Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

Bristol Cathedral - Organ Restoration


Jonathan Thorne

Recommended Posts

Ooh, bitch!!!!

 

Actually, no.

 

I merely think that it is a criminal waste of money to replace the Worcester organ. I remain unconvinced that my statement is inaccurate....

 

Hasn't Mr. Scudamore retired, anyway? (Or do you mean Mr. S. Jr.?)

 

Yes, Bristol is a good instrument, but so are those at Coventry, Exeter, Truro, Salisbury, Ripon, et al. To state that it is by far the finest in the country is, in my view, stretching the point. However, if that's what makes you happy....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

No offence meant...

 

RE Bristol - ok, one of the finest, maybe not 'the'.

 

Indisputably, however - one of the most original, having suffered little or no tonal alteration. Also, remarkable for a specification of this date to be so complete, and the voicing to be so lacking in sludge.

 

If I had a slightly tatty MG, I would probably not feel bad about respraying it and fitting non-original stuff to it, upgrading the suspension etc. If I had a really good A1 concours one, I would leave it alone and just let someone with sufficient experience service it. Bristol is a really good one.

 

Has Mr S retired? Still looking after my last instrument in Bournemouth, more's the pity. The spectre lives on...

Link to post
Share on other sites

None taken!

 

I would go so far as to say that tonally, Bristol is fantastic, though. It has to be said that, aside from the nuisance of the action the console is very comfortable.

 

Which is even more reason for restoring Worcester, not scrapping it. The organ there is also very comfortable to play. But then, H&H consoles are always comfortable. The only slightly odd one is Coventry. For two reasons:

 

1) At some point, someone had spilt Coke on the pedals and the inner sides of the console and had not cleaned it up.

 

2) The console is covered in leather, so it smells as if one is playing a Jersey cow....

 

It does have the most comfortable pedal board ever, though.

 

I suppose some people might like the cow thing. Such docile creatures....

 

Think I will still settle for Angelina Jolie. :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
suggested another solution

(Citation from previous post)

 

So there is at least some "Hope"

(not necessarily followed by "Jones";

I'd be content if the thing remained as it is)

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

 

 

With this I heartily concur. Perhaps we can get together with nfortin, rent a really large lorry and go and collect it. I would happily give it a home.... :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Guest paul@trinitymusic.karoo.co.uk

1. The Bristol Walker is lovely. I agree that it speaks slowly, but our expectations of an immediate response from an attached console may be the trouble. A lot of it is further away than one thinks. Pneumatics are rarely fast - mind you, this lack of an instantaneous response can result in a very elegant/unfussy/unabrupt (I know this word doesn't exist) style of playing and phrasing which can come as a relief to listeners. The present team at Bristol enjoy their instrument just as it is, so I don't think anyone has to worry that it is about to be spoiled. Your watchful eyes may need to be trained on other hot-spots entirely.

 

1b. Having said all that, it is worth noting that Tony Cawston is no longer the man who does the work for Cawston organs. Just a word of caution there. An ex-Nicholson guy now does it. Apparently he tunes well. Not all firms do.

 

2a. If we're discussing the possible rescue and re-use of discarded H&H and H-J material from Worcester: when Hope Jones carried out his rebuild at Worcester it became widely known that there was some decent Hill stuff left over and Holst Senior (father of G) and his vicar from All Saints' Cheltenham went over and brought it back to Cheltenham on a cart. Several stops were soon incorporated into the Hill job there, (now rebuilt a few times). The ex-Worcester stuff is still there, mostly playable from the Choir organ. It's a bit overscaled, but pleasant so far as it goes.

 

2b. H-J stuff is worth saving. Whatever the shortcomings of the bloke himself, H-J employed some of the best voicers around, notably William Thynne. Anyone out there know St.Mary's Warwick? After ten minutes spent playing or listening to Nicholson/Denis Thurlow's west end organ treat yourself to the tone of the H-J stuff that was incorporated into the east section. It's not heard to tell which stuff was new at the last rebuild.

