Gloucester rebuild

[James Atherton]

2 hours ago, contraviolone said:

Very interesting, thanks for that.

Talking of 'ancient' pipework, I do hope the two manual diapasons from the 17th Century will be preserved and used again? They were demonstrated by Jonathan Hope in his youtube video of the organ, and they sounded fine to me. At the other end of the timescale (so to speak), I would also hope the recent additions to the organ will also be reused. In particular the 32' reed which I believe you adjusted James for improved effect after its initial installation? The pedal mutations were also a very useful addition, given the lack of a 32' flue in the instrument.

Talking of which, I do remember one aspect of the rebuild of 1971 that probably reveals another aspect of RDs aversion to the Anglican choral tradition. This was the removal of the 32' flue which was an octave extension of the 16' flue. It was located in the upper galleries, and even though tucked away was apparently quite effective. There was astonishment when these pipes were removed, and consternation from several quarters. One argument for their retention was the dramatic use of this 32' flue in the more sombre episodes of the Anglican chant. When this was mentioned to RD, he simply said "why would anyone want to do that!" Probably sums up the entire ethos of the 1971 rebuild.

Certainly the destruction of the 12 32' Double Open Wood pipes was unforgivable. The organ builders, and John Sanders wanted to keep them, but RD not only insisted on their removal, but that they were sawn up outside the cathedral. Rumour has it that the foreman of H, N&B used the wood to have new window frames for his house, but perhaps this is an apocryphal tale.... Nevertheless that act was shameful. 

I really can't give details of the new instrument, sorry. 

[S_L]

6 hours ago, James Atherton said:

There are a multitude of reasons we are not releasing details, but the way Pershore, and other instruments, are received simply by the unveiling of a specification leaves us with no option (particularly with Gloucester which must be the most controversial of organs ever built) but to keep the specification under wraps, not just until the organ is opened, but well after that. We would like people to go and see and hear it with an open mind, have fun at guessing what we have done (there may be a competition to see who can come closest) and judge the organ on its sound, not on a list of stop names. 

A very wise policy, in my opinion! The armchair, back-of-fag-packet amateurs are straining at the leash to see it on paper and then to be able to comment on the lack of this or the reason for that! 

[Martin Cooke]

7 hours ago, James Atherton said:

We would like people to go and see and hear it with an open mind, have fun at guessing what we have done (there may be a competition to see who can come closest)...

Now, that would be fun! 

[contraviolone]

4 hours ago, Martin Cooke said:

Now, that would be fun! 

Yep I agree. Space has always been a problem with the organ at Gloucester, so if I had any input to the scheme I would:

1) Reinstate the 32' flue bottom octave in the triforium.

2) Make the space and depth considerably bigger in the Quire screen as they have done with King's College Cambridge, where by digging down forming a pit they've housed the bottom notes of the 32' reed, the bottom notes of the 32' Double Open Wood, the bottom six notes of the 16' Double Open Diapason, the Solo box including the Great reeds and a few other bits and pieces. At Gloucester you could dig down even further and go for a 64' reed. Just imagine that!

3) Increase the depth of the organ case to allow lots more pipe work.

Honestly anything is possible if you have the will and the dosh. Problem is, how would you guess the spec with all this subterranean pipework hidden away? There you go, that's my little scribble on the back of the fag packet for the day.

[Choir Man]

James, many thanks for clarifying (so far as you are able) what's happening at Gloucester. I look forward to hearing the new instrument after it's unveiled in 2026

[John Robinson]

11 hours ago, James Atherton said:

Certainly the destruction of the 12 32' Double Open Wood pipes was unforgivable. The organ builders, and John Sanders wanted to keep them, but RD not only insisted on their removal, but that they were sawn up outside the cathedral. Rumour has it that the foreman of H, N&B used the wood to have new window frames for his house, but perhaps this is an apocryphal tale.... Nevertheless that act was shameful. 

I have never been particularly keen on Ralph Downes, but this is something I was unaware of and find disgusting.
What would he achieve by destroying them?  They could be used elsewhere, or perhaps retained in safe-keeping in case future ideas might suggest their restoration.
Actually, the latter possibility is probably the reason for his selfish act.

