Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

Bells And Whistles On Toast


Guest spottedmetal
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest spottedmetal

NOTE - 27th March - upon completion of this project the effect has been so successful that I have deleted specific details so that hopefully details of my work will have benefitted the pipe-organ community without being capable of reproduction by the toaster makers in competition. If any pipe-organ builders and or organ advisers interested in the effectiveness of what I've achieved and the possibilities of benefit to pipe-organs would like to hear the results or come and visit, please PM me.

 

Best wishes

 

Spot

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Dear All

 

Should this thread or topic be considered boring, or inappropriate please ask the moderators to delete it and I won't be offended.

 

However, noting that subjects of house organs, both pipe and toasters have been mentioned before, I'm assuming that consideration of dream machines in the absurd might be fun for some, and I'd appreciate any unhelpful comments, rotten tomatoes or perhaps even encouragement and advice that anyone can bring, as options are vexing the grey-matter, and indeed the options available may point to experience valuable for others.

 

As many are probably aware, I'm trying to give focus to the repertoire for the repertoire's sake, and the instrument's sake outside of the ecclesiastical context, partly for the reason that there are people around who would never be seen dead going into a church and partly because down in the South East and in East Sussex in particular one feels that organ life does not seem to be quite as lively or as appreciated as it appears to be in other parts of the country.

 

However, to do justice to the whole repertoire, a delightful and versatile 10 rank Hunter can't quite make it . . . So I indulged in a toaster not to promote toasters, but to be better able to promote the music and provide a platform where organists can have fun in front of an audience. It was also felt to be partly a mental antedote to seeing off the progress of senility that has been taking hold of the grey cells since the age of 14 (how many of us are of the opinion that coping with larger works on a larger instrument wards off brain decay? Is this a marketable attribute to encouraging organ playing?).

 

The toaster was an interesting beast, having adequately served public duties for a dozen years, and in learning my way around its technicalities, I began to appreciate that it was non-standard, someone rather brilliant having got at it and directed different things on different channels. It was with great excitement that I recieved a PM on this board from the genius who had designed it . . . The non-standard channel allocation enabled me to start improving on some of the speakers, making each more fit for the purpose of reproducing the stop intended, and the results started showing through.

 

After its first outing in which I thought it did surprising justice to Vierne 1, and the audience enjoyed it and clamoured for more, we set about planning for Vierne 2. By this stage, I was sorely frustrated at the way in which its version of a Celeste was raw bread, perhaps even dough, rather than toast, and I was missing a small Open Diap possibly with voicing closer to that of the real organ on the Great. I have rejected Hauptwork as I really hate anything to do with the reliability of a hard-disk computer.

 

My quest for two ranks has led into adding two whole manuals - and in that I hope that others might be intrigued and excited. Like many I have always sneered at dream machines, Mickey Mouse stupidly vast electronics - for instance what, might one ask, is a five manual with not one or two but with the serious pretentions of three Op Diaps doing on such an instrument in the context of http://www.anthonybogdanorgans.co.uk/Wyvern5manual.htm ?

 

How could I possibly conceive of doing something so outrageous without veering down the same path?

 

The answer turned out to be a fortuitous acquisition of equipment. The first of these was [DELETED BY AUTHOR], the value of which is a very good Celeste, which is as close to my Salicional and Voix Celestes on the Hunter as one could find. It's very North German and Baroque in voicing and although really realistic perhaps I'd tire of it were it to be my only access to an organ substitute.

 

Next came a [DELETED BY AUTHOR]. This is a real toy box, with a bright [DELETED BY AUTHOR], a couple of 32fts, some nice upperwork with [DELETED BY AUTHOR]. Even better some [DELETED BY AUTHOR]. Well this meant that the 1812 had to be on the performance list - and Easter Monday will be a celebration of 25 years of organising concerts - so this put a strict time limit on getting the job done.

 

All of these additional boxes come split into two divisions. It was obvoius to put the [DELETED BY AUTHOR] division with the Celeste on the Swell and the division with the Principal either on the Great - but that would duplicate - so an Echo was born, and it was obvious that those [DELETED BY AUTHOR] should go on a Solo.

 

That wasn't the end of the story: wouldn't it be nice to have a portable organ facility to do concerts outside! Accordingly I followed the example of the "Desert Organ" constructed in America for the Burning Man festival and sought out [DELETED BY AUTHOR]. The [DELETED BY AUTHOR] could easily be put on the Echo and the [DELETED BY AUTHOR] added to the Solo. However, after perusing the Swell Great Choir manual discussion and so finding the links to the explanation of the French tradition at St Sulpice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kau-hubf2Gc

put into practice with

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOofV3PCnno (which my wife tells me is manic and demonic ! )

perhaps its a good idea to put the bulk of the reed chorus on the bottom manual, and the [DELETED BY AUTHOR] on the Swell for coupling down to either the Great or Choir in more of the spirit of the French - Grand Choeur, Grand Jeu etc.

 

For this reason, I'm contemplating coupling the mainly flue Echo to the Great and the Solo with reed and upperwork to Choir.

 

What is interesting about the project is

1. Deficiences of the harmonic structure of the toaster's top octave are remediated by the addition of the new units - which provide for brighter voicing in the top octave as well as not losing top frequencies probably caused by the 8bit 15 year old technology of the orginal toaster

2. [DELETED BY AUTHOR]

3. The toaster is voiced on very traditional H&H lines - it's good as far as it goes - but when I hear it at a distance there's a brownness about the sound not common to H&H - these units add the brightness and sparkle which people often complain about missing from H&H

4. The allocation of these disparate parts is providing a flexibility which can be changed at will without a great deal of trouble on an experimental basis. The combination of styles is providing a versatility to do justice to any repertoire, although I can see purists potentially being wholly horrified.

 

The stoplists are below. What does anyone think? Is it a mistake to parallel-think in terms of the French manual layouts? Is it more effective to be able to choose the different voicing of the same tone, for instance of the Tuba, Clarinet, Oboe on the same manuals, or should one reverse them so that one doe not duplicate them on the same manual so that they can contrast?

 

On one unit the Salizional is very useful with the Cello.

 

Needless to say, I'm still tied up in soldering cables to all the right places, and hope to finish in time! However, before I put the manuals in permanently and cut the holes for the new coupler drawstops, I'd rather have any rethinks at this stage. I think it's on the right track . . . but I'll await judgment from members before coming to a conclusion on that one!

