Pierre Lauwers

Of course I did not! I just bought these stupid tools at a bargain for use back here, not to destroy the organ... Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Yes, I've seen once electric cables that had been simply cut in a cathedral organ that had been condemned because it was "decadent". This was the usual word in Belgium 20 years ago. (Even the Cavaillé-Coll of the Brussel's music school was qualified as "decadent". It was nearly the same as St-François de Sales Lyon!!!) About Mr Phillip Klais having taken place just under the suspended section of the Cologne's cathedral organ: Maybe that's the reason they did not allow me to enter for the inauguration recital. I'd just taken the opportunity to buy some tools cheaper than in Belgium, among which a really big steel saw. I shall have to apologize and explain I am not a terrorist. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Splendid! Pierre Lauwers

What about two mixtures, one with octaves and quints, the other one with tierce? Holzhay did it ("Hörnlein"), a 1910 Walcker in Belgium has a "Mixtur" and a "Scharff" (with Tierce) on the same manual. In this one, however, the Scharff is louder voiced as the mixture, I think it's intended to go with the reeds. In the flemish organ there are "Sesquialter" or "Sexquialter", with Principal scales. These stops do indeed have a Tierce rank, but are actually rather mixtures because they do have breaks. They can be added to the Diapason chorus or not, like Holzhay's Hörnlein. This kind of Sesquialter was -or is-known in Britain. Audsley too described it that way (up to five ranks, with breaks). Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

I have seen organ-lofts you would believe a waste truck had discharged its content in! But this has some advantages too. I found many a 19th's century paper in such places, like inauguration's program, music sheets etc. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Here we have something quite interesting! The first english Swellbox dates back 1712. If it existed in Spain since 1659, it could have reached Britain trough the Portugal, which had many contacts with England during that period. On the continent, the first Swellboxes we owe to Abt Vogler, so not before the beginning of the 19th century... But nobody among our scholars do know this 1659 date. A vast majority of them still believe the english were the first. There is also a belief the magnificient spanish organs with horizontal reeds, Swellboxes etc were only late-Baroque creations, and that nobody did actually write for them. It seems the introduction of the romantic organ in Spain was a catastrophe, replacing spanish organs with french and german ones -tough Cavaillé-Coll was strongly influenced by the spanish organ-. You should create "the" big spanish multilingual Website with the aim to explain the history of the spanish organ. I'm convinced you'll agree with me the spanish themselves do not show enough interest in their organs. Don't worry, it's the same situation in Belgium, while we see here everyday the british had better their own organs exchanged for french and german ones... Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

There were reeds, of course; but wether Cabanilles knew "chamade" reeds (horizontal reeds) is questionable (he dissepeared in 1712). As far as I know, the "Spanish organ" as we see it today, with his chamades and accessories like Swellboxes etc, appeared after about 1730. Thanks fort this page! Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

So there would be a lot of written music for the spanish organ of the 18th century? Did not Cabanilles actually write for an earlier type of organ, without chamades? I've heard late baroque french music on them, and it seemed appropriate. Of course, this would not be the case with Franck. The "Cornetas" and "Nazardos", of smaller scale than the french and belgian Cornets, I see rather as "Flute mixtures", topping complete Flute choruses you won't find anywhere else. It seems there were undulating stops too, maybe from italian origin. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

This may be an occasion to investigate something I wonder about since long: What did the spanish organists of the 18th century play on these extraordinary organs? Cabanilles? Really? These instrument did not only feature the spectacular chamades; thet were in advance as far as Swell boxes and registrational aids are concerned. The flue stops were quite varied as well, with both Principal and Flutes choruses. There is a belief extemporisation reigned supreme. But do we know more today? Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Of course, we need to know what this organ is: -If it's anywhere close to the original state, why not simply go back to Arthur Harrison's design? After all, such an organ is an "ancient" one! -If not, one may consider the solution that consists in having the Tierce mixture divided in two, one with only octaves and quints, the other with the tierce(s) rank(s) and eventually the flat 21st. -We may effectively suppose the original "Harmonics" stops to go with H&H caracteristic "Tromba" chorus reeds. But why revoice them as Posaunes? Should we transform our belgian fat Cornets into german Sesquialters? (We do have flemish Sesquialters, but that's something else than the german ones). Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

The Diapason choruses at Worcester are impressive in Saint-Saëns, a music that could not do with the slightest hint of dullness. I agree for the slight french accent in the Great's reed choruses, but be sure a french would not! I have nothing against chamades and Zymbelsterns, tough I would personally never choose them, as long as they are built in another organ (as said). But as long as any english organ is concerned, I think of chamades as Ketchup on a scotch salmon's plate. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Well, Would it be foolish to believe an organ that fits Buxtehude does exactly as well in northern german 17th century's liturgy? If not, we should maybe exchange liturgies between countries every 30 years or so...What a pity organs are somewhat cumbersome and heavy to move... Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

So we do not really know what the true problems are. Wether it is only a matter of fashion I do not know, because I do not know the musicians there. So it's better to start with the idea there are true problems. I believe the good plan would not be to "criticize and blame", but to inventory the problems in the first place. If we cannot adress them for an organ like that, we have a civilisation's problem. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

