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

Minimum specification of small organ

Started by organforumadmin, April 17, 2010, 01:13:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Ian van Deurne

Okay then, here is one of my own little darlings, built in 2007 in West Friesland

I. Hoofdwerk

Principal 8
Roerfluit 8
Octaav 4
Quint 2.2/3
Waldfluit 2
Mixtuur IV
Trompet 8

II. Bovenwerk

Gedakt 8
Quintadena 8
Principal 4
Roerfluit 4
Nassat 2.2/3
Octaav 2
Terts 1.3/5
Cimbel III
Koortholt 8

Pedaal

Bourdon 16
Octaav 8  (trm.Hw)
Bazuin 16
Trompet 8  (trm.Hw)

Coppels

I/P  II/P  II/I

Tremblant forte (whole organ)
Tremblant doux (Bovenwerk)

Cimbelstern
Philomena

Compass: C - f' - f'''  (30-54)
Wind pressure: 68mm

a = 440Hz @ 18c
Temperament: Kirnberger III

20 registers          1206 pipes    (Bw Gedakt & Quintadena share C-B common bass)

....and it does exactly what it says on the stop knobs (all of them!)

Best Wishes from Ian.

MusingMuso

Well, if you want small, try the organ I play, at St Joseph's RC church, Ingrow, Keighley, W Yorks.


Hauptwerk


Principal              8
Rohrflute             8
Octave                4
Sesquialtera        II rks  (12:17)
Mixture               IV    (15:19:22:26)



Brustwerk


Gedact                 8
Koppel Flute        4
Principal               2
Quint                   1.1/3


Pedal

Bordun                 16
Fagot                   16


Bw - Hw
Bw-Ped
Hw-Ped


That's it!

The interesting thing is, that various organists have played a number of surprising organ-works in recital which wouldn't normally be considered right for the instrument.

Here is a list:-

Jonathan Bielby -  Liszt BACH
Francis Jackson - Vierne Finale Symph. no 1
Philip Tordoff - Mendelssohn/Rheinberger
Myself - Reger & Reubke

The list goes on, though nowadays, recitals would not attract much support.

The secret of the organ is the acoustic, allied to some superb voicing from Denis Thurlow. A silvery terz chorus and extremely beautiful flutes make this a very flexible instrument indeed, which in the absolutely perfect acoustic ambience, produces an effect not dissimilar to the Bavokerk orgel in Haarlem, but with less variety naturally.

Would I change anything?

Yes....I would get rid of the Quint 1.1/3, which really isn't necessary with a bright 2ft Principal. A 2ft Blockflute would be a nice alternative, and permit a nice contrast in Trio Sonatas, rather than an unrelentingly bright 2ft Principal chorus. 8.4.2.2 would be nice.








pcnd5584

Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on December 27, 2011, 01:03:59 AM
Bruise, if you want a real multum-in-parvo job, just look up the Willis at Kilkhampton Methodist - arguably one of the most ingenious little instruments ever constructed!

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D05164

Hmmm - I once had to play this for a concert (including solos and choral accompaniment of easily accessible repertoire).

Actually, in practice, I thought that it was dull and uninteresting - even allowing for its diminutive size. THe Willis/Lewis/Yates across the road is far more interesting. (Yes, I know that it is about three times the size.)
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

AnOrganCornucopia

#43
No doubt you'd prefer your small organ to look like this:
Pedal: Quintaton 16', Flute 8', Octave Flute 4', Mixture IV (19.22.26.29), Contra Bombarde 32', Bombarde 16', Chamade 8' (from BW)
Hauptwerk: Rohr Gedeckt 8', Principal 4', Fifteenth 2', Quint 1 1/3, Cymbel IV (22.26.29.33.), Chamade 8' (from BW)
Brustwerk: Chimney Flute 8', Rohr Flute 4', Blockflute 2', Quint 1 1/3, Octavin 1', Scharff IV (26.29.33.36.), Dulzian 16', Holzregal 8', Chamade 8'

plus super octave couplers on both manuals...