 

As a performance instrument, it's certainly better than the toaster that appeared in Chiddingly church recently for an international recitalist . . . Time will tell whether it's fit for any successors to Virgil Fox!

 

It's intended to provide serious fun for any who want to perform and audiences who want to listen. . . and as a pipe-organ man at heart, one of the purposes of mongrellifying a toaster in this way is to show it no reverence as an art-form but to demonstrate its usefulness as a functional object in bringing the music to the people in a place which could not accommodate the necessary pipe instrument. Indeed, another reason for being obscene in the enlargement of this organ is also to differentiate such an instrument, brought together for a purpose rather than to promote a lesser instrument as a seemingly adequate mere substitute.

 

In due course, I'm hoping to be able to control the pipe organ from the two new manuals at the toaster console - but that's a wholly different ball-game with which I can't cope at present, and I have yet to blow/suck the fumigation dust from the pipes from woodworm treatment. (By the way, I was surprised that no-one followed up with any better ways of preventing woodworm )

 

Best wishes

 

Spot

 

SPECIFICATION OF CONCERT INSTRUMENT:

GREAT / Grande Orgue:

Contra Salicional 16

Open Diap 8

Stopped Diap 8

Wald Flute 4

Principal 4

Twelfth 2 2/3

Fifteenth 2

Fourniture IV

Posaune 8

- Grande Orgue extension:

Open Diapason 8

Flauto Mirabilis 8 (tuned flat for use with Vox Humana)

Concert Flute 4

Quint Flute 2 2/3

Piccolo 2

Vox Humana 8

 

SWELL

Geigen Diap 8

Echo Gamba 8

Lieblich Gedekt 8

Holzflote 8'

Gamba 8'

Voix Celeste 8

Geigen Diap 8

Echo Gamba 8

Lieblich Gedekt 8

Stopped Flute 4

Principal 4

Fifteenth 2

Mixture V

Oboe 8

Clarion 4

Trumpet 8

Contra Fagotto 16

 

POSITIF - permanently on Swell

Holzflote 8'

Gamba 8'

Vox Celeste 8'

Flute 4'

Waldflote 2'

Quinte 1 1/3'

Sesqualter II

Vox Humana 8'

 

For use as Recit Expressif

Bourdon 16

Principal 8

Flûte à cheminée 8

Unda Maris 8

Octave 4

Spitzflöte 4

Nasard 2 2/3

Superoctave 2

 

CHOIR

Gedekt 8

Dulciana 8

Hohl Flute 8

Bourdon 8

Flûte harmonique 8 (tuned with Bourdon as Unda Maris for use for Vox Humana)

Chimney Flute 4

Flûte octaviante 4

Nazard 2 2/3

Block Flute 2

Larigot 1 1/3

Larigot 1 1/3'

Tierce 1 3/5

Clarinet 8

Corno di bassetto 8

Tuba 8

 

For use as Grand Choeur:

Cello 8

Cello Celeste 8

Salizional 8

Quintadena 8

Gedackt 8

Gamba 8

Nachthorn 4

Cymbale III

Cornet III

Cornet des Bombardes IV

Cornopean 16

Clarinet 8

Oboe 8

Cor Anglais 8

Tuba Mirabilis 8

Clarion 4

 

SOLO

Contregambe 16

Diapason 8

Quintadena 8

Terz 1 3/5

Septime 1 1/7

Scharff III

Bombarde 16

Trompette 8

Tuba Mirabilis 8

Tubular Bells (2 octaves)

 

ECHO

Principal 8'

Rohrflote 8'

Octave 4'

Quinte2 2/3'

Octave 2'

Mixture IV

Trumpet 8'

Coupler to Positif

 

PEDAL

Soubasse 32

Contrebombarde 32

Contre Violone 32

Contre Basson 32

Ophicleide 16

Contre Gambe 16

Violone 16

Bombarde 16

Bourdon 16

Violone 16

Open Wood 16

Subbass 16'

Gedekt 8'

Octave 4'

Bass Flute 8

Octave 8

Choral Bass 4

Octave 4'

Trumpet 8

Bombarde 16'

Trumpet 8'

Trombone 16

 

Couplers - Usual 3 manual couplers plus Echo-Great and Solo-Choir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think I have mentioned before in these fora that if going for a home toaster I'd only really consider a three decker. I'm sorry, but an electronic is not a pipe organ, and with only two manuals and fewer stops to choose between I think I'd quickly feel cheated if I settled for anything less. At least with three manuals and nearly 50 stops I don't tire anything like as quickly of the sound. It's this that for home organs is perhaps one of the obvious strengths of electronics that is a clear weakness in church installations. In a church one has to design something of coherence, beauty and function and resist the temptation to add as manu stops as you can think of - and I've seen plenty of toasters with too many stops none of which is very good. But at home you can let your indulgence run riot, and if you have a five manual you can still play through your surround-sound headphones and bother noone else.

 

Though I might be being a little harsh to the better toasters here. When I bought mine (3 manual second hand digital Johannus) I tried a few of the new ones in the showroom. Had I had the money I would have had serious difficulty choosing between say a 3 manual Rembrant and a 2 manual Monarke, given that the latter, with its combination of a console the size of a small home pipe organ in the style of an eighteenth-century instrument, speakers in the top rather than in the kneeboard, and a sound that actually almost convinced me it had pipes. Sadly responsive actions that simulate tracker don't yet seem to exist...

 

That said, what would I do for my dream toaster if I had the money? Frankly I think personally I'd stick to four manuals, with the fourth being a composite Echo-Solo-Bombarde on the grounds that I can't think of any circumstances where you need both Solo and Bombarde, or Echo and Solo, simultaneously. But I'd also save the handwringing of what style to go for by having dual (or more) voicing and select a romantic voicing for romantic works and a baroque voice for earlier music. (I'd probably actually want several different voicings). That way I'm not limited to only one set of stops. Though of course it does create a further challenge in the shape of designing a specification that is reasonably coherent, not confusing to the player, yet can be credible with both 18th and 19th century voicings (what sound be paired to the Viol celestes or Tuba Mirabilis drawstops when on Baroque voicing, and how many romantic organs have six rank Sharp Mixtures?)