 

3. Regarding uncomfortable H&H consoles, like other posters on this site, I've come to expect them all to be equally comfortable. Harry Harrison got the design of this aspect of their organs 'just right' very early on (in the 1900's) and the firm stuck to his basic design, layout and dimensions even in small jobs. That said, I would like to nominate another rare example of an uncomfortable one - visually identical to all the others (and done, I gather as a special order) the new H&H console at St.David's is 'out' in some way I cannot put my finger on. It could be the non-ivory keys, but I don't think it's just that. Having whinged about the console, the job itself is well worth a visit and a fine organ or a very fine organ depending where in the building you sit or stand to listen to it.

 

However uncomfortable St.David's might or might not be, it cannot compare with the Klais console at Bath Abbey. I swear Peter King must have anticipated the future addition of at least one further manual when he agreed to have the music desk put where it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2a. If we're discussing the possible rescue and re-use of discarded H&H and H-J material from Worcester: when Hope Jones carried out his rebuild at Worcester it became widely known that there was some decent Hill stuff left over and Holst Senior (father of G) and his vicar from All Saints' Cheltenham went over and brought it back to Cheltenham on a cart. Several stops were soon incorporated into the Hill job there, (now rebuilt a few times). The ex-Worcester stuff is still there, mostly playable from the Choir organ. It's a bit overscaled, but pleasant so far as it goes.

 

2b. H-J stuff is worth saving. Whatever the shortcomings of the bloke himself, H-J employed some of the best voicers around, notably William Thynne. Anyone out there know St.Mary's Warwick? After ten minutes spent playing or listening to Nicholson/Denis Thurlow's west end organ treat yourself to the tone of the H-J stuff that was incorporated into the east section. It's not heard to tell which stuff was new at the last rebuild.

 

 

Many thanks for these very interesting points!

It seems William Thynne, together with Michell, did things very very

different from H-J's afterwards -for instance some strange objects that happen

to occupy a corner in a place like Tewkesbury-

By H&H too there were former voicers from H-J. Maybe they did contribute

to that "A.Harrison sound", so typical with these closed toned reeds that are

sooo surprising to unaccustomed continental ears.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

This, to my ears, is a magnificent instrument offering total sonic satisfaction - which is not to say that I don't love the typical Willis/H&H English cathedral organ -but somehow Bristol makes an awful lot of sense as an alternative.

 

I am sure that Manders did a good job of what they were asked to do. The issue is that the whole idea of restoring pneumatic actions may be interesting to historians and specialists who don't have to pay for the work, but from every other point of view it is complete nonsense (as is the other nonsense of building large tracker action concert organs that are nearly always played from the alternative electric console).

 

Nobody is going to hear the difference between a pneumatic and electro-pneumatic action and music is about what you hear, not the mechanics of how you make the sound. It might be interesting to preserve a few pneumatic action instruments as museum pieces (and they are certainly a different sort of playing experience) but to waste church money on pneumatic actions runs against common sense - a quality sometimes in rather short supply amongst organ 'experts'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Roffensis
I would certainly concur with those thoughts. Yes, of course the problem is by no means restricted to faster music!

 

I still cannot believe that Worcester are going to throw out the H-J/H&H/Wood&Co., just because Adrian Lucas wishes to have a new toy.

 

I am also sorry to hear that Manders no longer have that care of the organ of Bristol Cathedral. Who is looking after it, now? :(

The 3 decker Hill organ that I play in Liverpool has Exhaust Pneumatic action, its not good on repetition, and the key touch is very shallow, perhaps a mere half centimetre. Its also pretty light. What is good is access, and everything is easy to get at.

 

Two points. Exeter is really more Father Willis than anything in its pipework, but the wind pressures have been lowered in places, and it does not have the growl that it did in the early 1960s so I am told, prior to the 66(?) rebuild by H&H.

The mention of following the 16' reed going down the nave, well puts me in mind of Canterbury, also a physical effect almost, as you can "see" the sound bounce off each pillar in the nave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is going to hear the difference between a pneumatic and electro-pneumatic action and music is about what you hear, not the mechanics of how you make the sound. It might be interesting to preserve a few pneumatic action instruments as museum pieces (and they are certainly a different sort of playing experience) but to waste church money on pneumatic actions runs against common sense - a quality sometimes in rather short supply amongst organ 'experts'.

(citation)

If you come to Belgium, let me know. I'll show you a pneumatic organ that nears its 100 years anniversary without a hint.

