Colin Harvey

I take it you haven't come across the version in HON then... Re. Lord for the years, I can't say my congregation has a problem with it. I encouraged them to enjoy the quaver and dotted crotchet and they've sung it with relish ever since. There's no need to dumb anything down for my lot...

Yes, as any well trained singer will tell you, it's rather difficult to sing a short "i" ... it's not really a singable vowel at all - a typically English amalgamation of 2 vowels in context. So most who've been professionally trained will tend towards an "ee" vowel, which is an easy and resonant vowel to sing. Thanks for posting this link - I enjoyed listening to the entire thing!

you should listen to what we have to put up with on Songs of Praise!

While listening to the rather stomach churning recordings at Kampen and Boswald on the Baroque organ tone thread, I came across this: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gI9G-yLx2wQ&NR=1 This impressed me even less than the very unpleasent playing at Kampen for a number of reasons. Firstly, the organist's tempo is all over the place - there is no sense of moving forward with an underlying pulse - sometimes he tries to drag the congregation forward by playing slightly ahead of the beat but it's quite funny to notice how the congregation wins in the end. Secondly, the congregation and organist are very much doing their own thing and the 2 activities don't really sound related at all. The organist is blasting away on all his Cavaille-Coll inspired reeds for all he's worth and yet it bears no relation to the chorale at all... ... which brings me onto the third point. Is it really necessary to play at that level of volume all the time? Yes, it's a big congregation and yes, it's Psalm 150 but to play on full Grande Orgue and Pedale anches all the time strikes me as ... insensitive, unmusical and immature. And the touch is not especially good. It sounds like the organist is too over-excited to be in control of what he is doing. This is a sign of immaturity or inexperience to me - after a while, the excitement of playing a really loud and exciting organ like this wears out and you're left with just playing the music... I felt this accompaniment was at the expense of the singing - it draws attention away from the singing and the chorale to the unholy racket going on at the west end, when its function should be to accompany and lead. Not show-off. Are there any other points people would make about this example? More to the point, do people have examples of good accompaniment they'd like to post or point at - either congregational or choral. It would be good to have examples from other cultures too, so we're not just sticking to Anglican Choral accompaniment and hymns.

very good!

Wasn't the story with this recording that the equipment in those days could only record about 7 minutes at a time so GTB had to play it very fast to fit in within the confines of the technology of the time? Somebody more knowledgeable about historic recording equipment than me would know. Also notice the complete lack of acoustic in the BBC recording hall at the end of the recording. I'm a little reminded of Gordon Reynolds when listening to this: "always allow full swell to creep in and obscure the last 2 pages of a Bach fugue. This will not only impress your listeners but also save you a lot of practice." However, it's a wonderful document of the tastes of the time & GTB's prodigious ability. Here's GTB playing his own Elegy: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9RyGq_kb-I8&...feature=related

I found it bizzarely slow on Saturday morning around 0930 (I'm with Pipex) but otherwise it seems to go like the clappers...

It's not uncommon in the UK for the Swell High Pressure (HP) reeds to be on a separate soundboard to the fluework (which is on a lower pressure), especially on larger organs. The HP chest is nearly always at the front of the swell box and there is usually a passage board between the HP and LP soundboards, with the faceboards to both soundboards available at foot or shin level - they're usually at the same level. Usually the Oboe & Vox humana are on the low pressure chest - there's no need for them to be HP and the tremulant normally only works on the LP chest. Sometimes there's a high pressure swell open diapason or some similar innovation - it'll either be on the HP reed chest behind the reeds or on a separate chest. Quite often the large flue basses (normally a stopped 16' and the 8' basses of the Swell open diapason and strings) will be conducted off and be on off-note chests to the back & sides of the swell box - sometimes, where things are desperate, they'll be on the ceiling as well... Sometimes these pipes will be conducted off until comfortably in the tenor octave. However, the swell box is generally pretty tight - there is rarely much space except for a passage board down the middle and between the HP & LP chests for tuning. English soundboards are generally quite small compared to the vast things found in very large German and French organs - the reason being the generally cramped conditions British organs inhabit in the triforium or under a chancel arch. The soundboards tend to be a fairly standardised width, the only thing that really varies is the depth, which obviously is dependant on the number of stops. Most chests in the UK are slider soundboards and most of the organs with separate swell HP & LP soundboards will be EP or pneumatic action - it's only in very large organs (like RAH) that one starts to run into the limits of how many stops one can happily put on a soundboard and this is very rare. Even a fairly lavish Cathedral swell organ will be something like L.P: 16.8.8.8.8.4.4.3.2.IV.8.8, HP: 16.8.8.4 and the LP stuff can (just) go on 1 soundboard. It's very rare for the chests to be at different heights - I can only think of the RAH, whose swell box is on 2 levels but the new RFH swell box is pretty vast too - it could almost house my church's entire organ! I'm not sure how the pipes are disposed between the 2 levels of the RAH's swell organ - JPM would know better than me! The size and shape of the swell box plays an important part in its characteristics - the size of its walls plays an important role, as does its depth - a small, shallow box is much more effective, with a larger dynamic range and better projection - a lot of sound can be trapped in a large, deep swell box and never get out. Swell box walls with smaller surface area transmit less sound than large swell box walls when shut - partly why Hill's dovecote swell boxes in small organs (with the basses in the middle) are so effective. It's worth bearing in mind the location and demands on British swell boxes: many have restricted headroom because of their location under an arch or roof in the triforium so they've spread horizontally instead. The situation of many German organs, with a west wall in a lofty nave to fill, is very different - you've got lots of head-height to play with but not always as much depth. As a rule, British churches are not as lofty as their continental cousins, unless one compares buildings that have their roots as monasteries or major religious foundations.