What is wrong with simply taking an organ as it is? Kilkhampton is only seven stops, of course it's going to be of limited interest tonally, but it's capable of a quite remarkable spread of repertoire [offensive material removed by Forum Admin]. Considering that your ideal organ would seem to be one with an unlimited supply of stratospheric upperwork, screaming chamades and a load of bizarre pedal mutations, I'm not surprised you didn't enjoy the Kilkhampton Willis.

MusingMuso

#44
This is pathetic!

For  starters, it needs far more quints. Then it needs at least sub, unison and octave tierces, (to add a little gravity) and then, as the crowning piece de resistance one of those untuned Polish Cymbals which sound like a sheet of falling icicles.

Pah!

You're just a pseudo sensualist, like those who smoke their opium through water!   8)

MM

pcnd5584

#45
Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on March 09, 2012, 08:22:20 AM
No doubt you'd prefer your small organ to look like this:
Pedal: Quintaton 16', Flute 8', Octave Flute 4', Mixture IV (19.22.26.29), Contra Bombarde 32', Bombarde 16', Chamade 8' (from BW)
Hauptwerk: Rohr Gedeckt 8', Principal 4', Fifteenth 2', Quint 1 1/3, Cymbel IV (22.26.29.33.), Chamade 8' (from BW)
Brustwerk: Chimney Flute 8', Rohr Flute 4', Blockflute 2', Quint 1 1/3, Octavin 1', Scharff IV (26.29.33.36.), Dulzian 16', Holzregal 8', Chamade 8'

plus super octave couplers on both manuals...

What is wrong with simply taking an organ as it is? Kilkhampton is only seven stops, of course it's going to be of limited interest tonally, but it's capable of a quite remarkable spread of repertoire [offensive snide remark removed]. Considering that your ideal organ would seem to be one with an unlimited supply of stratospheric upperwork, screaming chamades and a load of bizarre pedal mutations, I'm not surprised you didn't enjoy the Kilkhampton Willis.

Actually, No.

Given that you have not ever had to play this organ, either for accompanying a choir or the playing of solo organ works, I am not sure that you are qualified to judge its worth in this area.

Incidentally, your snide remark regarding '[offensive snide remark removed by Forum Admin]', is again without foundation. Please list the occasions when you have heard me play any organ for either accompaniment or solo work. Perhaps if you had been at Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford  when I was engaged in playing for a visiting choir, you might realise that I am actually quite imaginative, both in my handling of a 'strange' instrument and in my accompaniments.

The Kilkhampton instrument is, in practice, somewhat limiting.

For the record, you must surely know two things:

1) The only Pedal mutation on my own church instrument, is an extension of the Bourdon at 5 1/3ft. I have not specified any further mutations.

2) I have written (on more than one occasion) that I am extremely fond of the Walker instrument in Bristol Cathedral. This organ, the last time I played it, possessed neither 'screaming chamades' nor 'an unlimited supply of stratospheric upperwork'.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

makemoreandmore

#46
To return to the subject...

Has anyone mentioned the building in which this imaginary organ will be housed in? The acoustic can make such a difference :-)

By now it will have become clear that I'm just an old romantic. I love Truro Cathedral organ, or Westminster Chapel with their distinct lack of screaming mixtures and tinkly sounds (not to mention our good old N+B) and was averse to all things mutated. But there was a lovely little organ by Jardine at St Winifred's Hospital in Cardiff which was just delightful. It was small, being an extension organ, but very delicately voiced.

Thankfully it was saved from the bulldozers and is now in Nazareth House, Cardiff, although the NPOR hasn't yet been updated.

matt h

@pcnd5584

Glad to know I'm not the only one with a soft spot for the organ at Bristol Cathedral.  So often it is usurped by it's neighbour at St. Mary Redcliffe, but I found it to have a wealth of tone colour and it sits in an enviable acoustic. 

