News:

If you have difficulty registering for an account on the forum please email antespam@gmail.com. In the question regarding the composer use just the surname, not including forenames Charles-Marie.

Main Menu

Experiences of some recent digital organs

Started by revtonynewnham, September 25, 2010, 03:47:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

revtonynewnham

Hi

It's been several years since I've had opportunity to play a "new" digital organ substitute, but over the past few weeks, I've had opportunity to play 3 - all by different builders.  2 of these are home practice organs, the third was a demo at retailer's premises.  I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised.

The first of the 3 was a 4m custom job by Dutch firm "Content".  This shares the owner's music room with an Early English chamber organ, so it has plenty to live up to.  The last time I played a Content organ was probably around 20 years ago, soon after a firm in Cornwall started importing them.  At that time they were no more than average for the era.  This 4m was a salutary reminder of how far technology has moved in the time.  Most of the individual sounds - as expected these days - were good, even listening on headphones, which is a good way of hearing what's really going on.   The room was rather small, so as expected, the big ensembles and big reeds didn't really have the impact that the real thing would have, and some sounds were distinctly "electronic" - but the overall effect was good - certainly more than adequate for its function as a practice organ for recital work.  The normal speaker system is sub-bass unit plus a handful of small boxes for the higher sounds - probably all that could be comfortably accommodated in the room.

The second was a Wyvern 3m using Phoenix technology.  I have to say that this sounded vastly superior to the only other Phoenix job that I've played!  Again, it's in a relatively small room (although a little larger than the previous instrument) and is a home practice organ.  Again, most of the individual stops were fine, although I did think that one of the strings sounded a bit "scratchy".  The organ uses kneeboard speakers plus an external unit.  To my ears, the strings and the big reeds didn't come across - the later I think due to room size and the well known limitations of speaker technology.

The 3rd example is the newly released Viscount range, using physical modelling (the other 2 use sample based technology).  Obviously, a dealer's showroom is not the ideal location to evaluate the sound of the organ, although again I was able to use headphones - and turned the reverb off.  Compared to a mid-range Viscount using samples (also on display) the sound was like chalk and cheese.  However, there is a degree of electronic processing - a "chorus" function that, apparently, can't be reduced to zero, so that will obviously make the raw sounds appear more lifelike than they really are.  Thankfully, the setting was low enough that the all too common "out of tune" effect of such processing wasn't obvious.  The organ which I played has a traditional English stop list, which I found somewhat dull - but then, there is a choice of around a dozen alternatives for each stop, and I understand that the buyer can, within limits, choose what stops they want.  The alternative "German" spec. also sounded reasonable.  Again, some of the sounds fell somewhat short of my ideal - strangely, once again the strings sounded harsh, and the reeds were distinctly uninspiring as standard (but the German spec reveals that brighter alternatives are available, plus a significant degree of voicing control - all available to the user (with a return to default option for when you back yourself into a corner!).  The organ can be configured with multiple audio outputs, which I think is essential, where space and finance permit the use of multiple speakers and acoustic (rather than electronic) mixing of sounds.

Overall, I was impressed with the sound of all 3 organs - but none of them came close to replicating the real thing.  Speaker technology is a major part of the problem - and David Pinnegar's experiments in this area show just what can be done to improve the situation.  I could live with any of the 3 - especially as individual sounds can be tailored to some degree.  The Viscount, once again shows the superiority of computer synthesis/modelling over samples.  The computer model even takes into account the number of stops drawn and pipes speaking - very impressive, especially for the price.

Would I buy one?  Given that I don't have space for more than a very small pipe organ, then the answer has to be "Yes" if I had the money.  This is perhaps not the place to state my preference - and anyway, that may well change if I was looking to buy, as I would want to take the time to explore the options (and organs by other builders) thoroughly before making a final decision.  If I had space and funds then there's no question - the real thing wins hands down.

Every Blessing

Tony
(P.S.  I understand that Viscount have an expander using the physical modeling technology available.)

David Pinnegar

Hi!

Very interesting post - thanks Tony!

I think the problem on the reeds and strings that you identify might be a matter of voicing as I posted in another thread recently about why full organ tuttis don't add up . . .

