Organs That Should Have A "historical" Rebuild

[Guest paul@trinitymusic.karoo.co.uk]

Tewkesbury Milton organ?

 

(OK, I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, but wouldn't it be fascinating! Imagine the case restored to its original colouring, and a replica of the chair case based on Stanford-on-Avon...)

 

(And then the Grove organ in a new west tribune, with a new case and a new 32' reed...)

 

(And a third organ for choir accompaniment, presumably!)

 

 

As I understand it, English Heritage forbade the restoration of original colours on the Milton case, even though Kenneth Jones' staff were able to establish without any doubt what the original colour scheme was.

The same source of essential funding prohibited some very sensible modifications to The Grove's action when that was restored in the 1980s, where it could be proved that some of the present action arrangements were very hasty and intended as temporary only. Who pays the piper calls the tune!

 

I liked the old Milton very much, but I have to admit, the present one is a fine achievement. The purists would have less than a third of that organ there and, frankly, any less would not do the various essential musical tasks that it currently fulfills. A lot of snotty things have been written about this (IMHO wholly worthy) solution by nornally sensible and influential experts who (as it happens) are neither organists nor musicians, neither clergy nor even church attenders! I have to say, I think wise councils prevailed. A major influence for good (steering things towards a workable scheme) was the then vicar, Revd.Michael Tavinor who is now Dean of Hereford Cathedral.

[Jeremy Jones]

Um.... I think that you may have forgotten one.

You know.

 

Oh, come on -

 

a cathedral city that is a musical partner to two other cities, as Jeeves was similarly a partner to ...

 

no - I cannot bring myself to type the word again.

(Whisper it....)

I think he means Gloucester?

[David Coram]

You are correct about the additions at Blackburn - the Solo stops are pipe-work.

 

Reading - I agree with your implication. I thought that the restoration was flawed in several respects - not least with regard to pitch and the almost neurotic rejection of a perfectly good balanced swell pedal. At least one aspect of this restorarion has effectively limited the use of this instrument.

 

I assume, incidentally, that FHW built it with electric console lights and blowing apparatus. Oh, and that all performers on this organ will wear a black skull cap and suitable Victorian clothing.

 

God help us if toilet manufacturers ever follow a similar path....

 

I like Blackburn very much indeed. It might be too polite for some, but it's a splendid and very useful musical instrument and wouldn't benefit from being put back as it was before. I believe I read somewhere that it was voiced "blind" because the building was added to after its completion - I wonder if this is right?

 

I agree with pcnd and pdtm. I did recently get to play Drake's restoration of the Lincoln in Buckingham Palace ballroom, which is hand blown (admittedly by a machine operating the handle at the correct speed) but it takes no prisoners. No electric lighting either! No compromise I could see anywhere in the job, in fact.

 

I have sympathy with the need to provide a small (perhaps 3 stops) pedal department. Thinking about these things, and music, has changed so hugely that a single octave of pedals FFF/GGG-FF just won't do, not for anyone's money. I only object when it's done in an inappropriate style, i.e. where secondhand ranks of a totally different period (usually it's secondhand swell reeds) get put in.

[Jeremy Jones]

Certianly Kings College, Cambridge and Gloucester Cathedral need to be restored/rebuilt/newly created in proper style matching their cases and in the proper perspective and height. Gruesome at the moment. Good topic btw.

Justin Sillman told me in the late 1980s that Stephen Cleobury wanted to throw out the Harrison organ and replace it with a tracker action job in a slimmed down case. In that acoustic, I guess pretty much anything half-decent would sound fantastic.

[JJK]

Justin Sillman told me in the late 1980s that Stephen Cleobury wanted to throw out the Harrison organ and replace it with a tracker action job in a slimmed down case. In that acoustic, I guess pretty much anything half-decent would sound fantastic.

 

I remember hearing this at the time - but someone (can't remember who) told me that Cleobury started the rumour as a joke to see what would happen. It did elicit some letters from the greatly outraged!

 

JJK

[SomeChap]

As I understand it, English Heritage forbade the restoration of original colours on the Milton case, even though Kenneth Jones' staff were able to establish without any doubt what the original colour scheme was.

