Pierre Lauwers

Pierre

"the only multi-national organ dictionary I know of, by his fellow-Belgian Mr Praet? " (Quote) I do not use it. As you said, word-to word translation does not work. So there is a dutch version of the Orgelprobe ? I'll Google that... ....Indeed, an this since the 18th century already: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Wilhelm_Lustig Pierre

Agreed. Here is an interesting one: http://pipedreams.publicradio.org/gallery/...casparini.shtml Pierre

At that point I think we begin to go round and round; in a better world, we should now gather an go for an organ tour in Germany, where I could design a little program featuring Trost, Wagner, Sterzing, Creutzburg organs plus the only (little) Scheibe organ we still have....And end up the other side of the Atlantic in Rochester (NY) to visit the Go-Art Casparini organ. About the language question I open a new thread. Pierre

On another thread we encountered the translation between languages problems. This is a complicated matter, because it is spoiled by historic and even moral questions ("What, you do not know?", or reversely "pedantry of the polyglotts" and so on. I shall try to explain the question somewhat. There is a huge difference between to be born in an english-speaking area, one of the first languages in the world and an international one, and to be born in a frankisch-speaking area with about 1,000.000 native speakers that are located in three different countries, in a country with three official languages, none of which is frankisch! Are you still there, ladies and gentlemen ? When you live in such a context, you soon grasp several languages, before going to school, but you get a holistic, global knowledge of them. This means you do not master the french like a french, the dutch like a dutchman, the german like a german. I myself for example write preferably in french, because it is this language I learnt at school, and so it is in this language that I make the less faults. In dutch or german my level is comparable to the one I display in english, that is, rather poor. BUT....as for reading now, I prefer the german so I'll choose a book in that language if given the choice. While speaking or writing in french I will often use a german or dutch word when I do not find it in french; as a result, like many belgians, I do not "have" any "reference language", rather a mix of several ones. Now let us take the example of an historic text that should absolutely exist in english and french versions: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/sammlungen/...ht/278954251/0/ Second part: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/sammlungen/...ht/278955630/0/ ....This is the kind of text we belgians have no merit to understand; we grasp it globally, the phrases being constructed exactly like in our own "Muddersprooch", "Moedertaal" etc. But now what if we tried to translate it into another of the languages we use ? This will never reach the level of a parisian, a londonian, a berliner native. So the job won't be perfect. Second point: this would need aproximately one year on a 4-hour a day basis with the nose in the paper. Who would pay for that ? So I often tends to refer myself to such texts I have, while it should be translated first if we would want my readers to be able to control by themselves what that funny Pierre Lauwers writes on the forums. Over to you now, the discussion is widely open. Peter Lauwers

"Ha, the poor chap cannot understand German" (Quote) I am quite sorry to have lent you to believe that. Apologies, Pierre About Bach criticizing Silbermann's Mixtures: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear...lient=firefox-a ....Were we find this: "Gerade das, was Bach störte, die relative Schwäche der Mixturen, der so genannten "Klangkronen", die den Orgelklang hell und strahlend machen, gehörte zu Silbermanns Konzept..." What Bach precisely disturbed was the relative weakness of the Mixtures, the so-called "crowning of the tone", that makes the organ tone clear and luminous, that (this weakness also) was part of theSilbermann concept. So the organ was not clear and luminous enough.

