Hi
Can I commend the latest issue of the magazine to members of the Board, it covers the new Drake organ in the OBE Chapel at St Pauls and also the Mander rebuild of Sacred Heart Wimbledon amongst other interesting articles. The magazine has developed well under its new Editorship, long may this continue.
Barrie
My copy hasn't arrived yet!
Awwwwww I can tell you its worth reading!!!!!!!
Must be the Bradford Post!!!!!
Read up on the Wimbledon organ. Then come and hear it - and drool over it. It really is that wonderful. Just fabulous. Out of this world. Rich, opulent, colourful, bright, brilliant, extremely powerful, never less than completely musical... best 50-rank organ in the world as far as I'm concerned.
Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on February 28, 2012, 01:53:04 AM
Read up on the Wimbledon organ. Then come and hear it - and drool over it. It really is that wonderful. Just fabulous. Out of this world. Rich, opulent, colourful, bright, brilliant, extremely powerful, never less than completely musical... best 50-rank organ in the world as far as I'm concerned.
Now this is one instrument which I would very much like to get my hands on....
I thought you once said you had (prior to the restoration)?
I've said it before, the lone Great Trumpet isn't really man enough to balance the Swell reeds or the Great flues and the Pedal 32/16/8 Trombone rank is a bit smooth, but it is almost beyond criticism. Full Swell (with the scorching chorus reeds, sub- and super-octave couplers) underpinned by all the Pedal is one of the most exciting sounds imaginable and the boxes are very effective. It's unfortunate that the Swell Octave Oboe was removed (now carefully stored), which, with the Swell Contra Fagotto and Oboe, particularly coupled to the Choir Orchestral Oboe, was an extraordinary sound, but the Dulciana Twelfth on the Swell (which originally replaced the Vox Humana, now reinstated) is reasonably useful (though a new Nasard would have been better). What I would have done would have been to have placed the Vox on its own chest, perhaps even with its own shutters, had there been room for that.
Contrary to popular belief, Walker zinc diapasons are not at all dull and unmusical - the Great chorus is quite bright, although the Mixture could do with going higher than a 22nd. What I find amazing about this organ, though, is the way that the Choir Lieblich Gedeckt can completely fill a space which can still handle all 50 stops, including Tuba and 3x32fts... the voicing is just wonderful.
It's also a mere two streets away from the equally stunning (though half the size) Norman & Beard I've been banging on about lately...
Hi
There is one big error in the latest edition, it is stated the OBE organ is Drakes Swan song. this is what their website says:
Important Notice
Contrary to a recently published article, William Drake has not retired. The firm are currently undertaking commissions at Christ Church, Spitalfields, Jesus College, Cambridge and Fritham, Hampshire. There are no plans for the firm to cease building and restoring organs.
Best wishes
Barrie
Hi
One thing that quickly becomes clear to NPOR editors is that published material is often not accurate! Perhaps the most glaring example (not in The Organ but another mag) was the inclusion of a stop list for an organ, and on the same page pictures of the stop jambs - the stop names didn't correspond!
Every Blessing
Tony
P.S. My copy arrived yesterday - I'll probably start reading it later today, not that I've finished Organists' Review.
I do hope the Spitalfields organ gets reinstated soon. It must be over a decade ago that it was taken out of the church to William Drakes for safekeeping until such time as funds became available for a historic restoration. I believe at the time it was built it was the biggest organ in the UK, and the plan is to restore it to its original specification:
http://www.christchurchspitalfields.org/v2/history/organ/restoration/stoplist.shtml
though I do wonder whether they will end up needing two organs (or even a digital) for services and most recitals since most of the repertoire will be unplayable on an organ with no pedalboard even if it does have three manuals.
If it is ever to go back (and I am assured it never will), I see no reason to return it to its original spec. Absolutely daft. As it was last played, its specification gave you pretty much everything you could want: just leave it like that (with the Cornets reinstated). Ideologically-driven strict restorations like these do no favours to anyone. I respect Drake for the quality of his work (he could teach some other quite established organ-builders a thing or two) but I think he's on the wrong track with this one. At the very least, the Pedal department must be retained.
At any rate, the authorities which own the church (which hasn't been used for services for decades) have made it clear since Drake removed the organ about ten years ago that they have no interest in seeing it returned. Despite the rather nebulous suggestion that it would eventually be restored (the website says exactly what it did in 2002), it won't happen, it will never speak again, it has effectively ceased to exist. It's just a collection of scrap pipework in a shed in south Devon. I hope someone buys the pipework off Drake and builds something decent around it.
Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on February 29, 2012, 12:19:21 AM
I thought you once said you had (prior to the restoration)? ...
Not this instrument. I have never claimed to have played this one.
Hi
The latest info on NPOR reads:- "2011 - restoration started by William Drake, case to be restored and organ
returned to original Bridge specification; completion due 2013;" The source of the info is Choir & Organ magazine, Jan/Feb 2012, so maybe it will happen.
Every Blessing
Tony
I won't be holding my breath. This project has been on the verge of starting for over a decade. Taking out all the 19th century pipework from the organ and putting back those unsightly side-galleries which wreck the acoustic - what are these people thinking? This organ was once described to me as having a wonderful cathedral roll to it - clearly this is no more! What a desperately sad lost opportunity.
Contrary to what has been suggested earlier, Christ Church Spitalfields is still an active church (or a revitalised one), although it is true that the Diocese wanted to close (and possibly demolish) it years ago.
http://www.ccspitalfields.org
There's a well-produced website also for the Friends of the church
http://www.christchurchspitalfields.org
If the inside of the church is to be fully restored, there would be no point putting the organ back until that is done. Under such circumstances, it would be safer in store.
Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on February 29, 2012, 12:19:21 AM
I thought you once said you had (prior to the restoration)?
Again, no.
Christ Church Spitalfields.
'This organ was once described to me as having a wonderful cathedral roll to it - clearly this is no more! What a desperately sad lost opportunity.'
Well, your informant must have been pretty old! I don't think the organ has been playable since about 1950.
Incidentally, for those who might not have been there recently, the interior has been completely restored for a couple of years now, with the galleries re-introduced, and I can assure you from personal experience that the acoustics are great.
The informant was a gentleman of very advanced years whom I met at a recital in Westminster Abbey some years ago. I know not who he was, but overheard and became involved in a conversation with him.
I was aware that the interior had been finished some time ago, having followed its progress with keen interest. However, I have been in a number of churches with such side-galleries, which have without exception had the most unimaginably abysmal acoustics: I have not been in CCS but, on my experience so far, felt I had little reason to hope that they would fail to wreck the acoustic. Unless they are used regularly, given the opportunity I'd do what the Victorians quite rightly did and tear them down again. Every church I've known that's had them has wanted rid of them because they're an expensive Health & Safety nightmare...
Every church I've known that's had them has wanted rid of them because they're an expensive Health & Safety nightmare...
[/quote]
I am sure these factors will have been given the utmost consideration by the people carrying out the restoration work.
Barrie
I don't think galleries are necessarily a killer acoustically. Other things like carpets, upholstery, soft stone and wood roofs are more likely to have this effect. Two galleried churches which come to mind as having excellent acoustics are St. Botolph's, Colchester and the Cathedrale de Saint-Pierre (an island just off the coast of Newfoundland - a French colony, it has 6,000 inhabitants, one church - a cathedral - no supermarkets or fast-food joints but five patisseries). Both have plaster barrel vaults, which are good for sound, and the St-Pierre organ (a Casavant rebuilt of a Mutin with 14ss) is in the west gallery. Some of the City of London churches have pretty good acoustics, if they're not so rich as to have been over-cushioned. In the case of CCS, I would guess that the size of the place would negate any adverse effect from the galleries and, if Hawksmoor intended them, they should be there (I don't know if he did - I read once that Wren didn't intend galleries in St. Bride's, which was one reason why they weren't replaced after the Blitz).
Quote from: Barrie Davis on February 27, 2012, 02:20:39 PM
Hi
Can I commend the latest issue of the magazine to members of the Board, it covers the new Drake organ in the OBE Chapel at St Pauls and also the Mander rebuild of Sacred Heart Wimbledon amongst other interesting articles. The magazine has developed well under its new Editorship, long may this continue.
Barrie
It is indeed interesting - although the standard of proof-reading appears to have slipped somewhat. In addition to various other errors, Carol Williams' article could have done with careful revision. Apart from at least two places where what was written made no sense at all, there was an obviously incorrect word ('exuberant', in context should surely read 'exorbitant').
It is a pity that such easily remedied mistakes were allowed to mar what is otherwise a worthwhile journal.
However, for its centenary, I for onw would welcome all four editions being produced in the original format - including monochrome plates only.
Quote from: Barrie Davis on February 27, 2012, 02:20:39 PM
Hi
Can I commend the latest issue of the magazine to members of the Board, it covers the new Drake organ in the OBE Chapel at St Pauls and also the Mander rebuild of Sacred Heart Wimbledon amongst other interesting articles. The magazine has developed well under its new Editorship, long may this continue.