 

Aesthetically I'm not absolutely convinced by taking an existing console and sawing it up to add an extra couple of manuals - personally I'd feel a bit odd if the keys on different manuals looked different. And are you sure you have enough room in the jambs for all the extra stops? Would it be better to add some height to the organ and construct new jambs? Though I did see a three manual Compton electronic on Ebay once that had an extra two manuals fitted coherently.

 

Continuing my imagination further, I could also see a role for the dream toaster being totally liberated from any one design and allowing endless changes by doing away with stop knobs or tabs altogether, and instead having say a touch sensitive LCD screen either side of the keyboards where the stop jambs would normally go. You could display virtual stopknobs that would be touched to come on or off, and with that arrangement you could simulate any console of any organ in the world so long as the stops existed in the machine's memory. I have a vague feeling someone has already tried this - and I presume that's exactly what applications like Haupwerk are meant for.

 

Ooops, sorry, that requires you to have an on-board computer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest spottedmetal
That said, what would I do for my dream toaster if I had the money? Frankly I think personally I'd stick to four manuals, with the fourth being a composite Echo-Solo-Bombarde on the grounds that I can't think of any circumstances where you need both Solo and Bombarde, or Echo and Solo, simultaneously. But I'd also save the handwringing of what style to go for by having dual (or more) voicing and select a romantic voicing for romantic works and a baroque voice for earlier music. (I'd probably actually want several different voicings). That way I'm not limited to only one set of stops. Though of course it does create a further challenge in the shape of designing a specification that is reasonably coherent, not confusing to the player, yet can be credible with both 18th and 19th century voicings (what sound be paired to the Viol celestes or Tuba Mirabilis drawstops when on Baroque voicing, and how many romantic organs have six rank Sharp Mixtures?)

 

Aesthetically I'm not absolutely convinced by taking an existing console and sawing it up to add an extra couple of manuals - personally I'd feel a bit odd if the keys on different manuals looked different. And are you sure you have enough room in the jambs for all the extra stops? Would it be better to add some height to the organ and construct new jambs?

 

Dear All

 

Firstly, further to the original post, having tried more combinations, putting the [DELETED BY AUTHOR] on Choir rather than Swell has reinforced the Choir in terms of Grand Choeur with the Cymbale an audible mixture above the rest, and adding the Oboe reed. Never having had the opportunity of visiting St Suplice, the Daniel Roth videos on YouTube are quite an inspiration . . . and possibly make a lot of sense in playing that period of the French repertoire.

 

Number of manuals - yes - four makes sense in a "coherent" scheme - but here, apart from the desire to do something outrageous, the extra manuals were intended for control of a seperate two manual instrument at some stage in the future. As it is, manuals 3 and 5 with the [DELETED BY AUTHOR] provide an adequate baroque instrument, and these, coupled in with the rest of the instrument simulate the growth of a large instrument from earlier origins - or indeed the mismatch of tunings within the scale of the huge instruments that we hear recorded on the continent. So in its way it works and gives the best of both worlds without having to choose the romantic side or the baroque side in the fashionable switchable specifications.

 

We really are trying to build up the sound of the large specifications for which the French symphonies were written. Has anyone heard such a large continental organ with every pipe sounding perfectly in tune?

 

The manuals are similar enough to the originals - this was a matter of luck - just a quarter inch wider, hardly noticable in practice and mounted in matching key-cheeks, stained and french-polished.

 

Stop jambs - yes - this might come in due course. However, the Echo and Solo units permanently incorporated into the console are controlled primarily on combo-pistons from KA which match the originals near enough (I don't like the modern toaster buttons with limited movement!) and individual stops can be controlled with small lit stop buttons which fit in rather well. So at present, no major change has been necessary to the console and the whole project is entirely reversible, apart from the holes for the three extra drawknobs for coupler.

 

However, bigger stop-jambs may come in due course if the enlargement proves a real playing asset.

 

Fitting in the portable extra [DELETED BY AUTHOR] may be a bigger problem, and indeed, might cause a saw to be taken to the side-jambs of the console to fit them in above the stop jambs. Really depends on a playing concensus of their usefulness.

 

Another change will be to disconnect the Auto Pedal stop and replace it with a "Timpani" stop-head - to connect an extra midi socket to an orchestral synth, for the very specific purpose of putting Timpani on pedals - with the Poulenc concerto in mind.

 

I haven't heard the Poulenc since a performance with the school orchestra years ago and "All Gas and Gaiters" with Derek Nimmo. When is anyone planning on performing it next? Could anyone consider arranging it with Timp on pedals and the strings performed with string organ stops? How else can one get this piece to an audience without a performance budget of thousands and a rich patron to fund a possible loss if the necessary audience don't turn up to pay for it?

 

Best wishes

 

Spot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest spottedmetal

Dear All

 

Having just updated our concerts page on which I've put the spec more properly together than appears above, here the spec now available in a more digestible format. In view of our focus on encouraging performance of the French symphonies, I've given half an eye to

http://www.stsulpice.com/Docs/specs.html

and tried to keep within the spirit of the departments on aural auditioning and bearing in mind the inflexibilities of having to add groups of stops by the box . . .

 

Can anyone arrange the components better?

 

The specs of St Sulpice are interesting in showing how much early pipework there is there. For this reason, the incorporation of electronic units with voicing from different periods and sources achieves more validity than appears at first sight. I thought that making new work to add vaguely to facilitate playing in the French idiom might make playing this area of repertoire more intuitive. From what I can see of the YouTube videos, the French concepts of manual allocations reduces reliance on combo pistons. Of course the original instrument is still at the heart to make playing conventionally in the English manner unaltered.

 

What will be interesting in due course will be to analyse and take out the duplicates or merely the weight fillers . . . which will give a more realistic view of the number of ranks we actually need to be using.

 

A member has asked to hear a recording - yes we'll do one in due course and try to post MP3 files - but if anyone wants to hear it live, Easter Monday is its first outing in its new form with Vierne II.

 

Perhaps this electronic project might encourage someone wealthy to do something as absurd for real with pipes?

 

Best wishes,

 

Spot

 

(Sorry - I posted the proper html code below in good faith expecting it to produce a proper table so as not to give a link to the page so that I could not be in danger of being accused of promotion. In view of the code not having worked, perhaps I might be forgiven for posting the link here in due course?)