I've just discovered this recording on the internet of the 1727 Muller organ at Leeuwarden: http://pipedreams.publicradio.org/www_publ...1_0832part2_128 With some rather ravishing transcriptions from Bach's Cantatas - some fine duet playing of music of eye-watering complexity and remarkable charm.

This very recording, music, organist and organ ingnited my love for the organ: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?fmt=18&v=3cWq7bQkdMg This would be my desert island disk. I know it's Alkmaar pre 1986 but all the same...

And more to the point, I sometimes wonder if these organs would get the same superlatives and interest if they weren't in these prestigious venues...

A delicious Voix Humaine and spectacular console at Versailles http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1f7_V75GA&NR=1

I'm sorry, I've just had a quick look through the DGM Mass and it's not the one I was thinking of and certainly not as bad as I made out. Apologies. I could only find one or two minor quibbles, like the way the organ intro for the Gloria starts on the upbeat in the tonic and the downbeat of the next bar is the dominant in 1st inversion (with a random f#), which must throw quite a lot of people off the beat, esp in 2/4 time. There were a few other things like doubled 3rds (A&T on Ho(sanna) in the Benedictus), the tenor g in bars 3-4 of the Sanctus organ intro is slightly awkward (I know it's not a // 5th but a tied note that resolves to a 7th in the chord doesn't work in this context) but these are minor things. I feel the altos must get very bored at times (just 4 notes in the Agnus dei, mainly ds). However, there are some quite nice moments in it but with all those repetitive formulaic II7b - V - I cadences all over the place, it reminded me a bit of the music of Caleb Simper...

I agree. Too many parallel 5ths, bass line following the top line, clumsy and inept harmonic progressions, lack of melodic interest. I don't think it's well written at all. It's interesting to see how DGM has managed to avoid the basic tenements and rules of harmony and yet still created something truly insipid. The David Thorne setting is really quite passable - it has some quite good moments suitable for an average parish church on a Sunday morning. I've used the Ian Sharp St Katherine setting, which is quite OK but not that widespread these days.

What work are Bishop's doing these days?

I'm really enjoying the contributions to this thread. Best one in ages Nigel: OMG! With artillery like that, how could an army ever lose? BTW, a friend of mine informs me that most of the photos on that clip aren't Segovia - there are lots of shots of Granada. The appearance and visual splendour of the baroque organ should never be overlooked, neither the detail and skill of the craftsmanship. Here's a photo of the Segovia organ:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol...icle4986480.ece Fair, I think... i like "camp vulgarity" while acknowledging his outrageous virtuosity and admirable chutzpah... 3* is hedging bets...

well spotted re. fast show... Yes, the videos give the impression of it being quite OK (except the Schrammel - the reeds sometimes don't quite speak at the same as the rest of the organ but it's so wonderfully OTT and kitsch I really don't care - it's fantastic). Astonishing acoustic. Why do they think they need something 3 times the size? I still think it's completely & utterly stark raving mad but I've now canceled the trip to Hungary to burn it down...