Also the authorities in the Cathedral were most accommodating in allowing me, as a then 15 year old, to basically have free rein for an hour or two.

Regards,
Matt.

pcnd5584

#48
Quote from: matt h on March 09, 2012, 09:16:01 PM
@pcnd5584

Glad to know I'm not the only one with a soft spot for the organ at Bristol Cathedral.  So often it is usurped by it's neighbour at St. Mary Redcliffe, but I found it to have a wealth of tone colour and it sits in an enviable acoustic. 

Also the authorities in the Cathedral were most accommodating in allowing me, as a then 15 year old, to basically have free rein for an hour or two.

Regards,
Matt.

Welcome, Matt.

I was greatly pleased to read your post. I regard the Bristol Cathedral organ as one of our national musical treasures. In addition to a thrilling tutti (which seems just right for this superb building), it has a wealth of colour and of etherial beauty.

I can imagine how much you enjoyed playing it.

Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

David Drinkell

Clifford Harker used to say that the Cathedral organ was a church organ, whereas Redcliffe was a concert organ.  There's a lot of truth in that, although in practice there is a great amount of cross-over between the two.  I've heard wonderful recitals in the Cathedral and I know from experience that Redcliffe is a superb accompanimental instrument (although due to its positioning, you can't work it quite like other organs).  Then again, the Cathedral organ was, before the Mander mixture was added, not quite up to leading a large nave congregation (Clifford again: he said one had to play up an octave using the doubles when leading big hymns).

Although I knew Redcliffe very well indeed, I only played the Cathedral organ a few times, but I heard it on very many occasions.  I think both of them are great instruments and ideally suited to their respective buildings.

David Pinnegar

Whilst I have not heard Redcliffe in person, I have enjoyed a CD recorded there. However, whether it is the acoustic or the recording itself, the overall effect is vastly exceeded by another 1920s H&H, specifically at Charterhouse School Godalming, where the effect within its acoustic there is utterly supreme. There is another thread on this forum about that instrument and its need for preservation.

Best wishes

David P

David Drinkell

I've played Charterhouse and it is indeed a very fine job (slightly pepped-up AH) in a fine building (Gile Gilbert Scott) which deserves to be better known.  It should certainly not be replaced or drastically altered.

Redcliffe, however, in a number of ways stands out from the rest, even by Arthur Harrison standards.  Part of its character lies in the disposition, wherein the Choir and Solo (apart from the Tuba) make a small but complete two-manual organ adjacent to the choir-stalls.  Then there is the stupendous effect of the Swell with its two sets of independently controlled shutters, it's stone chamber and integral 32' pedal reed.  There's really nothing like it, although it may not be to everyone's taste.  AH considered Redcliffe and King's to be his finest creations, and I think that's true, although King's is vastly different from Redcliffe.

pcnd5584

#52
Quote from: David Drinkell on March 10, 2012, 08:29:09 PM

... Redcliffe, however, in a number of ways stands out from the rest, even by Arthur Harrison standards.  Part of its character lies in the disposition, wherein the Choir and Solo (apart from the Tuba) make a small but complete two-manual organ adjacent to the choir-stalls.  Then there is the stupendous effect of the Swell with its two sets of independently controlled shutters, it's stone chamber and integral 32' pedal reed.  There's really nothing like it, although it may not be to everyone's taste.  AH considered Redcliffe and King's to be his finest creations, and I think that's true, although King's is vastly different from Redcliffe.

I would agree that there is a wealth of quiet accompanimental registers - although, as you state, it is necessary to use the organ in a rather different way, due to its unusual layout.

On a small matter: I note that the Pedal to Swell Pistons (which I always find extremely useful when accompanying) has been replaced by a Pedal to General Foot Pistons* (which is only really useful when playing recitals or more complex voluntaries).



* Which is, in any case, a slightly odd choice; although the accessories appear to be a little unusual - even allowing for the slightly different divisional functions this instrument possesses.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

David Drinkell

Fair comment, although I don't think the major effects are too much for the building - but they need using with discretion and sound very big indeed at the console. (I am not suggesting that you don't know that!  We may always differ and I respect your opinion).