No; but I found nothing else! Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Yes the tierce can be tiring....If the Mixture is used as a classical Diapason chorus crowning. In the ancient german organs there was always the choice to have the Tierce or not in the chorus; it could have a seperate stop-knob, or it could be included in a Terzian, a Hörnlein (Holzay, souhthern Germany), next to a quint mixture. The romantic organ choosed the tierce mixture because the Diapason chorus was not intended to be used alone. It became the backbone of the tutti; so the tierce was usefull because it corroborates the partials of the reed and string stops. It was a bridge between the different families of stops. So far for the german romantic organ. In England the mix Diapason chorus-reeds was already done in the 18th century. Later the typical romantic english organ sound is the combination of a Diapason chorus with reed choruses, so without Flutes and strings, but still with tierces. In France, the tierce isn't allowed in the Diapason chorus. They are only to be found within the Flute family: "Jeu de tierce" (Bourdon, Flute 4 Nazard 2 2/3', Quarte de Nazard 2', Tierce 1 3/5'), the Cornet, or Carillon (Nazard 2 2/3', Tierce 1 3/5', Piccolo 1'). So we have a "Plein-jeu" (Diapason chorus) and a "Grand jeu" (reeds+ Cornets) that do not mix. Cavaillé-Coll solved the problem by having the reeds (and the Cornets intended to re-inforce their trebles, effectively) dominating heavily the rest. I tend to conclude from this the mixtures in a romantic organs are a synthesis of a classic stop and a Cornet. They aren't intended to be used in a classic context such as 8-4-2-Mixture, but rather, for instance, in a Full-Swell, or in the tutti. One could imagine, of course, to build new romantic-inspired new organs in which we would have both tutti and chorus-mixtures. This would be an interesting experience, and this is the reason I'm interested with the english Dulciana Mixture. This one was certainly not intended for loud effects. The german Harmonia aetherea is a german equivalent, build after the Geigenprinzipal scale. But usually it countained a tierce rank. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

And then there is the german Oboe...Thinner and louder than the french Hautbois. Wether the "Hautboy" is an english version of the french is open to debate. The french Hautbois dates back from F-H Clicquot, not before. Thess stops - I mean the english and the german Oboe- are very often diminutive chorus reeds, not solists. Hence lots of confusion about its use by C. Franck. Even many french Hautbois are rather crude compared with St-Clothilde's. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Maybe...That said, I would be surprised A.H. not having known Cavaillé-Coll's work. Walcker organs had all tierce ranks in Mixtures, of the Spitzflöte kind; Link, ditto. Weigle of Stuttgart used tierce and septièmes, very close to A.H. Only the french and the french-speaking belgians rejected the tierce from the Mixtures in the romantic period, as well as during the 18th century. So the tutti relied heavily on the reeds, often with a wide-scaled Cornet (only place where a Tierce was permitted). It seems Lewis was very much influenced by Schulze, whose Diapason choruses might have something of a Silbermann accent -without tierce-. If we go a little further: Gottfried learned something by Andreas in France (the land of the tierceless Mixtures)...

Very interesting discussion! May I ask two questions: -What difference do you see between an Oboe and a Hautbois? -Is the Cornopean a closed-toned reed? Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Some divisions are a little "cramped"; by downsizing I meant only removing some stops to give it more air. Of course I do not "know" what to remove. Only the organ-builder could decide. Why not build a second organ, of a completely different style? For this one one would have complete freedom of choice. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

There isn't many material to be found on the internet about spanish organs, but there is at least this one: http://www.homines.com/arte/organo_catedral_malaga/ ....Halas without disposition, but you will find the names and the dates. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

They would re-invigorate the Cathedral's music life in a way that a restoration of the existing tired instrument would not. (Citation) Really? I had some friends today, and we did hear to these LP's again. We all disagree with this; Worcester's is a valuable organ, moreover it's unique. There is a "Worcester sound", an incredible mix of "presence", dynamic range, poetry. An interesting remark from one organist was that the Mixture work, obviously of later vintage than the foundation stops, do actually blend with them, and this is something very rare indeed. So I wonder why any Cathedral could not enjoy a splendid musical life with an organ such as that one. If we had it here in Namur.... Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Here there might be a danger -the temperament wasn't the reason-. The move towards "gravity" commenced about 1750, far before the aequal temperament was widespread. In romantic organs, you need romantic mixtures. "opening the upperwork a bit", that has been done in Belgium since WWII. The result with romantic foundation stops is invariably a catastrophe. Finally, the....Romantic foundations were removed! Moreover, the roles of mixtures are different in romantic organs. A glimpse in the "Tierce mixtures" thread might be interesting. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

Well, Did you ever hear a Walcker or a Link Tierce mixture -with aequal temperament?- Maybe to "run trough the land to re-tune all" would deserve some tought in the first place. This said, I myself would be quite interested to try slightly unequal temperaments in new romantic organs; Father Willis used them, Samuel- Sebastian Wesley advocated them. I agree it would be interesting to hear Howells with this kind of temperament, and the same may be said for Tournemire. But -like the neo-baroque organs- please leave the remaining romantic organs alone with their aequal temperament... Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

I'd certainly not advocate a X-"further rebuild" at Worcester, but rather something like a downsizing: remove what's too much theirin in the first place. And then you can build new soundoards -of the same type-. (Remember RAH?). No need for computer gadgets. Of course with such stops -and layout!- you need to stick to electro-pneumatic action. The simpler the best, this is not an organ where experimentations need to be done. This is an ancient organ, best suited to the 1850-1950 repertoire... With a few less stops, the remaining ones can be given a bit more space to speak even better. Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.

There is of course something of a paradox here: "we", the "romantic guys", will have to protect neo-baroque organs! But wat else can we do? To "Neo-romanticize" Neo-baroque organs? Where would we end up? And as Mr Mander said, we do know such "improvments" do not work... By protecting valuable neo-baroque organs, preserving the remaining ancient ones, and even continuing to reconstitute organs from styles of which too few remain (like the ancient english organs), we shall build a credibility for whatever new style we can create. This means that less new organs will be build, and more will be professionally (respectfully) restaured. Then there will be more variety of styles represented in any area. This I believe is the "normal" situation. Like in nature, we need diversity; any too dominant species is a temptation to "slash it down". And round and round we go... Best wishes, Pierre Lauwers.