The same source of essential funding prohibited some very sensible modifications to The Grove's action when that was restored in the 1980s, where it could be proved that some of the present action arrangements were very hasty and intended as temporary only. Who pays the piper calls the tune!

 

I liked the old Milton very much, but I have to admit, the present one is a fine achievement. The purists would have less than a third of that organ there and, frankly, any less would not do the various essential musical tasks that it currently fulfills. A lot of snotty things have been written about this (IMHO wholly worthy) solution by nornally sensible and influential experts who (as it happens) are neither organists nor musicians, neither clergy nor even church attenders! I have to say, I think wise councils prevailed. A major influence for good (steering things towards a workable scheme) was the then vicar, Revd.Michael Tavinor who is now Dean of Hereford Cathedral.

Ah, the usual pot of politics! I might have known.

 

All right then, what about York University's Grant, Degens and Bradbeer - a barmy organ in anyone's book, but did the Walker tweaking really improve it? Presumably they were trying to make the Oberwerk into a nice English Swell...

[Jeremy Jones]

I remember hearing this at the time - but someone (can't remember who) told me that Cleobury started the rumour as a joke to see what would happen. It did elicit some letters from the greatly outraged!

 

JJK

Cleobury? Sense of humour? Pigs might ... oh!

[JJK]

Cleobury? Sense of humour? Pigs might ... oh!

Sometimes, just sometimes ...... I well remember him telling us (in the CUMS chorus) telling us how we had to pronounce the word "Vater" in the B minor mass - with the merest hint of a smile

[Guest paul@trinitymusic.karoo.co.uk]

I think he means Gloucester?

 

 

 

Jeeves and Wooster!

So.........

no, not Gloucester in this case!

[JJK]

the word "Vater" in the B minor mass -

.....or perhaps a Bach motet -not many German words in the B minor!

[Phil T]

Jeeves and Wooster!

So.........

no, not Gloucester in this case!

 

I guess we’re talking about the Hope-Jones here, as time can’t be turned that far back?

 

I have an old (twenty years or more) booklet about the organs of Worcester; it implies that the organs (two) removed by H-J were regarded by many as far superior to the one that replaced them. It also implies that all Worcester wanted was for H-J to make the two organs playable from one console. Hope-Jones, vandal or genius? Depends what side of the fence you happen to be.

 

[Stephen Dutfield]

Hope-Jones, vandal or genius? Depends what side of the fence you happen to be.

 

 

You could easily start another thread on this one, but my best guess is - a bit of both. However I do honestly believe that HE believed in what he was doing, so vandalism it might have been in some situations, but done with the best intentions.

 

You could pose the same question about John Compton, and to a degree the answer might be the same, but even in his sometimes drastic re-builds I believe he was far more sucessful far more often than H-J. Compton was though undoubtedly a genius!

 

Stephen

[pcnd5584]

Jeeves and Wooster!

So.........

no, not Gloucester in this case!

 

Thank you, Paul!

 

[Jeremy Jones]

Jeeves and Wooster!

So.........

no, not Gloucester in this case!

Pity! I was rather looking forward to chamades at dawn.

[Nick Bennett]

When I read this topic, I began to imagine that it might somehow become possible to restore organs accurately to long lost specifications. For instance, Worcester to its Hope Jones incarnation (complete with mechanism, of course ) or Winchester back to 994 A.D.

 

It would be fantastic to hear a Snetzler as built, but Halifax has lost its acoustic since you know who had the walls scraped in 1868, so it would be a waste of time there. Maybe Beverley Minster or St Margaret's, King's Lynn? To my ears, after hearing the Snetzler at Hillington, I find the Beverley Minster organ does have a distinct Snetzler sound.

 

Dominic was being rather scathing about King's College, Cambridge. What would you put that back to? I assume Arthur Harrison 1933 wouldn't satisfy Dominic. So, shall we have the Hill of 1859 or the Lancelot Pease of 1661? Either would be very interesting, in its own way.

[Guest paul@trinitymusic.karoo.co.uk]

When I read this topic, I began to imagine that it might somehow become possible to restore organs accurately to long lost specifications. For instance, Worcester to its Hope Jones incarnation (complete with mechanism, of course ) or Winchester back to 994 A.D.

