely adore Ton Koopman’s Bach, but am also profoundly moved by Horowitz (listen and weep ): respect is due to a musician of such transparent technique, modesty and life experience. Ian Ball

That's quite right. Ian Ball

Quite right: this month Dave begins work towards a doctorate in composition at Bristol Uni. However, he has picked up plenty of freelance work in order to support his studies, including 3 days a week as '2nd assistant' at the Cathedral. Ian Ball