Barrie
It is indeed interesting - although the standard of proof-reading appears to have slipped somewhat. In addition to various other errors, Carol Williams' article in particular could have done with careful revision. There were at least two places where the writing was so clumsy (including possible omitted words) that the intended meaning was immured in obfuscation; in addition, there was an obviously incorrect word ('exuberant', in context should surely read 'exorbitant').
It is a pity that such easily remedied mistakes were allowed to mar what is otherwise a worthwhile journal.
However, for its centenary, I for one would welcome all four editions being produced in the original format - including monochrome plates only.
Hi
I certainly wouldn't want the original format back - it would make shelving them difficult amidst the past several years that have been A4 - and anyway, the original covers were easily damaged!
Every Blessing
Tony
Quote from: revtonynewnham on March 03, 2012, 04:51:29 PM
Hi
I certainly wouldn't want the original format back - it would make shelving them difficult amidst the past several years that have been A4 - and anyway, the original covers were easily damaged!
Every Blessing
Tony
As I wrote, Tony - just four editions for the centenary year - not 'back' as in permanently.
Hi
Even so, they'd look odd on the shelves! It's bad enough having a mix of bound volumes and separate issues, as I have.
Every Blessing
Tony
Quote from: revtonynewnham on March 04, 2012, 02:58:34 PM
Hi
Even so, they'd look odd on the shelves! It's bad enough having a mix of bound volumes and separate issues, as I have.
Every Blessing
Tony
Well, possibly - but I also have a mixture of bound volumes and many single editions. Given that they are a similar size, this aspect has never bothered me.
However, I do have a fondness for the old format, with its (generally) clear monochrome plates - particularly if they were of organ consoles and taken by Gilbert Benham.
I wonder who the greatest ever photographer of organs was/is?
My nomination would be the late C.R.A. "Tony" Davies, whom Harrisons used for all their publicity photographs (in the UK at least). His photographs of the new St David's Cathedral organ (and also of the Schulze at Armley, especially its fabulous console) are nothing short of masterly. To achieve such utter clarity and focus at all points of a very three-dimensional subject and produce an image of such warmth is surely the mark of a true master. I wish I could have had photography lessons with him.
Quote from: David Drinkell on March 03, 2012, 01:23:39 AM
I don't think galleries are necessarily a killer acoustically. Other things like carpets, upholstery, soft stone and wood roofs are more likely to have this effect. Two galleried churches which come to mind as having excellent acoustics are St. Botolph's, Colchester and the Cathedrale de Saint-Pierre (an island just off the coast of Newfoundland - a French colony, it has 6,000 inhabitants, one church - a cathedral - no supermarkets or fast-food joints but five patisseries). Both have plaster barrel vaults, which are good for sound, and the St-Pierre organ (a Casavant rebuilt of a Mutin with 14ss) is in the west gallery. Some of the City of London churches have pretty good acoustics, if they're not so rich as to have been over-cushioned. In the case of CCS, I would guess that the size of the place would negate any adverse effect from the galleries and, if Hawksmoor intended them, they should be there (I don't know if he did - I read once that Wren didn't intend galleries in St. Bride's, which was one reason why they weren't replaced after the Blitz).
quote author=AnOrganCornucopia link=topic=1260.msg5730#msg5730 date=1330653232]
I was aware that the interior had been finished some time ago, having followed its progress with keen interest. However, I have been in a number of churches with such side-galleries, which have without exception had the most unimaginably abysmal acoustics: I have not been in CCS but, on my experience so far, felt I had little reason to hope that they would fail to wreck the acoustic. Unless they are used regularly, given the opportunity I'd do what the Victorians quite rightly did and tear them down again. Every church I've known that's had them has wanted rid of them because they're an expensive Health & Safety nightmare...
Well, I'm with David here. I've seen many churches whose acoustics have been ruined by carpet, and some which have been rendered unexpectedly dead by soft brick or complex wooden roofs. Not to mention acoustic tile, in North America.
I have yet to see one where old galleries appear to make things worse, though perhaps somewhere really small, with a large number of galleries, might fit the bill. Whitby, for instance, or that church in the New Forest.
But we can surely all think of galleried churches with brilliant acoustics: Thomaskirche, Leipzig? That big church in Wolfenbuttel? St George's, Hanover Square? St James, Piccadilly? St Mary's, Wanstead? Any number of little churches in Westfalia and Thuringia and Holland (Meppel), full of wood? St Leonard, Shoreditch? - where the side galleries have happily been put back recently.