yes, that's the one... i can just imagine sitting at the console at York on a Friday evening wondering which principals I'll use ... "Today I think I will mostly be using the Great principals 3, 5 & 8 today..." The Winchester organ looks decidedly down at heel. (or is that Vox Humana who looks down at Hele?) I'm sorry, I shouldn't get down at Hele. I wish them well in Hungary. Just think - at the very least, the specification is tailor made for the music of Olivier Messiaen!! (sorry about all the dreadful puns - seeing Nigel's post whetted my appetite but I don't think any mine come anywhere close to matching his... quite right to mention Waterford seconds too)

It looks completely and utterly stark raving mad. Did Steve Bournias design the tonal scheme? There seems to be rather mixed thinking behind it - what possible purpose could there be for an Unterwerk, Oberwerk and Positiv in the same organ? The Unterwerk and Positiv look extremely similar, in a quasi neo-classical style with the worst excressions of this period; the Oberwerk looks positively bizzare with a battery of trompetes and a flute harmonic, rauschpfeife and Acuta all on the same division. The swell organ, complete with 2 cornets and a stratosphericly sharp mixture would be best off spread between 2 or 3 swell boxes for that number of stops and size. Peppered with some stops that look like the wet dreams of the 1960s (and I thought had died out long ago) - there's no less than 3 1' stops here, it's amazing someone is trying to build this thing today. The case doesn't look all that large - maybe a 16', rather squat 19th century continental classical box? Where is it all going to go? With its many repititions, vainty and confused design, it reminds me in a funny way of the chaotic enlargements of the organ at York Minister in the early 19th century at the instigation of John Camidge... It's worth bearing in mind that St Paul's Cathedral is a bigger building. mind you, a 237 foot high ceiling under the dome is not to be sniffed at... Thanks for posting this...

The organ at Twyford on which I play is not a refurbished 19th century Walker organ: It is a new organ which draws inspiration and a degree of discipline from 19th century Walker practice. A similar approach can be seen elsewhere, like the Paul Fritts organ at Tacoma, which draws its inspiration from the Muller organs of the 18th Century. The main difference is that the Twyford organ contains a proportion of genuine period Walker pipework (alongside a couple of compatible stops by other period builders and a considerable quantity of new pipes). The degree to which it follows historic practice reflects the organ's environment and constraints on the project at the time, as well as the interests and considerations of those that made it, advised on it and commissioned it. So it deserves to be viewed as a modern creation and not as an historic reconstruction. And I'm still delighted with it. Whether it has a balanced swell pedal or stick swell is pretty immaterial: I would still be able to make music on it whatever type of swell pedal it had. True, the type of pedal would affect how I used the swell box but that doesn't mean that one type of pedal should be ruled out altogether, as people have already explained in the topic. In the end, we left the decision of the type of swell pedal to the builder and in fact barely discussed it at all - there were more important things to talk about! We fully supported the builder's decision: the thought was that other organists would find it easier to accept and adjust to the more prevalent balanced swell pedal.

It's a shame to see this otherwise excellent posting spoilt by the resurrection of this tired old hobby horse which has been discussed ad nauseam on these pages. Where do we stop with changes for modern taste? What else is there besides the trigger swell? Why not add extra bushing to the action to make it quieter? Why not add an R/C pedalboard? Why not make the stop jambs angled? Why not add an electric combination action? Why not add an electric detached and moveable console? How do we draw the line? How do we balance all the factors to make our decisions? Otherwise, I think Cynic makes some very apposite and well-informed points about player-consultants. I could add a few more to the list, like one Priory organ on the south coast with an almost unused mechanical action console... It's a shame that the world of consultants is not more dominated by consultants with backgrounds as a professional organ builders: in my experience those consultants are much better, bringing more relevant knowledge and experience to the table. What else can a big-name player/consultant bring to the table that the resident organists can't already bring themselves? Big-name organists make better patrons than consultants of organ projects.

Thanks for all the congratulations! I heard this Stanford in G story attributed to Edward Higginbottom at New in Oxford... he wanted it down a half... I've found score-reading is a very useful skill. Especially at choir practices where the choir is lost and there isn't a keyboard reduction (common with cpdl and contempory music scores - and when the organ is doing something different...). And Richard, I thought you made good use of your sight-reading skills the other day!

Would love to but sadly will be skiing at end of Jan.

I had particular joy reading a report that talked of "Waisting resources" rather than "wasting resources" yesterday.