 

It would be fantastic to hear a Snetzler as built, but Halifax has lost its acoustic since you know who had the walls scraped in 1868, so it would be a waste of time there. Maybe Beverley Minster or St Margaret's, King's Lynn? To my ears, after hearing the Snetzler at Hillington, I find the Beverley Minster organ does have a distinct Snetzler sound.

 

There are quite a few partially-spoiled Snetzlers around. Of those, I would most like to see Rotherham Parish Church's Snetzler sorted out. To start the project they still have the complete case including original console. Indeed, there could also be a fair number of ranks of pipes in there. If not a thorough-going restoration some day, at the very least, someone ought to disentangle this valuable antique from the modern carpentry/bodgery that has been perpetrated nearby in this currently disfigured church.

 

I agree most heartily with Nick Bennett's comment upon Hillington - I consider it a veritable jewel of an organ! A larger version of this would indeed be something special. If one needed proof that Snetzler deserved his position in English organ-building history then that organ speaks volumes as to his skill and taste. There's a photo of it on my website

 

http://www.paulderrett.piczo.com

 

it's on the Favourite Instruments page.

[Phil T]

When I read this topic, I began to imagine that it might somehow become possible to restore organs accurately to long lost specifications. For instance, Worcester to its Hope Jones incarnation (complete with mechanism, of course ) or Winchester back to 994 A.D.

 

"So there they stood in Quire and Transept, two large organs not so very many yards away from each other. They were tuned to the same pitch, so that they could be used together if so wished............" "Could they be combined so that one person could preside over both? That was the question." "The use of electricity had by now progressed beyond the experimental stage, and there was an organbuilder who was specialising in the use of electric action, namely, Robert Hope-Jones of Birkenhead." "Hope-Jones completed his task in 1896, but much of the pipework of the existing two organs was discarded in favour of his own work"

 

The instruments removed by H-J? A 3 m (43 Stops) and a 4 m (51 Stops) by Hill. To me it’s a shame that H-J didn’t just combine the two instruments as per the original plan.

 

[Guest Roffensis]

"So there they stood in Quire and Transept, two large organs not so very many yards away from each other. They were tuned to the same pitch, so that they could be used together if so wished............" "Could they be combined so that one person could preside over both? That was the question." "The use of electricity had by now progressed beyond the experimental stage, and there was an organbuilder who was specialising in the use of electric action, namely, Robert Hope-Jones of Birkenhead." "Hope-Jones completed his task in 1896, but much of the pipework of the existing two organs was discarded in favour of his own work"

 

The instruments removed by H-J? A 3 m (43 Stops) and a 4 m (51 Stops) by Hill. To me it’s a shame that H-J didn’t just combine the two instruments as per the original plan.

 

[/quote

 

 

To me, it's a shame HJ didn't just leave the old organs well alone.

 

R

[MusingMuso]

When I read this topic, I began to imagine that it might somehow become possible to restore organs accurately to long lost specifications. For instance, Worcester to its Hope Jones incarnation (complete with mechanism, of course ) or Winchester back to 994 A.D.

 

It would be fantastic to hear a Snetzler as built, but Halifax has lost its acoustic since you know who had the walls scraped in 1868, so it would be a waste of time there. Maybe Beverley Minster or St Margaret's, King's Lynn? To my ears, after hearing the Snetzler at Hillington, I find the Beverley Minster organ does have a distinct Snetzler sound.

 

Dominic was being rather scathing about King's College, Cambridge. What would you put that back to? I assume Arthur Harrison 1933 wouldn't satisfy Dominic. So, shall we have the Hill of 1859 or the Lancelot Pease of 1661? Either would be very interesting, in its own way.

 

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

 

I think Beverley is unique, in that Thomas Hill apprently went to great pains in blending the new pipework with the original Snetzler pipes, and in my view, extremely successfully.

 

Beverley is a lovely instrument, and quite unlike any other in the country.

 

Fortunately, Dr.Allan Spedding has jealously guarded this, and has never sought to alter the character of the instrument.

 

Good on him!