The Viscount "Physical Modelling" - I have used a CM-100 expander and it's particularly good on mediaeval reeds . . . It really likes chiffing on flues but I'm not sure that I'd want a whole instrument built upon it. Perhaps I have not explored the reeds sufficiently but whilst good and sounding authentic, none have the brilliant bite that one finds on French reeds and which is well reproduced by other manufacturers.

Content - I have used a 220 expander box - truly excellent but chiff is not of the quint variety - it's always a semitone. Whilst this is realistic for some ranks, it's not throughout an instrument. This box has been superceded by the 440 and the limitation of the 220 may have been overcome. Having said this, the 220 has the best Voix Celestes of all and I use the unit for additions to the Swell / Recit as well as providing a nicely Germanic Echo manual. The box has also proved to be very reliable.

Best wishes

David P

revtonynewnham

Quote from: David Pinnegar on September 25, 2010, 04:49:02 PM
Hi!


The Viscount "Physical Modelling" - I have used a CM-100 expander and it's particularly good on mediaeval reeds . . . It really likes chiffing on flues but I'm not sure that I'd want a whole instrument built upon it. Perhaps I have not explored the reeds sufficiently but whilst good and sounding authentic, none have the brilliant bite that one finds on French reeds and which is well reproduced by other manufacturers.


Best wishes

David P

Hi David

Interesting comment - I found the reeds distinctly bland - but I didn't have long enough to really get to grips with the organ - and certainly not enough to try the alternative voices, which is one thing I would want to do before I bought one (assuming the money ever becomes available!)  I assumed that they had used a typical Edwardian voicing - intended primarily for choral accompaniment and somewhat "polite", although the flue choruses seemd to have enough life.

Still, for now I'll manage with my computer simulators ("My Organ" and MidiTzer, and the Harmonium and assorted other keyboards that see occasional use.

Every Blessing

Tony

Barrie Davis

Hi

I have just spent 2 weeks playing a Makin in a Crem and to be honest it left me cold. It is a 3 manual Monarche with quite a reasonable stoplist,  but Oh Dear do Makins bother to regulate to the buildings? I have found this so often with their organs, a prize example is St Michaels Brierley Hill.

The 32 Flues make no impact, if indeed you can hear them, there are missing notes, bad regulation, I have to admit several other builders leave this firm standing ie Rodgers in Worcester cathedral but may be thats the acoustics.

Barrie

David Pinnegar

Hi!

These comments coming through are starting to be very interesting! I hope those thinking of daring to replace their good pipe organs with electronic instruments will find and read this thread. Perhaps on high profile installations manufacturers might ensure the result is worthy but more often than not, anything that rolls off a production line, however much it's said to be "customised" is going to be sold to customers rather than clients, and manufactured and sold as a matter of commercial profit rather than love of art.

In contrast I'm personally aware of a number of pipe organ builders who will go the extra mile in love of the results of their creation.

Whilst in encouraging enthusiasm for the the King of Instruments I dabble in the electronic arts, no-one can think that they can buy such an instrument off-the-shelf: electronics can serve a purpose, for a time (which is less than the life of a tracker pipe organ), and sound very good but provided very expert attention has been given to it. Furthermore the success of my instrument results to some extent in freedom to use technology from multiple manufacturers, so that characteristics do not run throughout the instrument and leading to the whole being more than the sum of the parts.

Best wishes

David P

revtonynewnham

Hi

With ref to Barrie's comments, a friend of mine has a Makin - a few years old, which is set up with a studio-type reverb unit, and like that it sounds impressive, although for my liking, the level of reverb is often too high - at least for serious practice rather than wallowing in a wash of sound - but the basic sounds with reverb off are distinctly electronic and artificial sounding.  Obviously, this is only one example, and their current production may be better.

As David says, so much of the success or otherwise depends on the voicing and the installation - and the speakers, but if the basic sounds aren't there, then there's little hope.

Please note - I would not want to denigrate Makin on the basis of this one example, which is not current production.  It would definitely be a brand that I would want to listen to if I was in the position of choosing a new electronic - after all, their heritage goes back to the Compton company - albeit with a few bankrupcies and changes of management and name over the last 50 or so years.

Every Blessing

Tony