In Britain there were excellent systems too, ditto in Germany. So why judge?

 

There are the experts , then the builders, and the organists. Three quite different point of view, no doubt . Three kind of people that could -should?- work togheter for "best results". Common sense is something that can vary widely so that it may sometimes

be interesting to "re-invent the wheel". So far as it's done like a "brain-storming" between the three parts, and of course not under the form of "experiments" in existing instruments.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Two points. Exeter is really more Father Willis than anything in its pipework, but the wind pressures have been lowered in places, and it does not have the growl that it did in the early 1960s so I am told, prior to the 66(?) rebuild by H&H.

The mention of following the 16' reed going down the nave, well puts me in mind of Canterbury, also a physical effect almost, as you can "see" the sound bounce off each pillar in the nave.

 

According to the late Lionel Dakers (and possibly Norman Sterrett) prior to the 1965 H&H rebuild, Exeter used to swamp the choir in a sort-of 'windy thickness'. This was largely due to the big Open No. 1 (when there were three on the GO). Given the fact that the Swell Fagotto and the Pedal Trombone were revoiced with French shallots on lower pressure, I would have thought that it growled more after the rebuild! However, I can only judge from recordings because I am too young to remember it pre-1965 :P

 

Some of the Willis pipework was partly altered by Arthur Harrison and again in 1965, I believe. In its present incarnation 1999/2002, (or whenever - I forget!) it is now excellent, in my view. Having said that, I would have changed the pipework of the two GO mixtures; even though the Sharp Mixture commences at CC as 29, 33, 36, neither of these stops adds much brilliance. The IV rank in particular just sounds quinty - it is a really odd effect. Possibly the cut-up is too high? Perhaps Mr. Mander could shed some light on this, from a professional point of view? :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Roffensis
I absolutely agree. Bristol cathedral is a superb organ but needs careful maintenance to keep it working well. Don't know of a Tony Cawston but I do know of many instances when an organ has been branded "bad" (and hence instigated much inappropriate work on it) because it has been poorly maintained.

 

On the subject of Worcester, a cathedral I have never visited, I understand that this project has created a bit of a kerfuffle in the AIOA. An anonymous report (by an acknowledged, completely independant expert) was submitted to the Dean and chapter. It recommended that the proposed solution by the organist (and endorsed by the advisor) was not the most appropriate solution and suggested another solution. The details of this solution unfortunately escape me now.

 

The saga of organs at Worcester appears to have often be frequently unhappy, often promoting controversional, fashionable solutions (such as H-J) and it looks like they want this trend to continue. But idle tongues can do much unintentional damage and I would rather say no more.

 

"Idle tongues" or not, several facts do remain. No cathedral organ should ever have been allowed to fall into the current state of very sudden (!)disrepair and unreliability that Worcester, apparently, is in. The other fact is that for so long the job has been constantly patched up with inadequate funding, and faults occuring have been mechanical more than tonal. Of the latter there has been much discussion already, and those that are not deaf or biased must be able hear that this is a very fine cathedral organ, even given its somewhat hybrid status, which however is far from unique. Very many of our cathedral organs fall strongly into that category. .best not go there.......a good reappraisal of the current organ and its fine tone can only make for a still magnificent instrument, and also gain a lot of respect for whatever builder does the work. Wholesale outing simply causes mistrusts and fears. To write the entire job off as past it, and the pipework as not fit for anything other than the wheelie bin simply stinks. The other clear point has to be made on financial grounds, and the fact is that a good restoration is going to be a whole lot cheaper than a totally new organ with new cases and heaven knows what else. It cannot be argued, and unbiased consultation has to be the order of the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I went down to Bristol in the summer of 2004 with a choir who I accompanied and at the time the chap called Tony was cleaning and restoring the organ. He said the action was so bad on the swell division that you could play the Saint-Saens Fantasie in E flat on the with great with the swell coupled and you wouldn't need to use your left hand as the action on the swell was so slow. I was gutted I didn't get chance to play it, or go up to the loft as even the console was in complete pieces, instead they had a 3-manual electric Allen organ which sounded suprisingly realistic, probably due to the vast acoustic of the building.