 

MM

[Guest Barry Williams]

The 'Reading Question'

I wouldn't call this generation of historic-obsessed, oh-so-purist advisers 'hypocrites', but they continue to pull their punches in one important area and we've all been too polite to point this out. If hand-blowing has to be restored (even provided on brand new organs) hitch-down pedals replaced instead of balanced swells etc. why have they allowed independent pedal divisions to remain? These are patently a total anacronism on every pre 1850 (or pre 1850-style) organ in this country - the equivalent of fitting a penny-farthing with satellite navigation.

 

If they've done this 'because one still has to be able to play the repertoire' I would suggest that the same argument extended should allow us to keep our electric lights*, blowers, composition pedals and other more modern conveniences. Providing/leaving a pedal division is saying... 'the player can choose to use it in music that requires it'. Absolutely fair enough - good decision!

 

Now, if they suggested that there should be two alternate swell-pedal control systems available at the player's discretion, I would have been all in favour. I'm sure it could have been done. The easiest method would have been to provide shutters at the back of the box for the balanced Swell. Those of you who have been to The Servite Priory, Fulham Road will have come across the late Alan Harverson's Oberwerk where Grant Degens and Bradbeer gave him hitch-down 'back shutters' and balanced-shuttered 'front' - so that the entire Swell could be opened right up.

 

I like, for instance, David Sanger's idea of having both traditional General pistons and Cavaille-Coll-style ventils available (at choice) on the J.W.Walker 'French' organ at Exeter College, Oxford. That's the way to get people to explore the literature and keep the organ convenient to use!

 

A final thought....

Reading Town Hall is a very suitable totem for this whole business. It may not be by total coincidence that some of our most rampant advisers have been connected with the Organ Historiography course at the university there.

 

*I know where some of these have been removed! .....in a restoration carried out at great expense, and the church people resent it.

 

 

There is little point is trying to persuade a congregation, strapped for cash, to 'restore' an organ to a preconceived idea of historicity that will no longer meet the needs for worship. It is difficult enough trying to persuade folk to retain pipe organs, let alone to make them more difficult to play and generally lmuch ess accessible.

 

The Church of England requires, as a matter of law, that all those advising, including Diocesan Advisory Committees, (and by obvious implication, their organs advisers,) to give advice on the basis that the parish church is the centre of worship and mission. This is Section 1 of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure. It is law and not optional.

 

Altering the pitch of a concert organ so as to make it unuseable with instruments is an invitation for it to become a museum piece rather than a vehicle for music. Pitch has become standardised in the past forty or so years. Only experts can tell the alteration of tone when pitch is changed by about a semitone and then only at the voicing machine.

 

Barry Williams

[Tony Newnham]

There is little point is trying to persuade a congregation, strapped for cash, to 'restore' an organ to a preconceived idea of historicity that will no longer meet the needs for worship. It is difficult enough trying to persuade folk to retain pipe organs, let alone to make them more difficult to play and generally lmuch ess accessible.

 

The Church of England requires, as a matter of law, that all those advising, including Diocesan Advisory Committees, (and by obvious implication, their organs advisers,) to give advice on the basis that the parish church is the centre of worship and mission. This is Section 1 of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure. It is law and not optional.

 

Altering the pitch of a concert organ so as to make it unuseable with instruments is an invitation for it to become a museum piece rather than a vehicle for music. Pitch has become standardised in the past forty or so years. Only experts can tell the alteration of tone when pitch is changed by about a semitone and then only at the voicing machine.

 

Barry Williams

 

Hi

 

One thing I have insisted on in the (just completed) restoration of the organ in my church is that the pitch stays at A=440Hz - simply because it is used regularly with other instruments. To be strictly historical, we would have restored cone tuning and a somewhat higher pitched - which would have made the restoration job somewhat pointless, as the organ would not have fulfilled our current requirements.

 

The restored organ was rededicated in the service this morning.

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

[Guest Roffensis]

When I read this topic, I began to imagine that it might somehow become possible to restore organs accurately to long lost specifications. For instance, Worcester to its Hope Jones incarnation (complete with mechanism, of course ) or Winchester back to 994 A.D.