 

<h3>Specification of enlarged 5 manual</h3>

 

<table width="95%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4">

<tr>

<!-- Row 1 Column 1 -->

<td width="15%">

<b>

<h3 align="top">GREAT</h3>

</b>

</td>

<!-- Row 1 Column 2 -->

<td width="15%">

<h3 align="top">SWELL</h3>

</td>

<!-- Row 1 Column 3 -->

<td width="15%">

<h3 align="top">CHOIR</h3>

</td>

<td width="15%">

<h3 align="top">SOLO</h3>

</td>

<td width="15%">

<h3 align="top">ECHO / POSITIF</h3>

</td>

<!-- Row 1 Column 4 -->

<td width="15%">

<h3 align="top">PEDAL</h3>

</td>

</tr>

</table>

 

 

<table width="95%" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" align="top">

<tr>

<!-- Row 1 Column 1 -->

<td width="15%">

 

<br> Contra Salicional 16

<br> Open Diap 8

<br> Stopped Diap 8

<br> Wald Flute 4

<br> Principal 4

<br> Twelfth 2 2/3

<br> Fifteenth 2

<br> Fourniture IV

<br> Posaune 8

<br><br>

<i>For use as French Grand-Orgue</i>

<br> Small Open Diapason 8

<br> Flauto Mirabilis 8 (tuned flat for use with Vox Humana)

<br> Concert Flute 4

<br> Quint Flute 2 2/3

<br> Piccolo 2

<br> Vox Humana 8

</ul>

 

 

 

</td>

<!-- Row 1 Column 2 -->

<td width="15%">

 

<br>Voix Celeste 8

<br> Geigen Diap 8

<br> Echo Gamba 8

<br> Lieblich Gedekt 8

<br> Stopped Flute 4

<br> Principal 4

<br> Fifteenth 2

<br> Mixture V

<br> Oboe 8

<br> Clarion 4

<br> Trumpet 8

<br> Contra Fagotto 16

<p><i>(From Echo II)</i>

<br>Holzflote 8'

<br>Gamba 8'

<br>Vox Celeste 8'

<br>Flute 4'

<br>Waldflote 2'

<br>Quinte 1 1/3'

<br>Sesqualter II

<br>Vox Humana 8'

<br><br>

<i>For use as French Recit</i>

 

<br>Bourdon 16

<br>Principal 8

<br>Flûte à cheminée 8

<br>Unda Maris 8

<br>Octave 4

<br>Spitzflöte 4

<br>Nasard 2 2/3

<br>Superoctave 2

</ul>

 

</td>

<!-- Row 1 Column 3 -->

<td width="15%">

 

<br> Gedekt 8

<br> Dulciana 8

<br> Hohl Flute 8

<br> Chimney Flute 4

<br> Nazard 2 2/3

<br> Block Flute 2

<br> Larigot 1 1/3

<br> Tierce

<br> Clarinet 8

<br> Tuba 8

<br><br>

<i>For use as French Grand-Choeur</i>

 

<br> Cello 8

<br> Cello Celeste 8

<br> Cornet des Bombardes IV

<br> Cornopean 16

<br> Clarinet 8

<br> Salizional 8

<br> Quintadena 8

<br> Cor Anglais 8

<br> Tuba Mirabilis 8

<br> Clarion 4

<br> Gedackt 8

<br> Gamba 8

<br> Nachthorn 4

<br> Cymbale III

<br> Cornet III

<br> Oboe 8

 

</ul>

 

</td>

<!-- Row 1 Column 4 -->

<td width="15%">

 

<br>Contregambe 16

<br>Diapason 8

<br>Bourdon 8

<br>Quintadena 8

<br>Flûte harmonique 8

<br><i>(Tuned as Unda Maris with Bourdon for use with the 4ft Flute and Corno di Basetto as an Italian Vox Humana)</i>

<br>Flûte octaviante 4

<br>Terz 1 3/5

<br>Larigot 1 1/3'

<br>Septime 1 1/7

<br>Scharff III

<br>Bombarde 16

<br>Trompette 8

<br>Corno di bassetto 8

<br>Clairon 4

<br>Tuba Mirabilis 8

<br>Tubular Bells (2 octaves)

 

</ul>

 

</td>

<td width="15%">

<i>Echo I</i>

<br>Principal 8'

<br>Rohrflote 8'

<br>Octave 4'

<br>Quinte2 2/3'

<br>Octave 2'

<br>Mixture IV

<br>Trumpet 8'

<br><i>Coupler to floating Echo II<i>

 

 

</ul>

 

</td>

<td width="15%">

 

<br> Bourdon 16

<br> Violone 16

<br> Open Wood 16

<br> Bass Flute 8

<br> Octave 8

<br> Choral Bass 4

<br> Trumpet 8

<br> Trombone 16

 

<p> <i>Additions</i>

<br> Soubasse 32

<br> Contre Basson 32

<br> Contre Violone 32

<br> Contrebombarde 32

<br> Violone 16

<br> Contre Gambe 16

<br> Ophicleide 16

<br> Bombarde 16

<br> Subbass 16'

<br> Bombarde 16'

<br> Gedekt 8'

<br> Octave 4'

<br> Trumpet 8'

 

 

 

</ul>

 

</td></table><table width="95%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4">

<tr>

<!-- Row 1 Column 1 -->

<td >

<b>

Notes:<br>

</b>

</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<!-- Row 4 Column 1 -->

<td >

Sound: the instrument is now in excess of 20 channels in addition to reverberation channels. </td>

</tr>

</table>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think I have mentioned before in these fora that if going for a home toaster I'd only really consider a three decker. I'm sorry, but an electronic is not a pipe organ, and with only two manuals and fewer stops to choose between I think I'd quickly feel cheated if I settled for anything less. At least with three manuals and nearly 50 stops I don't tire anything like as quickly of the sound. It's this that for home organs is perhaps one of the obvious strengths of electronics that is a clear weakness in church installations. In a church one has to design something of coherence, beauty and function and resist the temptation to add as manu stops as you can think of - and I've seen plenty of toasters with too many stops none of which is very good. But at home you can let your indulgence run riot, and if you have a five manual you can still play through your surround-sound headphones and bother noone else.

 

The funny thing though is that after a year and a half with my 2 manual Wyvern - no frills etc. - I have not got bored with the sounds. Apart from the artificial nature of an instrument of that size being in a front room of an Edwardian terrace house (which the reverb. just about makes up for) my playing has improved and so far I have not felt the need for extra exotica. A quieter 8' flute on the Great would be nice (I can always revoice the current one though) and maybe a 16' manual Bourdon but so far nothing more - maybe I'm just boring!