 

bristol2wf.jpg

 

^^ the Allen organ in Bristol Cathedral, and appologies for my appalling sitting position.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Roffensis
I went down to Bristol in the summer of 2004 with a choir who I accompanied and at the time the chap called Tony was cleaning and restoring the organ. He said the action was so bad on the swell division that you could play the Saint-Saens Fantasie in E flat on the with great with the swell coupled and you wouldn't need to use your left hand as the action on the swell was so slow. I was gutted I didn't get chance to play it, or go up to the loft as even the console was in complete pieces, instead they had a 3-manual electric Allen organ which sounded suprisingly realistic, probably due to the vast acoustic of the building.

 

bristol2wf.jpg

 

^^ the Allen organ in Bristol Cathedral, and appologies for my appalling sitting position.

Yes!! Toes oever the sharps!!!! But did you have much choice?! :blink::D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is going to hear the difference between a pneumatic and electro-pneumatic action and music is about what you hear, not the mechanics of how you make the sound. It might be interesting to preserve a few pneumatic action instruments as museum pieces (and they are certainly a different sort of playing experience) but to waste church money on pneumatic actions runs against common sense - a quality sometimes in rather short supply amongst organ 'experts'.

(citation)

If you come to Belgium, let me know. I'll show you a pneumatic organ that nears its 100 years anniversary without a hint.

In Britain there were excellent systems too, ditto in Germany. So why judge?

 

==========

 

The 100 year-old pneumatic-action in Belgium surprises me not. H & H have retained the pneumatic-action in the restoration of the Schulze at St.Bart's, Armley, and I bet that caused a few headaches for them.

 

Where I live, there's not a lot of money about among churches, and pneumatic actions continue to stagger on whilst the 1960's and 70's electro-pneumatic actions enter into terminal (no pun intended) decline.

 

In any event, no self-respecting street organ or dance organ builder in the low countries would ever have used anything else.

 

If you've never heard the speed of response and repetition of a Mortier organ, you haven't lived....it is phenomenal!

 

So is pneumatic-action restoration really "a waste of money" if it was good to start with?

 

I quite like the thumping noises, which make everything sound like a clog-dance.

 

MM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it the case that, if one wanted to use funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund to restore a pneumatic action instrument, they would prefer to fund restoration of the existing action rather than the installation of a new action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The pneumatic action isn't original at Armley, tough. The best pneumatic actions in Belgium were those of Jean-Emile Kerkhoff -my preffered belgian builder-. I showed to the present-day Mr Walcker notes and schemas of this system, and he told me this is pure luxury, only the best, and expansive solutions at every stage.

 

The consoles being mechanical -Kerkhoff built all himself and did not want to buy them from abroad- an unawared organist could well believe he plays a tracker organ. For this very reason, Kerkhoff's organs were hated by the experts some tents of years ago. They destroyed as many of them as they could, but some are still there, unrestored -but they hardly need more than normal maintenance-.

Here is an example:

http://www.catho.be/bxl/bx/sites/ecsm/cd100.html

Ernest Skinner wrote a pneumatic chest was actually quicker than any pipe, so that the organist could believe the reverse.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it the case that, if one wanted to use funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund to restore a pneumatic action instrument, they would prefer to fund restoration of the existing action rather than the installation of a new action?

[

=================

 

I think it is a fine point in law, that "restoration" means that an organ (or anything else for that matter) has to be restored to an original condition as far as possible. At Armley, that meant restoring it to the Binns re-build, because any restoration to the original Schulze would have been hideously expensive, and the heritage funds do not pay for the whole amount so far as I am aware.

 

Of course, the decision to go down the path of pneumatic action and the Binns re-build was controversial, but IMHO, the organ was in such an advanced state of decay, the additional fund-raising required would have silenced the instrument sooner rather than later. I think I was the last person to use the Echo organ in a recital before it became unplayable.

 

The speed and repetition of the Binns action was always good until it became worn and unreliable, so the advanatges of the original Barker Lever action would have been small. One would expect the refurbished pneumatic action to last another 80+ years, as it did before.

 

Furthermore, for the local community of Leeds, there remains the link between Schulze and Binns, in an organ which J J Binns so admired.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Roffensis

Isn't it the case that, if one wanted to use funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund to restore a pneumatic action instrument, they would prefer to fund restoration of the existing action rather than the installation of a new action?

