Makin take over Copeman Hart

[Barry Williams]

I understand that this is the offical annoucement:


The 28th of February, 2011, is a date that will go down in the history of Makin Organs, and indeed the digital organ business as a whole, when the acquisition of Copeman Hart & Company Ltd by Makin Organs was announced. Founded by Ernest Hart in 1960, Copeman Hart has been at the forefront of pipeless organ technology for fifty years with Ernest remaining at the helm.Copeman Hart has always produced instruments of exceptional quality, both in terms of sound and build, which has meant they have been in competition with top quality digital organ companies such as Makin, and pipe organ builders rather than a number of companies who have always produced 'cheap and cheerful' digital instruments. These are organs for the discerning customer, the connoisseur, and are custom built, with time lavished during the design process to ensure that custom expectations are met and preferably exceeded.Customers of Copeman Hart were delighted to hear the news of the acquisition since the future of their instrument, and that of the company as a whole has been secured into the next generation. The future is indeed bright.Dr Keith Harrington, Managing Director of Makin Organs since 2004, and now, in addition, Managing Director of Copeman Hart commented "This is a very exciting time for customers and staff alike and I am thoroughly looking forward to the opportunities ahead. Both Makin and Copeman Hart have their own unique identities and will be run as separate entities, each playing to its own strengths. Of course, due to our increased group size and purchasing power, there will be some excellent economies of scale, and since the group is geographically based around the country our engineers will all be closer than ever to all our customers." He added "Ernest will remain a Director of Copeman Hart. Going forwards we will ensure that everything we do will maintain and enhance the great tradition of quality which has been part of the business from the outset."Sincerely,

Dr Keith A Harrington
Managing Director
Makin Organs Ltd

[Barrie Davis]

How odd, I always thought CH were in a different league, their consoles are far superior to Makins. Did not Makins do the same thing with Bradford and that company ceased shortly after? I know John Pilling acquired it, one of their last organs was Pershore Abbey.

Best wishes

Barrie

[revtonynewnham]

Hi

I hope they don't reduce the quality of the Copeman-Hart name!  I find this announcement rather worrying.

Incidentally, the Bradford system is still available - although I guess only in limited numbers (I know Drs. Peter & Lucy Comerford well - and have heard and played one of their recent instruments.)  I'll try and remember to find out what the current "trading name" is.  The Bradford computing organ pioneered the use of real-time synthesis technology (the same principle as used by Copeman-Hart) - in my opinion, capable of vastly superior results to sampling - but only if the (very complex) voicing is done properly.

Every Blessing

Tony

[Barry Williams]

How interesting Tony!

To me, the Bradford technology invariably produces the weakest examples of electronic organs at the highest prices.  Further, the technology is needlessly complex and can only be dealt with by the originators.  This may give rise to expensive maintenenace in the future.   I have never heard a 'Bradford' type instrument  that is remotely convincing, or that compares well with the less expensive sound sampled machines.

You rightly identify the ears of the voicer as being critical.  I doubt that the 'Bradford' systems, with their inherent defects, could ever produce a satisfactory result.    But ears must be a factor.  Bradford sellers do not use pipe organ voicers.  Their 'ears' are experienced salesmen, sometimes also experienced organists.  How can such people hope to voice and regulate to pipe organ standards?  They have not had the training.  They may claim years of experience.  Would you have an operation by a surgeon with years of experience but no training?  Why, then, have an electronic instrument voiced by a salesman?

Also, Bradford organs have a permanent built-in 'Rotafon'/de-tuning effect which is extremely unmusical, even when it is 'randomised.

It is interesing that John Robert Makin Pilling, the deceased former owner of Makin organs, bought the Bradford Computing Organ Company and installed an instrument in Pershore Abbey.  On that it is play to run the notes faster than the computer can take it, so that the pedals lag behind.  I have played a number of ' Bradford' type organs with that defect, which does not occur on sound sampled instruments.


Barry Williams

[David Pinnegar]

Dear Barry

I think we should be wholeheartedly grateful that the electronic manufacturers don't employ pipeorgan voicers . . . :)

It's for this reason that I don't overtly publish design tips for successful speaker installations for electronics and will only do so privately with people who want to improve their own installation without commercial replication.

Best wishes

David P

[Barry Williams]

Dear David,

Well.....In the past, one or two have done so with remarkable results.  In the old analogue days one company engaged a full time voicer who had been trained at Henry Willis & Sons Ltd.  In America, one or two companies have used pipe organ voicers, yet in this country there is a marked reluctance  to achieve excellence in the electronic field.  As you say, that is probably a good thing!

In my capacity as a Diocesan Organs Adviser I came across one church that had tried an electronic and rejected it on the grounds that it was far too large and far too loud for the building.  We mananged to get them a second-hand Porritt pipe organ that cost less than the over-sized electronic machine which had offended them so much.  It was my privilege to give the opening recital on that organ last year.  The nearby Methodist followed suit and had a pipe organ too.