 

AJJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing though is that after a year and a half with my 2 manual Wyvern - no frills etc. - I have not got bored with the sounds. Apart from the artificial nature of an instrument of that size being in a front room of an Edwardian terrace house (which the reverb. just about makes up for) my playing has improved and so far I have not felt the need for extra exotica. A quieter 8' flute on the Great would be nice (I can always revoice the current one though) and maybe a 16' manual Bourdon but so far nothing more - maybe I'm just boring!

 

AJJ

 

I teach on a pupil's Wyvern two manual, and it is very good. But, does need the reverb. to accommodate being in a room.

 

Jonathan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Geoff McMahon
(Sorry - I posted the proper html code below in good faith expecting it to produce a proper table so as not to give a link to the page so that I could not be in danger of being accused of promotion. In view of the code not having worked, perhaps I might be forgiven for posting the link here in due course?) ... Sound: the instrument is now in excess of 20 channels in addition to reverberation channels.

 

John Mander and I have consulted on your request (received by e-mail) and responded to point out that this is a forum for pipe organ builders, and we are not into promoting events with electronic organs ever.

 

Moderator, Mander Organs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest spottedmetal
John Mander and I have consulted on your request (received by e-mail) and responded to point out that this is a forum for pipe organ builders, and we are not into promoting events with electronic organs ever.

Moderator, Mander Organs

 

Dear All

 

Yes - understood of course, which is why I did not place the link . . . Without this forum, English organ building and playing would be very significantly the poorer and it has formed and continues to form a most excellent repository of organ knowledge, technique and philosophy for which all of us with pipe organs at heart are particularly grateful.

 

As such, the pipe/electronic debate might not really need to be in issue. Electronics are pure illusions of hi-fidelity sound reproduction - but useful or even necessary nevertheless for appropriate purposes. What those purposes are is a matter capable of debate, debated ad nauseam elsewhere.

 

Where that debate is not undertaken nor properly considered, churches have spent comparitive fortunes on flashy short-lived electronics which are, musical issues aside, a bad investment against often only comparatively moderate expenditure on long-lived pipes. This is something on which I'm sure everyone is in wholehearted agreement without a shotgun applied to anyone's heads!

 

I'm deliberately expressing irreverance to electronics in deliberately bastardising a toaster for use as a breadboard (sorry - that sounds the wrong way around :) ) which enables experiments with possible value to pipe organ design and big-organ playing.

 

I had not expected to be able to configure a practice instrument for those expecting a visit to St Sulpice . . . The effect achieved was wholly a surprise and as such, as an amateur player I'm discovering new insights into the French symphonies which are now making more sense to me in terms of logistics of registration. Being so different, this could well inspire players to seek new dimensions of pipe-organ design on this side of the channel when funds permit and wealthy benefactors can be inspired.

 

In promoting the repertoire, can't we have the inspiration of attracting the attentions of billionaires in sight?

 

Meanwhile I can't wait to get my hands on some analogue generators that I can change capacitors on to raise the pitch by three octaves . . . Where else in England can we hear the effect of multiple pitches above 1ft? Sorry - but I haven't got space for such ranks of pipes :-( however much I'd like, and they'd be out of balance on the existing pipe-organ that we do use. As a result of hearing the sort of sounds available in Venice, it would be wonderful to inspire someone to commission such an instrument as at San Giorgio Maggiore to be built in a magnificent acoustic in England, possibly as part of a bigger and more versatile instrument.

 

How can we venture on such a path if we are unable to breadboard how those tones might be incorporated?

 

In this way, I'm hoping not to have encouraged electronics in any way beyond the experimental as well as to showcase the fun and most inspirational of repertoire, Carlo Curley and Vigil Fox style, of bringing a composers out to the people who would not otherwise come in. That must be good for pipe-organs.

 

In addition, experimenting with options available beyond the capabilities of Arthur Harrison style of voicing of the original electronic, we are capable of pointing ways in which Arthur Harrison instruments can be retained whilst overcoming perceived limitations. In this way, the experiments that the electronics facilitate may be of particular interest to those who seek the future preservation of particular pipe-organs which otherwise might be under threat.

 

The only way of assessing the success of such experiments is to hear them. Musicians usually progress from electronics to pipes where space and funds allow and for this reason, experimentation is both fun and useful.

 

For instance, I'd love to hear the beast built by a pipe-organ builder on which he allocated a speaker to each individual note and after all that still decided that pipes were better!

 

Electronic specs even with 20 channels still aren't going to be good enough! The reality is that beat-frequency generation of multiple notes coming through the same speaker and doppler effects of cone movements are _always_ audible and degrade the sound, however frighteningly good.

 

One of the best ways of promoting the pipe organ would have been to promote a recent celebrity concert on an electronic a few months back where a charming single manual pipe-organ outperformed a three-manual Mickey-Mouse toy with artificial "tracker touch" manuals, the playing forces of which bear no relation to the speech production of the sound, horrible combo-buttons (one could not call them pistons), and worst of all, inadequate amplifiers and speakers poorly placed.

 

Those of us who attended that concert on toast might just as well have stayed at home and listened to our hi-fi systems, some of which could perform to better effect, and the members of the PCC at that concert knew that they had spent their money well in restoring their pipe organ.

 

However, this was not the original purpose of the post - it would be helpful to be able to present an organ spec in a tabular format or otherwise link to an external page - but the issues raised are of significant importance to pipe organs. . .

 

1. How best can we inspire: Is no-one planning a super-organ?

 

2. Can one dare to throw issues of "coherence" to the wind and incorporate disparate styles or even perceived types of instrument in one?

 

3. Are organs in the USA to be the last big pipe organs on this side of the world?

 

4. What experiments are we doing to create experience with the biggest beasts in order to be capable of being competitive in China?

 

5. Certainly would one really want to invest some millions in pipes without aurally breadboarding it electronically first? CAD was unavailable to former generations but is ubiquitous now. Should AuralCAD auditioning be prohibited?

 

6. Are we going to suffer the export of our best performers to the bigger instruments of America or China in due course?

 

I hope that the issues raised are useful and inspirational. The shopping mall of the Wanamaker organ clearly considers it economically viable to maintain that beast. As a result of playing with toys of outrageous size, can we not inspire such an instrument as part of a commercial property development today? And in the UK? Or even China?