 

It would be fantastic to hear a Snetzler as built, but Halifax has lost its acoustic since you know who had the walls scraped in 1868, so it would be a waste of time there. Maybe Beverley Minster or St Margaret's, King's Lynn? To my ears, after hearing the Snetzler at Hillington, I find the Beverley Minster organ does have a distinct Snetzler sound.

 

Dominic was being rather scathing about King's College, Cambridge. What would you put that back to? I assume Arthur Harrison 1933 wouldn't satisfy Dominic. So, shall we have the Hill of 1859 or the Lancelot Pease of 1661? Either would be very interesting, in its own way.

 

 

Well of course at King's very much indeed of the old Hill pipework is still there, albeit somewhat revoiced no doubt.........if someone said to me it was being put back to Hill then I would have a problem arguing with such a decision. But could it be done........

 

I think Hope Jones was a sheer vandal at Worcester, but Hill's were perhaps not in fashion then......

 

R

[David Coram]

Well of course at King's very much indeed of the old Hill pipework is still there, albeit somewhat revoiced no doubt.........if someone said to me it was being put back to Hill then I would have a problem arguing with such a decision. But could it be done........

 

I think Hope Jones was a sheer vandal at Worcester, but Hill's were perhaps not in fashion then......

 

R

 

Bearing in mind the provenance of most of these cathedral organs, how far back do you go? The situation is always easier for somewhere like Salisbury (that doesn't contain any old pipework I'm aware of) because you have something of a stated level of integrity from the word go.

 

But the picture gets confused when just up the road at St Thomas you have the old cathedral organ, which is (allegedly) full of Samuel Green work, although much altered by Hill, Conacher x 2 and HNB. Where do you start in restoring that? Do you take the line of going back as early as possible to its Green origins, and destroy a lot of Hill material in the process? Or do you take it back to the most recent distinctive style, i.e. Conacher? Whatever you do, someone will be upset and loudly proclaim that a mistake has been made and an opportunity lost.

 

I wonder how frequently the word "remodelling" comes into our vocabulary now. All too often instruments were re-worked into the latest style (usually Willises gone over by Harrisons or Rushworths in the 20's and 30's because they were too quiet), but this seems now not to happen so frequently. All organs, good and indifferent, surely deserve to keep their integrity, or just be scrapped/sold on if they are REALLY not up to the job required of them?

 

Willis seems to me to have gone more than some of his contemporaries for the provision of entirely new organs, allowing the old organs to be broken up or passed on to other places. That's how St Thomas' got the Green organ from Salisbury Cathedral. That way, neither instrument was compromised (though of course the Green organ suffered in the long term). This seems to me to be a very sensible route to take, historically speaking - I wonder if this was intentional? (I wonder also just how many old organs have had new leases of life in other buildings as a result of displacement, how often the builder of the new organ had a hand in this happening, and how often the organ builder encouraged this - got to be a book in this somewhere.)

 

Although it's quite possibly an impossible task, an interesting database might be one of pipework and odd bits that people have stored in workshops, garages, attics, sheds etc. There must be thousands of ranks, many of them historic or unusual and worthy of research, that lie unnoticed because they're not currently used within an instrument known to the NPOR. Who knows what it may be possible to reconstruct! Even ranks that may be thought of as indifferent may prove to be something else, perhaps with later markings superimposed.

[MusingMuso]

But the picture gets confused when just up the road at St Thomas you have the old cathedral organ, which is (allegedly) full of Samuel Green work, although much altered by Hill, Conacher x 2 and HNB. Where do you start in restoring that? Do you take the line of going back as early as possible to its Green origins, and destroy a lot of Hill material in the process? Or do you take it back to the most recent distinctive style, i.e. Conacher? Whatever you do, someone will be upset and loudly proclaim that a mistake has been made and an opportunity lost.

 

(snip)

 

Although it's quite possibly an impossible task, an interesting database might be one of pipework and odd bits that people have stored in workshops, garages, attics, sheds etc. There must be thousands of ranks, many of them historic or unusual and worthy of research, that lie unnoticed because they're not currently used within an instrument known to the NPOR. Who knows what it may be possible to reconstruct! Even ranks that may be thought of as indifferent may prove to be something else, perhaps with later markings superimposed.