[wolsey]

5 hours ago, contraviolone said:

[..]

2) Make the space and depth considerably bigger in the Quire screen as they have done with King's College Cambridge, where by digging down forming a pit they've housed the bottom notes of the 32' reed, the bottom notes of the 32' Double Open Wood, [..]

While there are some pipes of the 32' Double Open Wood in the south screen, are not the longest of them lying horizontally behind the west side of the screen?

[contraviolone]

10 hours ago, wolsey said:

While there are some pipes of the 32' Double Open Wood in the south screen, are not the longest of them lying horizontally behind the west side of the screen?

Yes I believe you're right. I was thinking of the bottom notes of the 16' Diapason. The majority of the Open Wood pipework is in the South screen pit, but even the lowest notes (at least one I recall from the photos) is bent at right angles so not to appear above the quire screen.

I have visited the organ loft once back in 1991 and did notice the open wood pipes laid horizontally to the right as you look at the console. I asked the late Sir Stephen Cleobury what he thought of this arrangement. He gave me one of those wry smiles and said there was no other place to put them, but the result was effective in the chapel. Not sure though what it would be like at the console!

 

[contraviolone]

13 hours ago, John Robinson said:

I have never been particularly keen on Ralph Downes, but this is something I was unaware of and find disgusting.
What would he achieve by destroying them?  They could be used elsewhere, or perhaps retained in safe-keeping in case future ideas might suggest their restoration.
Actually, the latter possibility is probably the reason for his selfish act.

It's certainly a strange and unfortunate episode. I had much admiration for Ralph Downes. I attended his last recital on the RFH organ in the 1980s, it was one of the 5.55pm performances. He gave a superb recital, and finished with Widor's toccata from the 5th, which was just incredibly performed for a man of his age. But some of his views and actions are hard to understand. As you say, he could have just left the pipes there disconnected. It just comes across as being vindictive, which is a real shame. 

[swalmsley]

Downes makes several remarks about the 32' Open Wood in Chapter 11 of Baroque Tricks. I'll summarise, rather than quote directly.

His dislike of it seems to be motivated by 

a) It being distant from the organ and relying on the acoustic to create an illusion.

b) Father Willis having previously judged its provision to be unsuitable.

He then goes on to say that it was "unceremoniously discarded for the irrelevancy that it was".

His says later that the fullness of the giant scaled Bishop 16' Open Wood (called "Flute") completely compensated for the lack of a 32' register.

And his final remark on the topic is where he expresses an opinion of the general superiority of the (then) new instrument, as a result of several factors including the lack of "booming 32-feet" of the previous rebuild

 

In my personal opinion, whilst the Flute 16' did not completely compensate for the lack of a 32' stop, it got very close indeed. It's one stop of several whose loss in 2023 is, I think, unfortunate.

[OwenTurner]

I can see that there's a real danger of "shooting the messenger" here, where the builder is quoting to a client's instruction. There was a similarly heated discussion of Charterhouse in this forum not long ago. I haven't seen mention of a consultant for the Gloucester work. I wonder who has created the new scheme. It's unlikely to be just Nicholsons acting alone.

There must have been a lot of good quality pipework in the HNB instrument which could have been re-used elsewhere. I wonder whether the overly enthusiastic "melting down" comment is really true or headline grabbing, a bit like edgy comedian Joe Lycett's recent "shredding" of £10k. 

[Martin Cooke]

Just to say, I am pretty certain there was no heated discussion in THIS forum re the proposition of a new instrument in  Charterhouse School chapel- that was all on the FB site. Meanwhile, Paul Hale lists Gloucester Cathedral as a 'current project' on the consultant tab of his website.

[James Atherton]

On 30/04/2023 at 22:59, John Robinson said:

I have never been particularly keen on Ralph Downes, but this is something I was unaware of and find disgusting.
What would he achieve by destroying them?  They could be used elsewhere, or perhaps retained in safe-keeping in case future ideas might suggest their restoration.
Actually, the latter possibility is probably the reason for his selfish act.