I am interested in your comments about speakers, for I have heard very basic electronic insturments transformed by better speaker installations, both in houses and churches.

Barry Williams

[revtonynewnham]

Hi

The latest iteration of the Bradford system is far, far better than the earlier one, which was limited by computer power.  The hybrid pipe/digital at Addingham parish church is interesting to listen to & play - I can hear which stops are genuine and which digital - and there doesn't seem to be the "out of tuneness" to the same degree as older installations.  The C-H technology is, at root, the same - but the voicing software is different (as are the voicers!).  Aside from Allen, sampling technology just wasn't around when the Bradford system was conceived - and we all know just how much computer power is increasing over the years, making possible what would have been a pipe-dream, or impossibly expensive a few years ago.

I still very much doubt that any electronic substitute will ever have the same "presence" and randomness of the real thing.  (By randomness, I mean the way pipes will speak slightly differently each time they're played, depending on a whole host of other factors.

I had better declare an interest here - Drs. Peter & Lucy Comerford - the people who develop the Bradford system, are very good friends

I still have to hear a digital that's better than a Copeman-Hart.  The sample-based jobs, whilst superficially impressive - sound like what they are - a recording of the real thing.

Every Blessing

Tony

[Barry Williams]

I wonder whether 'randomness' really is different speech each time a pipe is played.  With good winding that should not
happen.  Certainly, it does not on our house organ.  'Randomness' might just be one of those aural myths, rather like controlling the speech of a pipe in rapid music with tracker action.  Robert Ehrens showed that these things simply do not happen, though I suspect that with anything less than really good winding, all kinds of alterations in speech occur.

However, there is something about pipes that cannot be reproduced electronically.  It is, simply that the sound emanates from all parts of the pipe.  Thus when middle C of an Open diapason plays, the whole of the interior and exterior of the pipe resonates, with the mouth and foot and, to a lesser extent, the rackboard too.  That gives a huge vibrating area for just one pipe.  Moreover, the sound comes off the exterior surface of the pipe at 360', giving the most remarkable stereo effect, just from one pipe.  With several pipes speaking that effect is incredibly rich and resonant.  No electronic instrument can ever match that, which is why even a couple of ranks for home use are so much more satisfying than a large array of tabs with reverberation and de-tuning.  (None of these comments detract from the usefulness of an electronic instrument for home practise.  After all, pipe organs do not have headphones!)

It is possible to improve the effect of electronic instruments by using a different configuration of high quality speakers, but the suppliers seem markedly reluctant to do so.  This is surprising, when the mark-up and profits are so large.  (Many years ago BF, BM & L and I bought an instrument directly from abroad for £2,000, including import duty.  The comparable price in this country was £5,800 plus VAT i.e.  £6815.  We saved £4815 and received the instrument within ten days, whereas the supplier in this country would have taken three months to import the instrument.)

Board members may know that in 1998 BF, BM & L proclaimed "Its no good!  That thing has got to go!"  She insisted that we get a real one and you all know the rest of that story that ended with us getting a pipe organ.

I find that I can practise for hours on just a couple of stops without wishing to change registration, for the tone is so satisfying and complete.  Tony and Sue have seen the organ; if any Board members are contemplating getting a pipe organ for home we would be pleased to show them ours.  Just send a PM.

Barry Williams

[David Pinnegar]

I wonder whether 'randomness' really is different speech each time a pipe is played.  With good winding that should not happen.  Certainly, it does not on our house organ.  'Randomness' might just be one of those aural myths,

. . .

However, there is something about pipes that cannot be reproduced electronically.  It is, simply that the sound emanates from all parts of the pipe.  Thus when middle C of an Open diapason plays, the whole of the interior and exterior of the pipe resonates, with the mouth and foot and, to a lesser extent, the rackboard too.  That gives a huge vibrating area for just one pipe.  Moreover, the sound comes off the exterior surface of the pipe at 360', giving the most remarkable stereo effect, just from one pipe.  With several pipes speaking that effect is incredibly rich and resonant.  No electronic instrument can ever match that, which is why even a couple of ranks for home use are so much more satisfying than a large array of tabs with reverberation and de-tuning.

. . .

It is possible to improve the effect of electronic instruments by using a different configuration of high quality speakers, but the suppliers seem markedly reluctant to do so. 

. . .

I find that I can practise for hours on just a couple of stops without wishing to change registration, for the tone is so satisfying and complete.  Tony and Sue have seen the organ; if any Board members are contemplating getting a pipe organ for home we would be pleased to show them ours.  Just send a PM.

Hi!

Randomness - yes I agree with you that any randomness might be an illusion . . . However, when pipes are voiced near to overblowing there is a turbulence both on the transient and on the sustained tone . . . So very relevant with Gambas and some Violin Diapasons. Certainly the case with pipes requiring beards as well as wooden pipes without nicking below the labia.

Pipes - yes - interestingly 180 degrees out of phase at the two ends of the pipes . . . and with around 75% of sound coming from the mouth rather than the end. I use speakers that replicate this . . . and my thin "pipefront for mothballed pipe organs" experiments are capable of doing likewise.