 

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

 

 

One of the most fascinating, and certainly one of the best, organs I have ever personally heard, is that in the Aa-kerk, Groningen in the Netherlands.

 

If an organ could tell a story, it would be a best-seller, if only as a travelogue.

 

Permit me to suggest a scenario of an original Harrison organ built around 1875, which has long-since been scrapped, at Holy Trinity, Keighley in W.Yorks. This was the first organ I played regularly as a church organist, and one which Arthur Harrison and Lt.Col.George-Dixon visited when discussing future trends in organ-building. Here was a two-manual instrument of gentle tone, with fabulous build-quality and a very restrained Victorian Swell Organ, to which was added a third manual labelled "Choir." In fact, almost uniquely, this third-manual was placed ABOVE the Swell, and had a single windchest, which included both enclosed and unenclosed stops. (The enclosed stops were rather bad orchestral reeds on light wind-pressure). The fact that the stop-list of the new choir organ (about 1920 or so) included a horribly thick Clarabella, an equally awful 4ft flute, a string of no great distinction and a 2ft Harmonic Picollo. meant that it was never used by me. It was completely out of character with the remainder of the instrument.

 

In a way, this encapsulates the problem of restoration, when it comes to organs in the UK, because very, very few instruments have been enlarged or re-built with continuity and sympathetic addition in mind; and perhaps even less, with preservation in mind.

 

If there are two notable exceptions, then certainly Beverley and Doncaster would qualify, because in each of these instruments, there was an active desire to AUGMENT what was there already, and if possible, to improve UPON IT.

 

Now consider the Aa-kerk, Groningen, which to all intents and purposes, SHOULD be a complete mongrel.

 

Nominally built in 1702 by Arp Schnitger, for the Academiekerk, Groningen, it utilised earlier pipes from the organ built be Andre de Mare in 1676-9. The organ had 32 registers, three manuals and an independent pedal organ.

 

In 1816, the organ was transferred to the Aa-kerk by the organ-builder Timpe, where another Schnitger organ of 1697 had been totally destroyed when the tower of the church collpased. In 1830, Timpe replaced the Borstwerk (Brustwerk) with a Bovenwerk. Then in 1857, the organ-builder van Oeckelen made other changes, which included the enlarging of the Hoodwerk (Great), making changes to the voicing and pitch, providing new keyboards and changing the casework.

 

Dramatically, in 1977, the church tower was on the move again, and threatened to collapse: the ground on which it is built being essentially sand, as is often the case near the coast of the Netherlands. Consequently, the organ was removed very hurriedly and placed in storage. By 1989, the church was made safe and restored, and the organ put back without any alterations. To this day, it remains as it was left by van Oeckelen in 1857.

 

Essentially, the organ is an historic mongrel. If this organ had been originally a Snetzler or Green in the UK, it would have been enlarged with a German pedal in the 1860's, greatly enlarged in the 1880's with more powerful diapasons), stripped of its upperwork in the 1920's, tonally thinned-down again in the 1950's (with new "Screechwerk"), and finally discarded as a pile of junk at the turn of the 20th century, to be replaced by a digital instrument.

 

Here is the essential difference of approach, which stems from the style and type of music heard in, for example, Anglican music before 1950 but after 1850, and the type of music heard in worship before and after that period. To a large extent, pure organ-music also reflects a parallel change of style and fashion, from Walond and Stanley, through Elgar and Bairstow, to modern-day Bach and French romantic repertoire.

 

In the Netherlands, nothing ever changed very much. The organ accomnpanied metrical Psalm-singing and not much else, as they still do today. Thus, there was, and is, a natural continuity of musical purpose.

 

The big difference is this. You walk into many British churches, and you will hear a toaster or something which is a hybrid Anglo/French instrument of no great distinction. (Blackburn excepted, of course).

 

Go into the Aa-kerk and you will hear a mongrel, which just happens to be one of the very finest organs in the whole of Europe, speaking into a ravishing acoustic. It is so good, no-one has the heart to restore it to the original Schnitger.

 

Perhaps the real crux of the matter, is the fact that whether the path of restoration or complete re-build is chosen, it stems from a certain musical dissatisfaction with what exists already......but is that SO surprising in England, when musical fashions change so regularly?

 

MM