I think it was out of peevishness. Such wanton waste. The cost of they were to be replaced is eye-watering

 

[James Atherton]

On 03/05/2023 at 07:25, Martin Cooke said:

Just to say, I am pretty certain there was no heated discussion in THIS forum re the proposition of a new instrument in  Charterhouse School chapel- that was all on the FB site. Meanwhile, Paul Hale lists Gloucester Cathedral as a 'current project' on the consultant tab of his website.

Paul Hale is not the consultant at Gloucester.

[James Atherton]

On 02/05/2023 at 22:30, OwenTurner said:

I can see that there's a real danger of "shooting the messenger" here, where the builder is quoting to a client's instruction. There was a similarly heated discussion of Charterhouse in this forum not long ago. I haven't seen mention of a consultant for the Gloucester work. I wonder who has created the new scheme. It's unlikely to be just Nicholsons acting alone.

There must have been a lot of good quality pipework in the HNB instrument which could have been re-used elsewhere. I wonder whether the overly enthusiastic "melting down" comment is really true or headline grabbing, a bit like edgy comedian Joe Lycett's recent "shredding" of £10k. 

There is no 'headline grabbing'

The specification for the new instrument was drawn up by me, as a matter of fact. It was approved by the Cathedral musicians and the Dean and Chapter with one additional stop they requested. This is the basis of the contract that was signed last year. The pipework was not suitable for reuse in the new instrument with the exception of 2 basses. It was almost all made by Stinkens and was not the finest quality. The pipe bodies and the languids were very thin. They were made with the specific needs of open toe voicing, and scaled by Ralph Downes. The scalings were bizarre to say the least. 

 

There is no consultant at Gloucester, it was not felt necessary as the Dean and Chapter and cathedral musicians and ourselves were 'on the same page' from day one. They trust us to build the organ they want. This was also true for our brand new instruments at Llandaff and Auckland Cathedral's respectively. 

I don't recall any discussion of Charterhouse on this site. Charterhouse will be the next brand new organ out of our factory after Gloucester Cathedral (the specification was also drawn up by me in consultation with Mark Shepherd, for your information) Another brand new Cathedral organ for Christchurch Cathedral follows hot on the heels of that one (where I also drew up the specification) 

[James Atherton]

On 01/05/2023 at 14:49, swalmsley said:

Downes makes several remarks about the 32' Open Wood in Chapter 11 of Baroque Tricks. I'll summarise, rather than quote directly.

His dislike of it seems to be motivated by 

a) It being distant from the organ and relying on the acoustic to create an illusion.

b) Father Willis having previously judged its provision to be unsuitable.

He then goes on to say that it was "unceremoniously discarded for the irrelevancy that it was".

His says later that the fullness of the giant scaled Bishop 16' Open Wood (called "Flute") completely compensated for the lack of a 32' register.

And his final remark on the topic is where he expresses an opinion of the general superiority of the (then) new instrument, as a result of several factors including the lack of "booming 32-feet" of the previous rebuild

 

In my personal opinion, whilst the Flute 16' did not completely compensate for the lack of a 32' stop, it got very close indeed. It's one stop of several whose loss in 2023 is, I think, unfortunate.

The Bishop Open Wood will remain. 

 

[James Atherton]

On 30/04/2023 at 09:49, Philip J Wells said:

Thank you James Atherton for the full answer to my question.  I look forward to hearing the result in due course. 

Thank you. I look forward to seeing you at the Cathedral when you do. 

 

 

[James Atherton]

On 30/04/2023 at 20:02, contraviolone said:

Yep I agree. Space has always been a problem with the organ at Gloucester, so if I had any input to the scheme I would:

1) Reinstate the 32' flue bottom octave in the triforium.

2) Make the space and depth considerably bigger in the Quire screen as they have done with King's College Cambridge, where by digging down forming a pit they've housed the bottom notes of the 32' reed, the bottom notes of the 32' Double Open Wood, the bottom six notes of the 16' Double Open Diapason, the Solo box including the Great reeds and a few other bits and pieces. At Gloucester you could dig down even further and go for a 64' reed. Just imagine that!

3) Increase the depth of the organ case to allow lots more pipe work.