It seems Bach criticized "french" Mixtures -that is, the ones he knew, from Gottfried Silbermann- because they had too many breaks. Indeed the french Mixture is not meant for polyphony, but for chords. In a Trost, a Wagner, a Sterzing organ you usually have three breaks, which jump back one octave deeper. So Silbermann was a complete outsider in the central german scene. But he influenced it strongly afterwards, up to Schulze in the 19th century with his big Quint Mixtures. Even people who worked with him, and were influenced by him, turned the french elements he brought with him to completely different things, the best example being Joachim Wagner, who turned back to tierce Mixtures while retaining Silbermann's Cornet, reeds and "jeu de Tierce" (seperate 8-4-2 2/3-2-1 3/5 stops). Even more surprising, those Cornets and tierces were meant to be added to the Principal chorus as well!!! Believe me, when you hear that at Angermünde, coming from Belgium or France (where you learn the Plein-jeu and the Grand jeu are never to be mixed, so you never drawn a Cornet with the Principals etc...), you fell off your chair, while Bach's music really thrive precisely in such conditions. Another important outsider was Eugen Casparini when he came back from Italy round 1700 with a style of his own. He introduced Ripienis on secondary manuals -without tierce ranks- while retaining the traditionnal tierce Mixtures as well. The Scheibe organ of Leipzig university was designed by his son Adam-Horatio Casparini, and this is another organ we know Bach liked much. Trost, Wagner & al, so different from Silbermann, are closer to the' Casparini school by far; in fact, the neo-baroque retained only Silbermann in central Germany, while the real reference with Bach's organ is Casparini. Pierre

Here is a page about the Waltershausen organ: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgel_der_Sta...altershausen%29 There is no Mixture on the third manual. But let us avoid cutting hairs in four in their diameter; there is maximal one Mixture pro Manual, and when there is a Pedal Mixture, it is borrowed from the HPTW. I myself do like Quint Mixtures as well (Nebensache!). Maybe the most important point is such stops aren't bearable for 10 minutes at a time. What these organ question are two neo-baroque Holy Truths: -There is no color at all permitted in a "true" organ, only "polyphonic textures"; -Mixtures stop knobs are to be nailed open . Those central german organs are color boxes, they leave nothing to the romantic organs for that matter. They were a big surprise in the 70's when I visited them. From Angermünde to Waltershausen. Had they been "west from the iron curtail", no doubt they would have been neo-baroquised and we would not have this debate -this would be more confortable, but the Bach sound would have been lost forever-. When you hear Bach in Waltershausen, Altenburg, Grossgöttern, Angermünde, what you have is the Cantate's orchestra; there is no need for a 20 years bureaucratic study to realize that. Pierre

I myself understand this: Phrase one: The Mixtures were sparingly specified. So one for each Manual -the Pedal Mixture was borrowed from the HPTW, aka Hauptwerk, aka Great organ-. (An this is indeed so in the reality) Phrase two: There are no Trost Mixtures without tierce ranks, despite the presence of Sesquialteras. (Again, it is so in the three Trost organs we have!) About Quint Mixtures in central Germany: they were introduced by Gottfried Silbermann back from France. Those Mixtures were obviously not intended to be used the neo-baroque way, that is, 90 % of the time, for complete Preludes and fugues, but rather for climaxes. These stops crown registrations close to the full organ. Pierre

Agreed, Vox, But there is another point beyond the strict meanings of the words: the sounds! And this is what Mr Grenzing's talks about in his article. We have a chance in Belgium in that we have dialectal forms here aplenty with flemish, brabanter, limburgs, frankisch and german dialects, many of which close to the ancient ones. Pcnd, Organagraphia is well a french-based Forum. But it is litterally crammed with links in all european languages, a thing which became accepted with time. And its founder is not even a native french-speaking ! I can understand the wish for some academic rigor, this is sound. But to have all translated in one language, for a belgian at least, seems like "I shall eat whatever you offer me, provided it is beef". Pierre

Why should it be, Dear Pcnd ? The data is in german dialects, written in gothic; the organs, while I toured them, behind a severe border... My teacher in organ history accepted me because I understood four language then, and could do with the local variants of the Flanders and Germany. "A prerequisite for that matter" he said. I believe one cannot understand Bach and his organs without knowing the german language. See Gerhard Grenzing again: http://www.grenzing.com/pdf/klang.pdf This tierce Mixture question seems to be bounded to languages, save in Britain where both Quint and Tierce Mixtures are to be found since the 19th century. Let us take, for example, the dutch-speaking area: Flanders, Netherlands and Northern Germany -the Plattdeutsch being closer to the dutch than to the standard german-. There, the Sesquialtera obtains absolutely everywhere, and goes in the chorus with the Quint Mixture. In central Germany, the tierce is in the Mixture itself also. But there is a variant: one can find Mixtures which "turns around" a Sesquialtera! The Sesquialtera provides the 1 3/5' rank, while the Mixture has the 4/5' rank in the bass, breaking directly to 3 1/5' in the treble ! Do we need any evidence more those two stops were intended to work togheter ? (etc etc etc. I am researching such things since some years already) Pierre