Practicing for hours on a few ranks - this is the difference between a professional musician who plays elsewhere on large instruments regularly and the enthusiastic amateur, possibly for whom Hauptwerk is targeting, whose only access to a large instrument is an electronic in a living room.

For real practice, a few ranks can be good as also a pedal harpsichord . . .

Best wishes

David P

[Barry Williams]

"Practicing for hours on a few ranks - this is the difference between a professional musician who plays elsewhere on large instruments regularly and the enthusiastic amateur, possibly for whom Hauptwerk is targeting, whose only access to a large instrument is an electronic in a living room."

This is a most interesting point.  When designing our house organ we had in mind to make it large enough that a good deal of the standard repertoire could be played effectively on it, for I do not regularly have access to other instruments, as other do.

Of course, before electric blowing it was a pedal piano, pedal harpsichord, pedal clavichord or nothing.  I think someone mentioned that Bach used a pedal clavichord.  Vigil Fox's organ lessons were, I was told, forty five minutes on the piano and thirty minutes on the organ.

Barry Williams

[revtonynewnham]

Hi

I can hear a degree of randomness on certain pipes in the chamber organ in my church - it is real.  Agreed, the winding on that particular instrument isn't rock solid - given the design of the windchest and reservoir it never will be - but even with just one stop drawn, the pipes don't always sound exactly the same.  The effects are small, but real.  The acoustics of pipe organs is a complex area!  I still prefer the real thing - but for now, my Harmonium, plus a Computer simulator, will have to suffice at home.

Every Blessing

Tony

[twanguitar]

Returning to Barry's post which kicked off this thread, there are some mysterious aspects to the whole affair.

Firstly Makin's website is still - this minute - taking a sideswipe at the Bradford/Musicom technology which CH has used since 1986:

At http://www.makinorgans.co.uk/Info.aspx?ID=18 they say:

"Prior to the advent of sampling, the technology now used by most manufacturers of digital organs, tone generation
was by way of artificially synthesised sounds, with the technology of choice usually being the 'Bradford System'
developed in the late 1970s. There are still a few companies who use this technology today which is, to say the least,
interesting, since it is now more than 30 years old and hasn't really been developed nor has kept up with software
and computer enhancements in general. Whilst there remain a few die-hard supporters of this system, who simply do not
believe that sampled sound is better than artificially generated sound, they are very much a dying breed."

And, again as of this minute, CH's site does not even mention the takeover as far as I can see.

(See http://www.copemanhart.co.uk/).

Still more mysterious, the Musicom website is clearly 'parked'.

(See http://www.musicomsystems.com/)

Those who know how will see that it has not been updated since May 2010.

Even more curious is that Tony Koorlander apparently had his "appointment terminated" as the MD in March 2010, though
I don't know what this actually means.

(See http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/musicom)

He is now apparently running a TV media company.

(See http://www.linkedin.com/pub/anthony-koorlander/12/312/864)

If anyone can put these pieces together and make a jigsaw, I'm sure we will be interested!

All the best

TG

[Doug Levey]

"If anyone can put these pieces together and make a jigsaw, I'm sure we will be interested!"

Sorry to report that there are no macabre secrets - and no need to invent a jigsaw.

Musicom remain extremely active following the early retirement of Tony Koorlander who left to pursue exactly those interests reported here. As a company, we are deeply involved in a number of projects both in the UK and abroad and have expanded our pipe organ control system range quite dramatically to include the fully featured PipeNet control system which currently represents, one of, if not, the fastest responding control networks on the market. A range of ancillary products to control slide solenoids, analogue/digital signals, and the only range of industry power supplies to come with a lifetime guarantee are all very active strings in our bow. This aside, there has been a complete ground up redesign of the Advanced Digital Environment product group which allows our own real-time sound synthesis that has established its own identity following those early beginnings within the Bradford fold.

Copeman Hart has been a very loyal customer for Musicom over the years, but always a seperate entity, with its own commercial path.

It is remiss of us that, having been so busy with development and involvement, we have neglected the update of our website which has been 'in progress' for rather too long by now. A position that will shortly be corrected.

[David Pinnegar]

Hi!

Welcome to the forum and as you are actively engaged in pipe organ control systems, please feel free to give us news of what you are doing and your products in the Organ Builders section of this forum. That's what this forum is for and it will also take the pressure off updating your site - the technicalities of corporate sites with issues of corporate feel and image can be very distracting from doing what you really want to be doing in terms of marketing pipe organ related systems!

Best wishes

David P

[Barry Williams]

Hi Doug,

Welcome to this Board.  (For those who do not know. Doug Levey is on the the most distinguished engineers of solid state technology around.  His expertise is unrivalled in the trade.)

It would be helpful to know whether Musicom is still marketing electronic sound generation systems based on the Bradford type of system (i.e. using a formula) to compute the sound.

Yours sincerely,

Barry