 

Best wishes

 

Spot

 

PS Whilst on the subject of electronics - there are basic electromechanical sound generators coupled to keyboards and amplifiers which have survived for years - but the reality is that modern computer technology will not do so. Not only hard discs are inherently unstable in the long term, whatever components are used have to be connected by circuit boards. These are not the simple set of connector tracks on one surface of transistor radios of our youth . . . they are multi-layers relying on throu-hole plating and soldering to make the myriad of multi-bit connexions. These are inherently fragile. Furthermore, many types of electronic board are manufactured in dry conditions. When they suffer humidity, they can absorb to some extent and warp if single layer. In the case of multi-layer, the expansions can place strain on the interconnexions between layers of wiring. Pipe-organ builders increasingly relying on electronics might bear such issues in mind. Electronics are only temporary marvels :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing though is that after a year and a half with my 2 manual Wyvern - no frills etc. - I have not got bored with the sounds. Apart from the artificial nature of an instrument of that size being in a front room of an Edwardian terrace house (which the reverb. just about makes up for) my playing has improved and so far I have not felt the need for extra exotica. A quieter 8' flute on the Great would be nice (I can always revoice the current one though) and maybe a 16' manual Bourdon but so far nothing more - maybe I'm just boring!

 

AJJ

Not boring, Alastair, just sensible!

JC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing though is that after a year and a half with my 2 manual Wyvern - no frills etc. - I have not got bored with the sounds.

Same here. My old Wyvern is out of the ark by modern tonal standards, but on its own terms (i.e. so long as you don't try comparing it with a pipe organ) it's a perfectly musical instrument. It has dual Romantic and Classical voicing and when it was installed I had Wyvern tweak or revoice a lot of the classical stops, including boosting the volume of the Swell so that it equals the Great. This is ideal for playing trios, but it also means that I can couple the manuals together and use it as a giant 41-stop one-manual instrument. Even after 14 years, I am still discovering new combinations. And I still think the classical 8' swell flute is a ravishing sound, even if it is electronic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Barry Williams

"Electronics are only temporary marvels "

 

Indeed. Yesterday I visited a church (as DOA) to advise on an electronic instrument. It had been sold to them as the latest technology about seveteen years ago. It has no stops. Instead, there are myriads of pistons and a visual display of the stops selected via the pistons and other gadgets. It seems that despite being so wonderful only about six were ever made. Registration is difficult; extremely complex might be a better description.

 

However, the mechanism is failing. The contacts are worn and keep breaking. The maintenance contract is said to be £400 per annum. Although the quality of service is good, with very prompt attention, the failure rate makes the instrument unreliable.

 

The parish is upset that the instrument was sold within memory as being the latest technology, yet is not merely outdated, but is actually mechanically faulty.

 

Another church I visited the same day has a tracker action organ about twenty years old that is failing.

 

Barry Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Electronics are only temporary marvels "

 

Indeed. Yesterday I visited a church (as DOA) to advise on an electronic instrument. It had been sold to them as the latest technology about seveteen years ago. It has no stops. Instead, there are myriads of pistons and a visual display of the stops selected via the pistons and other gadgets. It seems that despite being so wonderful only about six were ever made. Registration is difficult; extremely complex might be a better description.

 

However, the mechanism is failing. The contacts are worn and keep breaking. The maintenance contract is said to be £400 per annum. Although the quality of service is good, with very prompt attention, the failure rate makes the instrument unreliable.

 

The parish is upset that the instrument was sold within memory as being the latest technology, yet is not merely outdated, but is actually mechanically faulty.

 

Another church I visited the same day has a tracker action organ about twenty years old that is failing.

 

Barry Williams

 

I think the parish are expecting too much. A seventeen year old car of comparable cost to the electronic is equally likely to have mechanical faults through wear and tear and will certainly have outdated technology compared with today's models. A car purchased for a quarter of a million pounds seventeen years ago might reasonably be expected to have a longer life. If an electronic organ is all that a church can afford, they must plan on the basis that it will need to be replaced within twenty years or so.

JC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another church I visited the same day has a tracker action organ about twenty years old that is failing.

You phrase this in such a way as to imply that the organ is failing because it has tracker action (otherwise why mention the action at all?) The fact is that any organ twenty years old runs the risk of being on its last legs. Personally my experience gives me to have more doubts about the longevity of electro-pneumatic action than tracker. Surely it depends on how good or bad the workmanship was, not on the action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Barry Williams
You phrase this in such a way as to imply that the organ is failing because it has tracker action (otherwise why mention the action at all?) The fact is that any organ twenty years old runs the risk of being on its last legs. Personally my experience gives me to have more doubts about the longevity of electro-pneumatic action than tracker. Surely it depends on how good or bad the workmanship was, not on the action.

 

That instrument was built by an acknowledged expert in tracker action. It is a deeply regrettable installation for many reasons and the parish wish to consider an electronic because they, like the other place, were told that what they were getting would last forever and was the latest in organs.

 

The difficulty of prediciting the life of modern tracker action is that it is quite unlike to anything made earlier. Whilst the 'system' is the same, the components are different.

 

Most of us have had to struggle with the heavy Vistorian tracker action. I played one last Sunday where the weight coupled was almost half a pound - and that was an instrument completely restored in 2003.

 

Only time will tell as to the longevity of modern tracker actions. However, not all the claims made for their reliability are valid. I am disappointed at the number that have been replaced in less than the time an electro-pneumatic action would last.

 

Perhaps it is better, for an ordinary church organ, to have electro-pneumatic action that is less dependent on precision adjustment, superb design and craftsmanship, than on ordinary workmanship that does not require setting up extremely well. After all, church organs, in the main are paid for by congregations for the accompaniment of worship rather than the 'historical' interpretation of Baroque music. My experience makes me doubt whether tracker action is the answer to all the problems. It probably does come down to a question of bad workmanship, but so much does - especially the voicing, the tuning, the casework design - the lot in fact! No-one doubts that a good tracker action is magnificent - of course it is. The problem is getting one within the church budget. As the late Stephen Bicknell remarked at a BIOS meeting in the East End of London many years ago, it is far more a question of money than anything else, especially when churches have to maintain the roof, etc as well as the organ.