"There is evidence that a number of french, northern german and castillan instruments from the Baroque period contained predominantly quint mixtures. " (in the case of the french organs: all of them.) Pierre

Indeed, this is well played. But the organ is actually a modern one.... see here (to be read with a pint of salt and carefully): http://www.baroqueorgan.com/organ.html " I have yet to see anything conclusive regarding tierce mixtures on organs Bach would have known. The only instrument (Mülhausen) which he was known to have played, for which I can find contemporary records of the mixture intervals shows that all the chorus mixtures contained unison and quint ranks only." (Quote) Since some time already, I am no more alone with that Mantra. Quint Mixtures were very rare in Central Europe during the baroque period, and where there were some, it was following a french (Silbermann) or italian influency (little Ripieni on secondar manuals in Casparini or his follower's organs). The last restored Joachim Wagner, the little one in Sternhagen, has a "Mixtur 3 Fach" whose treble is 2 2/3'- 2'- 1 3/5' ! yes, exactly the same as in the Walcker organ....I learned it two days ago... See here: http://www.wagnerorgel-sternhagen.de/Baugeschichte.html Pierre

I guess, though, in some years you will hear precisely that in the majority of Bach's recordings, since it becomes clearer everyday that Bach had just such mixtures! Another interesting video: a presentation of a 1920 swedish post-romantic organ of first magnitude: Pierre

Althornbach, Walcker, 10 stops, 1884: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDQN1otCyeU...feature=related A "muddy" stuff ? Pierre

I do not know much about that particular church. What I do know is than Dalstein and Haerpfer met while working with Cavaillé-Coll, after having be trained in Germany (Walcker), and that they built organs that were a splendid synthese of both.....Nothing less than that. Pierre

This is a beautifull work that deserves more consideration. Its main drawback is that it does not fit in the neobarokkie's mood, nothing else. Pierre

Here is the first Video featuring a Dalstein & Haerpfer organ: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cpr2vjEeR0Y Note the Specifications: there is only one 4' and one Mixture (with tierce rank, to be heard from 6' 35". And note also the Trompette is to be heard for two seconds only; as it was halas off-tune, the player soon shut it!) The action is pneumatic, probably after the Weigle system. To be thrown into the Rhine ? The Specifications was by Albert Schweitzer. See here (in french language): http://decouverte.orgue.free.fr/orgues/stthomch.htm Pierre

See here what they cherish in Argentina, and what they play upon -despite the diplomatic problems!-: Pierre

Well, are we sure Cromwell is dead ? (I'd check) Pierre

This was an add issued before any sale was discussed yet; as for the balanced swell pedal, it is probably not original of course. Pierre

Go figure: we would import an historic organ from 5000 km away, something which is a rarity even there, and this, just to "better" it after "our modern standards" ? I see no point there... Pierre

Ladies and gentlemen, here is the best video with Bach I found in 2010 yet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvdfQ2AVbHs...feature=channel (Post edited)Well, sorry, this video was there since some days and it is already deleted.... Pierre

Well, I hope they did not do that ! Pierre

This is well in touch with the current evolution of the ideas in Belgium today; a 1854 Hook & Hastings organ was rescued in Portland, Maine, and is prestently re-erected in Boom (about mid-way between Brussels and Antwerpen). The opening is due this end May. Here is a page with pictures and Specifications: http://www.wallacepipeorgans.com/html/for_...ook%20Op173.pdf Pierre