Organ matters - Organs matter!

Hi

Whilst I agree that the Dome Willis looked to be a good instrument - and there's a mystery over its fate - it seems to just disappear when the HNB/Christie hybrid was put it, I wouldn't be so harsh about the HNB job.  Certainly, in the right hands it was (& is) an effective instrument.  The onlt big issue I would have is the mixing of classical & theatre organ stops within each department. I would have thought that a dual console arrangement like the Southampton Guildhall Compton would have been a better choice - or at least having the more TPO stops in a separate block on each manual, but then, I've never played it (but have heard it several times in the late 1950's/1960's). 

It's an organ designed and built to do a particular job, and does it pretty well.  I doubt that the Willis would have coped adequately with the lighter repertoire that it's called on to play.  Maybe another option would have been to restore the Willis and put in a seperate "entertainment" organ - but it's too late now.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Why on earth didn't they design the new building with space for the organ?  Or is there something about the design/tonal finishing that he's not saying?  I note that no organ builder is credited.

Every Blessing
Tony

Hi

Another interesting topic!

We do need, however, to make a distinction between producing music (i.e. generating an appropriate sound filed in a given room for an electronic organ) and REproducing music, where the aim is to reflect (or sometimes improve) on a live performance. 

In the case of designing a room for reproduction, then acoustics need to be on the dead side, so that they do not overwhelm the acoustic on the recording, whilst in the sound production area, the room acoustics generally need to be somewhat liver and the distribution of reflections, etc will have a significant effect on the final sound.  Artificial reverberation also attempts this trick.

As to speaker, flat panels are not a new development as such - Quad electrostatic speakers are of the flat panel genre, and have been around for over 50 years - and they make a very good sound, albeit somewhat bass light and with limited power handling capability. I have heard one of the panels described above - but only on a stand in a busy exhibition, so I can't really comment on how effective it is (or isn't).  Again experiments have been going on in this area, using electro-magnetic drivers, for a number of years.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Good news.  Are the 12th & 15th in the treble or bass?  If they're in the treble, then there's good precedent - especially on single manual organs, as it allows solo and accompaniment work.

What system are you considering for the electronics? Whatever you choose, it will need to have an accessible tuning control to adjust to the pipes, which will shift in pitch with changes of temperature - and no "automatic" system is 100% accurate.

There have been a few hybrid organs over the years - even Compton built one, and one organ builder offered hybrid organs as a standard range.  In recent years, the improvements in digital technology have made it an ever more feasible option where there isn't space for real pipes.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

And the use of the Hydraulos at Roman Gladiatorial games (Christian v. Lions etc) was one of the reasons that the church were relatively slow in adopting the organ for use in worship (i.e. a few hundred years).  (I know that other factors were involved).

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

I enjoy playing theatre organ when I get the chance, and also listening to the better players.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

re the clefs, the Barrenreiter Bach edition shows miniature clefs to indicate those used by Bach - maybe it's something like that?

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

The L122 may be worth putting on E-bay - it has most of the typical Hammond characteristics and with a Leslie may generate enough interest to make it worthwhile.  It seems to me that, in the UK at least, it's only vintage Hammonds that are making any money.  I'd love to have both - but I really don't have the space (but I suppose I could store one of my other keyboards) or cash.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Interesting demonstration.  Obviously, the results for those of us listening on home computers will be compromised because what we're hearing will be modified by the speaker & room characteristics - and where 2 sound sources are used, the sound we hear is electronically mixed by David's camcorder mics.

That said, I could hear most of the beats, and on some demos, there was a noticeable difference between single and dual source (although as was pointed out, some of this is down to the relative distance of the speakers used from the mic).

I suspect though that the real differences will not show up until a significant number of notes & stops are drawn - and that's going to very difficult to demonstrate.  It's well known that the softer stops on electronic organs work well and (usually) sound good, but that things fall apart with larger combinations, and empirically, multiple loudspeakers and hence acoustic mixing of sounds does make an improvement - I guess partly because the inevitable intermodulation distortions of a typical moving coil loudspeaker attempting to follow a complex waveform are much reduced, as each speaker has less work to do.  Potentially also any intermodulation distortion in the amplifiers will have less effect.  Conversly, because the sounds are now added acoustically, the characteristics of the space will have a greater influence, as early reflections will vary in timing and angle of arrival depending on which speaker(s) are producing the various sounds.