 

 

Barry Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the parish are expecting too much. A seventeen year old car of comparable cost to the electronic is equally likely to have mechanical faults through wear and tear and will certainly have outdated technology compared with today's models. A car purchased for a quarter of a million pounds seventeen years ago might reasonably be expected to have a longer life. If an electronic organ is all that a church can afford, they must plan on the basis that it will need to be replaced within twenty years or so.

JC

I can speak with a little authority on the organ in question, as the parish in question is mine! (And Barry's visit was very much appreciated.)

 

The mechanical problems are principally with the manuals. They have a rather Heath Robinson contact design which is not at all robust. On several occasions - usually half an hour before weddings! - the churchwarden and I have made panicked fixes with a soldering iron to repair it.

 

A 17-year old electronic keyboard of standard mechanism, similar to that found on a thousand Casios or Yamahas, would be less likely to fail (indeed, we have a little portable Viscount of exactly the same age which has not failed yet). But if it did, a complete replacement would be simply a matter of pulling out the old manuals and slotting in a new one at a cost of a couple of hundred pounds. The point is not just that the manuals are fragile, it is that they are non-standard.

 

To some extent, the same can apply to the sound-generating technology. It should be possible to pull out antiquated circuitry and replace it with a new "heart", keeping the case and manuals intact. (This should be where Hauptwerk comes into its own, but there are as yet far too few 'dry' sample sets for it to be of much use in reverberant spaces.) But unfortunately, with our organ, the piston-only design and erratic manuals would make this a fruitless exercise.

 

Perhaps a 17-year old narrowboat is a better comparison than a car - something built to last and which you can keep upgrading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can speak with a little authority on the organ in question, as the parish in question is mine!

If I am not mistaken, I have played this instrument twice (for a wedding and a funeral). I would say it is the most unsatisfactory organ I have ever played, and that its design was grotesquely ill-conceived.

 

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cynic
If I am not mistaken, I have played this instrument twice (for a wedding and a funeral). I would say it is the most unsatisfactory organ I have ever played, and that its design was grotesquely ill-conceived.

 

Paul

 

 

 

Sounds absolutely fascinating!

 

I'd love to know more about the failing tracker job too, any chance some kind person would PM me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest spottedmetal
Sounds absolutely fascinating!

 

I'd love to know more about the failing tracker job too, any chance some kind person would PM me?

Hi!

 

Hearing of a tracker failing within 20 years is so very disappointing . . . and this was the sort of reason that I started the topic

Organ Building Techniques To Be Avoided. Is there any chance of putting specific construction techniques/materials that led to such failures on there as a repository?

 

Bearing in mind that toasters share manual switch designs with electric actions it would also be interesting to hear the specifics of the manual problems.

 

On longevity, the comment about electro-pneumatic is surprising - isn't straightforward electric action more reliable than with pneumatics? The one good thing about the Percy Daniel extension instrument which I dislike is that after two and a half decades, it's still working fine, reliably and (sadly) shows no sign of giving up for a few more decades to come . . .

 

Best wishes

 

Spot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another church I visited the same day has a tracker action organ about twenty years old that is failing.

 

I'm afraid I regularly play one in Scotland that is only TEN years old and it has some serious deficiencies that some may call failings. What do the church do? Do they keep throwing good money after bad in the hope that it improves eventually? The church are concerned that if they call in another builder that they might propose something very radical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I teach one of my pupils on a small two manual tracker action job in a private chapel which was built from parts of a previous organ by a local organ builder, not known for his skills in mechanical action. I guess the instrument is only about two years old.

 

It is horrendous. It is incredibly noisy, the touch is heavy, uneven and urgently requires regulation. A number of keys don't play through Sw-Gt or through Sw 8ve properly, so sound out of tune when played through the couplers as the keys don't go down all the way. The rattle of the (unfelted) pedalboard has to be heard to be believed. The organ builder ticks off faults in the tuning book, but never does anything about them. When my pupil tackled him the other month, he said that these faults were an "instrinsic" part of the instrument.

 

It is the most appalling demonstration of organ building I think I've ever come across. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest spottedmetal
The mechanical problems are principally with the manuals. They have a rather Heath Robinson contact design which is not at all robust. On several occasions - usually half an hour before weddings! - the churchwarden and I have made panicked fixes with a soldering iron to repair it.

In searching for "tone generators" I happened to stumble across http://recital.mugwo.com/contacts.html which talks about the effectiveness of using magic liquids to restore proper operation of oxidised contacts. The keyboards pictured there might equate with your fragile beasts? Has anyone had experience of using such liquids in practice either on electronics or on electric actions?

 

On the subject of suitability of electronics however, former topics have noted inadequacies in comparison to pipes and the review of a recording on a Viscount Prestige http://www.guildmusic.com/reviews/rev7249z.htm demonstrates that pipe-organ builders have no fear from competition with digitals.

 

The reality is that in not allowing any recital on a digital to be promoted is counterproductive, as most demonstrate just how bad a digital can be. The reality is that where a digital and a pipe intrument are side by side, audiences are made very much aware of the tonal deficiences of the electronic, but the obvious repertoire limitations of the smaller better pipe instrument. Longevity apart, musically it's a matter akin to "publish and be damned" - perform on one and let the audience judge, record on one and let the critics join in if the instrument doesn't measure up.

 

I have always argued passionately the corner of the tracker instrument on terms of longevity, but in the light of disturbing reports on this thread unless pipe organ builders do put together their experience of building techniques to be avoided, and can be relied upon to build instruments not requiring serious attention for 50 to 100 years, the pipe organ industry will be at risk of sniping from the wrong side.

 

Having said that, whilst many champion Allens above many others, I've heard an Allen installation I can't abide and my middle son suffered a hideous example in his school chapel. Content electronics are at the heart of another famous make - and the chiff of Content is fine if one wants a purely Baroque effect. The reality is that I have not yet heard a commercial digital instrument performing publicly that one can go and buy off the shelf that competes with the pipe organ . . . But perhaps perhaps my recipe for an uncommercial leviathan is just that beast worthy of fear . . . ? It's certainly fun to play!

 

Putting such issues aside, is anyone planning a performance of the Poulenc concerto?

 

Best wishes

 

Spot

 

PS On the subject of building techniques to be avoided one kind friend explained the benefits of square rather than round wind-trunking - I hope he'll post that on the techniques thread as it could be food for thought for some.