Honestly anything is possible if you have the will and the dosh. Problem is, how would you guess the spec with all this subterranean pipework hidden away? There you go, that's my little scribble on the back of the fag packet for the day.

There is no room for scheme like this. The new organ will be exactly where the old one was. The beauty and historic case along with its gloriously decorated case pipes will be meticulously restored. The Bishop Open Wood will remain in the 'pedal pit' where it has been since 1971. As for a 64' Reed.... That did make me chuckle. I think you might keep your fag packet 🙂

[James Atherton]

On 30/04/2023 at 13:41, S_L said:

A very wise policy, in my opinion! The armchair, back-of-fag-packet amateurs are straining at the leash to see it on paper and then to be able to comment on the lack of this or the reason for that! 

Precisely! Come and hear it, rather than damn it before it has even been built. (I started the voicing the new organ this week, a stop for the Swell for those who might be interested....)

[James Atherton]

12 minutes ago, James Atherton said:

There is no 'headline grabbing'

The specification for the new instrument was drawn up by me, as a matter of fact. It was approved by the Cathedral musicians and the Dean and Chapter with one additional stop they requested. This is the basis of the contract that was signed last year. The pipework was not suitable for reuse in the new instrument with the exception of 2 basses. It was almost all made by Stinkens and was not the finest quality. The pipe bodies and the languids were very thin. They were made with the specific needs of open toe voicing, and scaled by Ralph Downes. The scalings were bizarre to say the least. 

 

There is no consultant at Gloucester, it was not felt necessary as the Dean and Chapter and cathedral musicians and ourselves were 'on the same page' from day one. They trust us to build the organ they want. This was also true for our brand new instruments at Llandaff and Auckland Cathedral's respectively. 

I don't recall any discussion of Charterhouse on this site. Charterhouse will be the next brand new organ out of our factory after Gloucester Cathedral (the specification was also drawn up by me in consultation with Mark Shepherd, for your information) Another brand new Cathedral organ for Christchurch Cathedral follows hot on the heels of that one (where I also drew up the specification) 

Christchurch Cathedral NZ, to clarify. 

[contraviolone]

On 10/05/2023 at 21:42, James Atherton said:

Precisely! Come and hear it, rather than damn it before it has even been built. (I started the voicing the new organ this week, a stop for the Swell for those who might be interested....)

Very interesting information. I do enjoy the occasional video you make for YouTube.  Glad you are retaining the Bishop stop. I'm sure the finished results will be very interesting, I'll be there to listen when all is done!

Talking of videos, very much enjoyed your latest video from Radley College. Impressive tuba, bright and powerful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzJlblaWn7I

[James Atherton]

On 12/05/2023 at 13:00, contraviolone said:

Very interesting information. I do enjoy the occasional video you make for YouTube.  Glad you are retaining the Bishop stop. I'm sure the finished results will be very interesting, I'll be there to listen when all is done!

Talking of videos, very much enjoyed your latest video from Radley College. Impressive tuba, bright and powerful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzJlblaWn7I

Thank you for your kind words. We are pleased with how Radley turned out, it certainly does the job or supporting the lusty singing of the boys there (and goodness me do they sing!!!) The uptake of new organ students has been heartening. The Tuba is a new design of ours, and is certainly arresting in the chapel!! 

[WJ Swindells]

In a post in 2020, about the York Minster rebuild, I wondered if Gloucester Cathedral might have it's Ralph Downes reimagining reversed. And indeed it is! I loved the 1970's instrument for all the reasons I guess that its fans liked it - that it sounded unique and unlike pretty much any UK cathedral instrument. Perhaps Blackburn comes close and I remember preparing for a visiting choir service on the organ at Gloucester in a darkish building and trying out for myself such combinations such as "tutti fluty" and the mutations - and coaxing the noises I had heard when played by David Briggs. I will treasure his and Rob Houssart's recordings made on it, especially when David improvised a stunning uber romantic improvisation on the hymn tune "Hereford" at a Gloucestershire Organists Association event - happily also recorded. But as James Atherton says, for the every day choral evensong, Ralph Downes was clearly not that enthused about the need to accompany Anglican chant, Stanford, Bairstow, Stainer, Walmisley and those sort, and probably in 1970, wasn't the opinion of some in the musical world  that those people would soon be off the music lists of cathedrals with worthy repertoire being seen by some as Renaissance composers and then up to Purcell, and then jump to the post romantic composers?  Britten, Berkeley, Jackson, Walton and today's composers music probably worked better on the 1970's model. But now, cathedrals are becoming the only show in town for great liturgy and music, with great congregations coming in who want to sing and be led by a good healthy organ weight behind them. And this the 1970's organ really didn't enjoy doing. I was lucky for my service that the mass setting was a Viennese one so all the little sparkles worked fine. But if you looked at the 1970's spec, and you were faced with music from 1850-1930 on the music desk, as James says, you really didn't have a lot to choose from. I am sure though that Nicholson's will build something that has colour, perkiness but also grandeur and gravitas. 