An interesting topic.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

I now have 1.5G on the old Windows XP laptop that I use to run the organ sims.  (Recently increased from 750M when the old hard drive failed).  That will run reasonable 2m sets in "My Organ" easily, but Grande Orgue & HW Free are on the edge with sets that "My Organ" runs absolutely smoothly - to the extent that I used it - pre update - for a live performance last year.  The computer also runs the 2m MidiTzer with no problems - but that ran on 250Mb - albeit with significant latency.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

I've not seen any way of doing this so far.  There was an unequal temperament utility with a Harpsichord sample set (?Sigsoft or similar - it's on another computer that's not currently running) but I didn't get a chance to try it before the hard drive failed.  I doubt that it could be done easily unless the original samples were in the relevant temperament - or possibly each note of each could be detuned by the relevant amount - don't know if that's possible, and it would be very time consuming.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Glad to be of help.  I'm sticking with "my Organ" for now, as it seems to be less computer resource hungry than Grande Orgue.  To my mind, one of the big problems with Hauptwerk is that it requires a pretty powerful computer, which adds to the cost.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Interesting - but very much a theatre-style organ, regardless of how they try to say otherwise.  The use of unit chests and extended/duplexed ranks - and to an extent, tracker action, means that the true classical organ repertoire is compromised to some degree.  Given the designer and the builder, I would guess that the tonal design is influenced heavily by Audsley, so what we have is a large romantic organ with distinct TPO leanings (and the choice of Jellani Eddington to record it indicates the same).

Nothing wrong with the organ per se - but I do wish people wouldn't try to pretend that ANY organ is equally suited to playing the whole of the repertoire, transcriptions, etc.  This organ is good at what it does, but no way can it have all the sounds needed to play the whole repertoire in a historically-correct way (nor can it be tuned to the various temperaments needed practically).

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Yes, operating the switches several times may well sort out most of the problems.  I generally use an aerosol cleaner - but that's only been on electronics (although if you're using transistor switches, the currents involved are much the same. Well designed switches have a "wiping" action where the moving wire slides over the fixed one, so to some extent should be self-cleaning.

Every Blessing

Tony

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

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

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.)

Hi

There is a free version of Hauptwerk currently available - restricted facilities, but it should run the St Anne's sample set.  You mat need to download the latest version, which on start up has the options of demo or free versions.  I have it, but have yet to get it properly configured.  Alternatively, if you can manage with Hauptwerk 1 sample sets (there are still a few around), then why not take a look at "Grande Orgue" (http://www.exedra.hu/grandorgue/).  It's open source software which seems to be very similar to "My Organ" (which I still have, but which currently is unavailable - I suspect due to commercial pressure).  Grand Orgue seems to be a little more resource hungry than My organ, and again, AFAIK, is limited to HW1 sample sets.  I hear rumours of an open source equivalent to Hauptwerk, but I've not seen anything concrete yet. 

Another possible system is JOrgan (uses Java as it's basic operating system).  I hear that it's good, but requires some degree of computer literacy - I've not tried it, but there is expertise in these areas in Electronic Organ Constructors' Society.  The third relatively easy option is MidiTzer - a theatre organ simulator (which does a fair job of classical sounds with careful registration).

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

Beyond my means unfortunately.  Why not ask Ahlborn, or their UK agents, if voicing changes are possible?  These are nice units.

Every Blessing

Tony

Hi

The organ is on NPOR  - http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D08090  Hint - only put the minimum search terms in for an NPOR address search - I used "Bartholomew Crewkerne" - and make sure you spell the names correctly - computer's don't have the intelligence to spot wrong spellings in database queries!

This is actually quite worrying, as the organ had work done just 6 years ago.  Why the sudden urge to get rid of it?  Maybe there's been a new incumbent who dislikes organs and want's to "modernize" - or church politics at work?

What this (and other churches looking at the same options) need to realise is that, although the electronic might be cheaper initially, and need less maintenance, it will never sound as good as the real thing, nor will it last as long.  They're looking at spending some £30,000.  Being generous and giving the new organ a life of 20 years, that's costing them £1,500 a year, not taking into account inflation, etc.   Try asking the church treasurer to put aside that amount every year and see what response you get!  That's the realitiy of the situation.  The pipe organ, if properly rebuilt, will last a minimum of 50 years before needing major work, and then will go on for at least another 50!  If they can use tracker action, it will last even longer.  The chamber organ here had survived getting on for 200 years and at least 5 changes of location with no evidence of any professional work - certainly, the last 2 moves were done by an amateur, and quite possibly the others were as well.  I wish churches would look at the total cost of ownership, and not just the short-term cost implications.

Every Blessing

Tony