Garth used to complain that the Swell Viole Sourdine (added in 1947) had disappeared somwhere along the way and he missed it!

The Great Quint Mixture was new in the seventies and was the sort of thing one might expect from that period.  It was recast later and now fits in much better.  Some very large Harrisons, as you will know, had quint mixtures on the Great (inspired by Armley).  It's maybe surprising that Redcliffe didn't, although it has other registers that don't appear on other jobs.  The Harmonics is still there, so you can have the original chorus if you want it.  The Swell mixture was recast at the same time as the Great quint mixture went in, but was never quite so startling.  I think it has been revamped back to something more like the original and sounds pretty authentic to me.

I agree about that piston coupler change - they could have had a switch so that one could have either/or.

pcnd5584

Quote from: David Drinkell on March 10, 2012, 11:49:55 PM
Fair comment, although I don't think the major effects are too much for the building - but they need using with discretion and sound very big indeed at the console. (I am not suggesting that you don't know that!  We may always differ and I respect your opinion).

And I yours, David.

Quote from: David Drinkell on March 10, 2012, 11:49:55 PM
Garth used to complain that the Swell Viole Sourdine (added in 1947) had disappeared somwhere along the way and he missed it!

Indeed it did - in 1974, along with the Octave Wood. I had assumed that Garth Benson had requested this himself. It would be a little surprising if Harrisons had just packed the pipes in the crates (in which the then new G.O. Mixture V had arrived) and just gone back to Durham....



Quote from: David Drinkell on March 10, 2012, 11:49:55 PM
The Great Quint Mixture was new in the seventies and was the sort of thing one might expect from that period.  It was recast later and now fits in much better.  Some very large Harrisons, as you will know, had quint mixtures on the Great (inspired by Armley).  It's maybe surprising that Redcliffe didn't, although it has other registers that don't appear on other jobs.  The Harmonics is still there, so you can have the original chorus if you want it.  The Swell mixture was recast at the same time as the Great quint mixture went in, but was never quite so startling.  I think it has been revamped back to something more like the original and sounds pretty authentic to me.

I agree about that piston coupler change - they could have had a switch so that one could have either/or.

I agree with you regarding the second G.O. Mixture. I had wondered whether it was simply the case that Ralph T. Morgan did not particularly like compound stops.

Are you able to confirm the present composition of this stop at C1, please? The NPOR gives two possibilites. I had hoped that it was the 'standard' 15-19-22-26-29, but there is a possibility that it commences 12-15-19-22-26 - which would be too 'quinty' for my tastes - and still rather low-pitched.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

MusingMuso

With all respect, how on earth did we manage to get from minimalist organs to Bristol Cathedral and Redcliffe?   :o

( I prefer the Colston Hall organ to either of them, by the way).

MM

David Pinnegar

Quote from: MusingMuso on March 11, 2012, 10:27:43 AM
With all respect, how on earth did we manage to get from minimalist organs to Bristol Cathedral and Redcliffe?   :o

:-) Yes - I'm sure we might all have been wondering that - should Admin split this thread?

Best wishes

David P

MusingMuso

I don't think we need to split the thread, but perhaps we should recognise that the small organ is a specific art-form all it's own, and not very many achieve greatness.

On my travels to the Netherlands, I am often surprised and delighted to hear not one, but two or even three organs, at recitals; usually a smallish two manual in the choir and a much larger organ in the west gallery.

Notable examples which I have played are those at the Laurenskerk, Rotterdam; Doesburg Cathedral, the Martinikerk Groningen and, of course, the VERY old restored instrument at the Grotekerk, Haarlem. (There are also one or two other remarkable small organs in Haarlem).