A final anecdote was that I attended an evensong once at Gloucester in the 2000's and the organ sounded like a traditional cathedral organ somehow - at the end who should descend the stairs but Roy Massey.....

[James Atherton]

On 03/07/2023 at 20:26, WJ Swindells said:

In a post in 2020, about the York Minster rebuild, I wondered if Gloucester Cathedral might have it's Ralph Downes reimagining reversed. And indeed it is! I loved the 1970's instrument for all the reasons I guess that its fans liked it - that it sounded unique and unlike pretty much any UK cathedral instrument. Perhaps Blackburn comes close and I remember preparing for a visiting choir service on the organ at Gloucester in a darkish building and trying out for myself such combinations such as "tutti fluty" and the mutations - and coaxing the noises I had heard when played by David Briggs. I will treasure his and Rob Houssart's recordings made on it, especially when David improvised a stunning uber romantic improvisation on the hymn tune "Hereford" at a Gloucestershire Organists Association event - happily also recorded. But as James Atherton says, for the every day choral evensong, Ralph Downes was clearly not that enthused about the need to accompany Anglican chant, Stanford, Bairstow, Stainer, Walmisley and those sort, and probably in 1970, wasn't the opinion of some in the musical world  that those people would soon be off the music lists of cathedrals with worthy repertoire being seen by some as Renaissance composers and then up to Purcell, and then jump to the post romantic composers?  Britten, Berkeley, Jackson, Walton and today's composers music probably worked better on the 1970's model. But now, cathedrals are becoming the only show in town for great liturgy and music, with great congregations coming in who want to sing and be led by a good healthy organ weight behind them. And this the 1970's organ really didn't enjoy doing. I was lucky for my service that the mass setting was a Viennese one so all the little sparkles worked fine. But if you looked at the 1970's spec, and you were faced with music from 1850-1930 on the music desk, as James says, you really didn't have a lot to choose from. I am sure though that Nicholson's will build something that has colour, perkiness but also grandeur and gravitas. 

A final anecdote was that I attended an evensong once at Gloucester in the 2000's and the organ sounded like a traditional cathedral organ somehow - at the end who should descend the stairs but Roy Massey.....

This is a superb synopsis of all that was good and not so good about the old Gloucester organ. I, for one, appreciate your considered thoughts on the organ and can guarantee that the new one will be able to do much of what the old one could, but everything it couldn't.

Best wishes

James

 

[Nick Warner]

Hi

I'm new to this forum. Hope someone can support. I was quite shocked to learn recently of the 'sudden'(?) demise of the Gloucester instrument. Whilst I've not been fortunate enough to ever hear it live, I've heard it many times on recordings, most memorably of David Briggs's opening recital on the rebuilt instrument - 1999 I think? I realise that as far as English cathedral instruments go, it's always attracted controversy in terms of its function as a recital instrument v its use to accompany the Anglican choral services. Personally, in the hands of someone like David Briggs, I always found it a thrilling listen when it was handling repertoire - both Baroque and romantic. Now, I appreciate 1999 is 24 years ago however, it got me thinking and pondering the question as to how long an instrument of significance - such as Gloucester, would be expected to last and why the life of the current instrument appears to have ended relatively suddenly? I appreciate it's far from simple as rebuilds can often use parts of previous instrument but I'm curious to know..

Kind regards

Nick W