[

=================

 

I think it is a fine point in law, that "restoration" means that an organ (or anything else for that matter) has to be restored to an original condition as far as possible. At Armley, that meant restoring it to the Binns re-build, because any restoration to the original Schulze would have been hideously expensive, and the heritage funds do not pay for the whole amount so far as I am aware.

 

Of course, the decision to go down the path of pneumatic action and the Binns re-build was controversial, but IMHO, the organ was in such an advanced state of decay, the additional fund-raising required would have silenced the instrument sooner rather than later. I think I was the last person to use the Echo organ in a recital before it became unplayable.

 

 

Getting back to Bristol, I was reading a very old organ magazine last night, and it surprised me just how much of the original organ was kept, including a good amount of Vowles pipework. One could certainly not have called the Walker a new organ in any sense. It was clearly stated that the better of the original organ was to be retained. I imagine a lot must have been revoiced even so? The article simply quotes a very great deal of ranks as "old" or harris or wahtever. The new stuff was surprisingly minimal.

 

The speed and repetition of the Binns action was always good until it became worn and unreliable, so the advanatges of the original Barker Lever action would have been small. One would expect the refurbished pneumatic action to last another 80+ years, as it did before.

 

Furthermore, for the local community of Leeds, there remains the link between Schulze and Binns, in an organ which J J Binns so admired.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barry Oakley

 

Re Heritage Fund. I was given to understand some time ago that before the Doncaster Schultze was "restored", the Heritage Fund requested that the action be restored to Barker Lever and all pistons removed. I don't think for one minute that it happened. Bit like putting oil lamps back on motor vehicles,

Link to post
Share on other sites
Re Heritage Fund. I was given to understand some time ago that before the Doncaster Schultze was "restored", the Heritage Fund requested that the action be restored to Barker Lever and all pistons removed. I don't think for one minute that it happened. Bit like putting oil lamps back on motor vehicles,

 

This may explain while they were content with a new console... This said, how many original Schulzes obtain today? There are many Barker-lever tracker organs in Europe, and you need to queue to play some of them! So I believe the idea of restauring Doncaster at its original state could be a rather interesting one indeed.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated previously, the funding of things in the UK from lottery funds, is fraught with difficulties, because it has to be in the manner of restoration, and in any event, does not cover the full amount. No doubt someone will know how much the "client" has to raise by themselves, but as Doncaster is a church isolated by a ring-road and has few parishioners, fund-raising would be a problem.

 

The late Magnus Black (A fomer organist at Doncaster PC) left his entire estate to the church, and I think it formed the back-bone of the refurbishment and new console by Andrew Carter/Nicholson.

 

I can see no real musical advantage in re-making a Barker-lever action, or restoring the Schulze version of the cone-valve chests used in the pedal organ at Doncaster for the extensions. Furthermore, the old "Schulze" reeds would have been a complete travesty in any event, and the 32ft Posaune remains so! Musically, the Norman & Beard reeds are far superior, and surely, music should be at the heart of any decision?

 

Apart from one or two "authentic" but small instruments in Europe, the only organ which really demonstrates the Schulze sound almost completely, is that at St.Bart's, Armley.

 

We are constantly in the dilemma of whether restoration takes precedence over musical considerations, and it begs the question as to whether organ-building is a greater art than organ-music, or vice-versa. Is authentic Mendelssohn worth £1,000,000?

 

I personally do not feel that there are THAT many organs in the UK which are treasures of English heritage or for which a great deal of music was actually written.

 

MM

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest paul@trinitymusic.karoo.co.uk

Schulze-hunters: Not a perfect example mechanically, nor in it's original home but quite near its original tonal state is the three-manual Schulze -built for St.Mary's Tyne Dock - installed in the hall at Ellesmere College, Shropshire in the 1980s by HN&B under the leadership of Paul Spicer and Roger Allen.

 

The reeds were improved a little by Norman and Beard Ltd. a good while ago (the same firm who carried out similar work at Doncaster) and there are features of N&B still about the console (now with a rather unsatisfactory updating by HN&;) but there is plenty to admire and appreciate in a rich pallette of 19th flue and reedwork.