 

PPS The Times this morning

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol...icle3516969.ece

reports "Eric Weiner, a former New York Times journalist, spent a year travelling the world in search of the planet’s happy places. But after visiting Britain he felt only pity for a population unable to experience happiness.". This is the very purpose of creating an absurd instrument for toasting not stale bread but scones on which the best and most fun of the instrument's repertoire can be performed with jam and cream and fizzing surprises in the sultanas?

 

The organ is very capable of making a real difference to people's lives, not with the slush of cinemas, but with the best of existing repertoire - avoiding too much Bach.

 

Where are there diverse venues with large instruments where performers wanting to spread enthusiasm can put on recitals with the spirit of fun and excellence without significant financial risk should audiences not materialise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the point of all this pipe vs toast argument is that it is not comparing like with like at all....?

 

Leaving aside the action points for the moment, any reasonably competent organ builder is going to spend a great deal of time firstly designiong a coherent spec, and then voicing and finishing the organ in situ to suit the building. This represents an enormous amount of time and skill, and rarely, if ever, is matched by electronic organ builders. The giveaway in the description of the Viscount is that it is voiced using samples from a variety of north German organs.....a pick and mix approach which is hardly likely to produce success, given that each stop is voiced to fit in a particular scheme and in a particular building. In a different space, the balance and evenness of these stops will be surely compromised, and the chances of a diapason from one organ fitting perfectly with a principal of another are small. I know that some firms offer voicing on site, but given the limited sample pool available and the rather fixed nature of the samples, there is not a great deal of room for manouvre in the process, and the results are bound to be poor. Add to this the unavoidable harmonic distortion introduced by feeding too many notes through one loudspeaker, and the results are going to be inferior whatever you do. These organs should really be best compared with other "off the shelf" products like a Compton Miniatura, for example.....all very well for what it is, but never more than a compromise.

 

Surely the way forward is to build organs with much better speaker systems, that is to say, with multiple speakers not only per department but perhaps per note name...all Cs to one speaker, all c# to the next and so forth....expensive, but not approaching pipes although you may end up with up to 24 speakers per division......and then creating, not sampling, sounds which are manipulated in the building concerned to produce the desired results. This requires electronic organ builders who have an understanding of voicing style, not merely a bank of samples to choose from. While many builders do something along these lines, I doubt there are any who can start from scratch and create a stop and match it perfectly to the building, and I doubt that many installations have the sort of speaker set up that is really necessary to reduce the distortion which ruins larger ensembles so much.

 

Now all of this wouldn't come cheap, and the skills required do not exist in an quantity as yet, that is something that will have to be developed. However, it's still going to come in at a great deal less than pipes, and can be a real alternative. Quality consoles are also a requirement; it's no use using inferior materials for these instruments and then complaining they won't last very long.

 

As for reliability in the electronic sense, why then, the answer is surely to use a PC, just as Hauptwerk does, and also Colin Pykett's excellent Prog-Organ. I understand that many people would be concerned about reliability with a PC, but hey, that's an approach to the matter that belongs in another age. If you have a quality console, and a good speaker system, then the PC element fades into insignificance.........have two PCs. Set you organ up with the required spec and voice it to suit, and then just copy all the programming onto a second computer. If the first fails, then just undo a few cables and use the second, while you have the frirst sorted out, or better yet, replaced...After all, the cost of a PC is now very low indeed, and a very good Hauptwerk compatible computer can be had for probably less than the cost of a pipe organ's annual tuning contract in many cases. So thre is no issue with reliability, the PC is here to stay and getting cheaper every year. If it gives trouble, give it to the kids to surf on and get another.

 

Now all this is going to require a larger outlay than the average toaster off the shelf, firstly a quality console, and then a great deal of sound system expense, and then a LOT of quality voicing time and time to create the soundfiles in the first place, but the actual nuts and bolts of the computer generation is now unbelievably cheap, and it has this great advantage, in flexibility. Different insruments can be stored to give good accounts of varying periods, without having a huge and unmanageable spec; and small changes can be made easily, given the proper voicing skills.

 

The science in toasters is getting to be very well advanced. The trouble is, that the art in them is still in its infancy and it will take some considerable time before we are discussing the merits of the Viscount style of reed voicing versus the Allen style. Trouble is, they are as yet only copyists, and it will take many years before they become artists in their own right. But the day will come, and we should be grateful for it.

 

One more thing, one wondeers how those Mendelssohn sonatas were recorded? In the average private residence, it is unlikely that the acoustic would be any good for recording on account of standing waves etc, and so it is likely that the instrument was recorded direclty...in which case, an instrument voiced for one room is then playing via you hifi into a room very different, and therefore any question of balace will be much altered....so not really a fair way to assess its quality.

 

George

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of sounding like I'm promoting electronic organs...conflicts of interest stated at beginning. I have a Johannus at home. Second conflict of interest - give me a good tracker pipe organ any day.

 

Can, or indeed should, electronic organs ever really be musical? My own preconceptions, and the decision to buy an electronic, were admittedly rather challenged by the installation of a Caville-Coll style console and samples at a nearby church (OK, by Johannus). The console is I think very beautiful to look at, and the samples in most cases pretty realistic - and they blend well. Further afield, at the Johannus factory is a demonstration concert hall which includes a four-manual Cavaille-coll model. They do a publicity DVD which I have seen, and it does sound and look pretty nice. Apparently the hall has regular concerts which are filled to capacity.

 

So maybe that is an example of good art in electronics trying to catch up with the (obviously pretty strong) science. Sadly most of the rest of us can't afford such luxuries.

 

At the risk of being banned from the forum for heresy(!), I wonder if perhaps we are missing out on the opportunity to digitalise more of the most outstanding organs. Looking at the samples available on Hauptwerk for instance, and knowing some of the organs featured, they are good, but I wouldn't say any of them are in the top ten organs in the world. If some of the finest instruments could be digitally recorded, note by note - and perhaps have precise measurements of pipe scallings and voicings to boot - there would be the beginning of a database of the finest instruments, to learn from, analyses, reproduce and (perish the thought) in the event of the loss of one of these organs have something of a template for reconstructing. If when practising my home organ I could flick a switch and bring up the specification and sound of say, Weingarten, Armley or Saint Sulpice...A sort of organ DNA database. Is this actually being done, or are the makers of electronics still tending to sample random churches that are prepared to let them have their pipe samples still, with not much regard for the quality or coherence of the tonal schemes therein? And what could builders of pipe organs learn from such an enterprise?

 

Contrabombarde

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...