I recall with special delight a concert at Doesburg Cathedral, and the absolute contrast between the big romantic Walcker organ in the west gallery, (on which was played various Straube editions of Bach), and the beautiful and rather chirpy two manual by Flentrop, on which was heard a particularly well performed Hinedmith Sonata. I didn't feel that either of the organs upstaged the other; both being very beautiful in their own rights, and of course, speaking into the usually generous acoustic of your average Netherlands cathedral church.

Another special delight was to play the little Snetzler in the chapel of Eton College, as well as the two manual organ in the college hall.

In my experience, the really successful small organ has that elusive quality of tonal integrity, which isn't always apparent in larger instruments, and that same integrity can be stylictically varied; as with the Flentrop neo-baroque instrumentat Doesburg, and the sweet little Snatzler at Eton.

I've come across a few small Fr Willis organs which are also delightful, and one or two old Charles Brindley organs with a boldness and character which punch far above their weight.

So make no mistake, the small organ is a special art-form which needs very careful handling and voicing if it is to be a success.

Of course, we could also include in the successful small organ stakes, those very fine extension organs by John Compton, which often contain no more than 5 opr 6 extended ranks, yet manage to sound ten times bigger.
MM




David Drinkell

I believe the Great mixture at Redcliffe is now 15.19.22.26 in the bass - one step lower than originally.  Mine here is the same and works perfectly well.  I think it's down to how the breaks are arranged and how carefully the quints are voiced.  The Great Mixture at Belfast Cathedral was not good.  Philip Prosser revoiced it for me and made it a lot better, mainly by softening the effect of the quints (replacing the wire to the chopper valve on the reservoir with a cord also helped, by steadying the wind somewhat).

I think the Octave Wood is back.  People are rude about Octave Woods, but the one at Belfast was just right when a French Baroque composer wanted 'Flute 8' (getting the rest of the sounds was more difficult, but possible).

I think the Viole Sourdine may have been ditched on grounds of space. Garth maintained he didn't know it was going.

Muso mentions the Colston Hall.  This is a magnificent instrument which deserves to be better known.  One bit that doesn't work too well, in my opinion, is the unenclosed Choir division which is a fully developed Positive on paper but in practice is far too small to cut any ice against the Great or Swell.  Beautifully, voiced and regulated, of course, but too soft!  The Solo string chorus is possibly the last Harrisons' ever did.

I, too am feeling guilty about mentioning such leviathans on this thread.  Muso mentioned Brindleys - Kilmore Cathedral, Co. Cavan, has an early small 3m. The Great (16.8.8.8.4.II.IV.8) is quite terrifyingly huge.  The rest is nowhere near it, but not feeble.  I also wonder if it's time to consider extension organs again.  Compton could work wonders, but the system was brought into disrepute by so many cowboys who did everything on the ultra-cheap.  If a reputable builder really took trouble, I think something excellent could result.

MusingMuso

Quote from: David Drinkell on March 11, 2012, 08:01:54 PM


Muso mentioned Brindleys - Kilmore Cathedral, Co. Cavan, has an early small 3m. The Great (16.8.8.8.4.II.IV.8) is quite terrifyingly huge.  The rest is nowhere near it, but not feeble.  I also wonder if it's time to consider extension organs again.  Compton could work wonders, but the system was brought into disrepute by so many cowboys who did everything on the ultra-cheap.  If a reputable builder really took trouble, I think something excellent could result.

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


I suspect that David has hit the nail on the head concerning the eventual fall from grace of Brindley & Foster organs, which apart from a certain over-complexity and dogged reliance on pneumatic actions, really didn't move with the times tonally, in spite of slightly larger flutes and a few passing nods in the direction of the orchestral tendency after the turn of the 19th century. Essentially, they continued to build organs with terraced dynamics; very much in the Schulze style, which makes much of the repertoire, (including late German romantic music), almost impossible to play convincingly.

As for a revival in extension organs, I quite agree, because Compton showed what could be done, and 5 or 6 ranks of real pipes is far more musically natural in sound to anything electronic: not that I don't admire the progress made with modern digital organs and systems such as "Hauptwerk."

MM