 

Talking of Doncaster, which we were earlier, the problem with at least one big would-be grant-giver who might have been presumed to support the work there in recent years was that a condition of their grant was made that Doncaster should agree a reconstruction of the (long-gone) original man-powered blowing installation. To my mind, this is as inappropriate a use of funds as the provision of the mechanical consoles (some of us would guess - installed for politically correct reasons) at Christchurch Priory, Bridgewater Hall etc. etc. *

This plan (and therefore the possible grant also) were turned down by the church council.

 

*I think some advisers seem to have forgotten that many of the greatest works in our literature were concieved for consoles with mechanical assistance, and the ones that weren't still benefit from a console position where the organist can hear what he or she is actually doing. Sorry to be so politically incorrect as to give my true opinion here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

personally do not feel that there are THAT many organs in the UK which are treasures of English heritage or for which a great deal of music was actually written.

 

(Citation).

 

I personally believe there are lots and lots of organs in the UK that are treasures of *european* heritage. Halas, we are too few to believe that.

(Of course, many are small jobs not suited for Bach...)

 

The "repertoire" debate (what can be played according "to the books" on a dedicate organ) is a typically neo-baroque one. Thus it should already be old-fashioned.

No matter the repertoire, provided any organ has a style (which one does not matter).

 

I also believe there exists no "progress" in art, there are only styles.

 

Schulze's reeds were intended just to color the Diapason choruses. Like Walcker's,

and like any baroque german ones. So N&B's aren't "better", they are different!

Indeed the very word "better" is doubtfull as long as differing organ styles

are concerned.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally believe there are lots and lots of organs in the UK that are treasures of *european* heritage. Halas, we are too few to believe that.

(Of course, many are small jobs not suited for Bach...)

 

The "repertoire" debate (what can be played according "to the books" on a dedicate organ) is a typically neo-baroque one. Thus it should already be old-fashioned.

No matter the repertoire, provided any organ has a style (which one does not matter).

 

I also believe there exists no "progress" in art, there are only styles.

 

Schulze's reeds were intended just to color the Diapason choruses. Like Walcker's,

and like any baroque german ones. So N&B's aren't "better", they are different!

Indeed the very word "better" is doubtfull as long as differing organ styles

are concerned.

 

==================

 

 

It's not often I make a really stupid statement, but I did!

 

Of course, there are many British instruments which are treasures of European heritage. I think most would agree with all the big three Liverpool instruments being just that, and to which could be added numerous Fr.Willis instruments, St.Mary Redcliffe, Beverley Minster etc etc.

 

Also, a great deal of repertoire was written for these instruments, and those like them.

 

What I intended to say, but failed to do so miserably, was to make the suggestion that we do not have many very old organs in Britain such as may be found across almost the whole of mainland Europe, from France right across to Latvia, and from Sweden right down to Spain. Consequently, exact historical restoration is not really our great priority as it is in Holland, Germany and elsewhere.

 

I'm sorry to disagree with Pierre concerning Schulze reeds, which are very, very ordinary sounding things. As I explained previously, the 32ft reed at Doncaster is completely mis-scaled.

 

Generally speaking, English (and American) reeds tend to be the best in the world, and Norman & Beard were especially good at them for the most part.

 

Now what about those Cavaille-Coll reeds?

 

I can hear the clamour already.

 

To which I would reply, "The German who voiced many of them was something of a genius!"

 

Myths and legends are such fun. I wonder how many Fr.Willis reeds were ever touched by him?

 

Cavaille-Coll reeds are so unique aren't they?

 

Well no, as a matter of fact. Fall asleep on a train and wake up in Budapest, Hungary in time for an organ-recital, and you would probably think you were back in Paris. Go behind the old iron curtain, and there are three countries, each with a fantastic organ heritage which seldom get a mention in Western Europe, but that's another story.

 

MM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Schulze reeds, which are very, very ordinary sounding things. As I explained previously, the 32ft reed at Doncaster is completely mis-scaled.

 

What is "ordinary?" What is "better"?

I have had the chance to assist someone who *really* knows this kind of

"shortish and mis-scaled german reeds" in a rescue of some of them.

I am pretty sure if you have been there, you had change your mind.

French and english reed stops are of course treasures, but they are something else,

intended for different musics -repertoires!- As I said, repertoire does not matter

so we need to keep them all-.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...