Minimum specification of small organ

[David Drinkell]

The thing that tends to annoy me most about small extension organs is that one nearly always gets all the diapason stuff on the Great and then a flute chorus up to Nazard and Piccolo on the 'Swell'.  There's nothing much to balance the principal chorus, or to provide a firm lead in hymns.

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=C00362

Quite a nice one, the above, in a decent acoustic and decent case.  But it's dififcult to think of much use for that Swell.

Worse if the diapason is unenclosed and too loud to use with anything else:

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D01379

(particularly filthy tierce mixture extended from the salicional on the above, and also a nicely made 16' stopped bass whcih was far too quiet to be of any use.)

Even the Compton Miniatura IIa erred in this way - the 'Swell' had the Diapason at 8' and the Flute at 8.4.2. - although the vocing was classy enough to allow things which shouldn't normally work.

The little three rank (plus tierce) Mander which started off in Coventry Cathedral later spent some years in St. Anne & St. Agnes, Gresham Street, City of London.  The organist at the time (Simon Lindley, so that's dating things a bit) gave me the run of it on a number of occasions and I thought it was an extremely effective job. The secret was that there wasn't much difference in volume between the ranks, so most combinations worked.

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D03173

Comber Parish Church, Co. Down, had a very nice Miniatura and could afford a little more than was necessary to have it restored (after 45 years, the Compton electrics were getting just a little tired).  I suggested that they add a Gemshorn rank.  Philip Prosser went one better.  He provided (after quoting for the job and at no extra cost) a Twelfth to tenor C (borrowing the bass from the Gemshorn) and used it to provide the quints in a three rank mixture.  Freed from the constraints which Compton faced (the economic electrical scheme limited the number of registers possible - solid state has changed that), the second manual was developed as a good secondary department, almost a Positive.  It looks slightly odd because it has three 2' stops (!) - the Fifteenth and Gemshorn were the logical provision in the new scheme, but the Piccolo was there in Compton's scheme and it seemed wrong to lose it.  It really is a very clever little organ.....

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D08245

[Ian van Deurne]

The organs of Charles Brindley of Sheffield deserve to be included in a list of the best English organ builders of the 19th/early 20th century. I believe he also received a great many commissions for instruments in Australia and New Zealand
In line with this thread, here then is the specification of one of his small instruments which stands in virtually original condition
in St Peter's Church in Hascome, Surrey, England;

GREAT

Open Diapason 8
Stopped Diapason 8
Dulciana 8
Principal 4
Lieblich Flote 4


SWELL

Stopped Diapason 16
Open Diapason 8
Vox Angelica 8
Principal 4
Mixture II 
Oboe 8


PEDAL

Bourdon 16


COUPLERS

Great to Pedal
Swell to Pedal
Swell to Great

Compass:  C - e'  (29-Pedal)  C - g'''  (56-Manuals)


The Gt Std. Diapason and Dulciana share a common bass, otherwise there are no extentions or tramsmissions
The Vox Angelica is not tuned to beat with the Open Diapason and is of a far too smaller scale to do so anyway
It may also be the only tonal alteration to the instrument since it was first built, the writing on the engraved stop knobs is slightly different to the others. It is, however, a very early alteration if  it actually is one.

The church was built in 1864 and the organ in 1869 and as said, is in remarkable original condition,
including the retention of the original narrow and straight pedalboard.

Musically, there are some problems with balance between both manuals, since the Great soundboards are in their own case, suspended on the north choir wall above the player while the Swell is behind, buried behind the wall.
It was last restored in the early 1990's by the organ builder, Saxon Aldread.

I hope this is of interest - with best wishes, Ian.

[MusingMuso]

I'm glad that someone else appreciates the work of Charles Brindley, and I'm sure it is fairly common knowledge that he was not only apprencticed to Schulze in Germany, but assisted Schulze in the building and re-building of the great Schulze organs at Armley and Doncaster; even to the extent that he did some of the voicing.

I shall repeat something I mentioned on another forum, which concerns the loss of one of the truly great northern organs, built by Brindley & Foster, in what was the complete, (rather than divided) Centenary Methodist Church, Dewsbury, W Yorks.

The Great organ was a virtual copy of the Great Organ at St Bart's, Armley, and to hear it ring around the chapel was to hear something very special indeed, and by the hand of an English builder who had clearly learned how to produce the "canned lightning" effect of Schulze.

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=N04839

Not many Brindley organ survive from this period, but a few do, and they are remarkable for their boldness and clarity.

What a tragedy that these Anglo-German organs fell out of fashion, and were often re-built beyond recognition or more often, scrapped altogether.

MM

[AnOrganCornucopia]

Interesting to hear Hascombe (near Godalming) mentioned - I was in there not very long ago. I recall that the Mixture II replaced a string a few years ago (there was originally an undulating pair) and also the Swell Stopped Diapason is at 8ft pitch, not 16ft. I haven't heard the organ but I wonder what use a mixture is in such a small church (although I don't know if undulating strings would work either).

EDIT: I have a feeling my memory may be playing tricks on me - I was pretty sure the Vox Angelica had gone, and that its place had been taken by a Sesquialtera 12.17. - which would make the Swell spec OD8, SD8, Pr.4, Mx II, Sesq. II, Oboe 8'. I don't know what mr van Deurne's connection with Hascombe is, but if he is often there, I for one would appreciate an up-to-date spec.

The church is well worth visiting - it's in one of the most beautiful parts of Southern England (lots of wonderful walking country and good pubs) and the church itself is a gem - it's by Henry Woodyer and it's a remarkably rich little Tractarian church - unaisled nave, apsidal chancel, plus side chapel off the chancel (not a transept, its roof runs E-W). It replaced a much-abused medieval church and is, side chapel apart, built on the original foundations. The chancel is completely covered in wall paintings and there's a stunning rood screen. Plenty of fine stained glass, too. Simon Jenkins' Thousand Best Churches claims that Surrey is short of good Victorian churches (though I think this one did make it in), but nothing could be further from the truth. If you want to do a church/organ/pub crawl, it's an excellent place to do it.

[pcnd5584]

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

Although in the case of Brindley, they also displayed a somewhat persistent attitude with their patent combination action the 'Brindgradus' system - which apparently did not win many adherents, for a variety of reasons.

With regard to Compton - yes, they could produce good instruments. However, the quality of their voicing was not always in the top rank. For example, some quiet orchestral reeds, which were neither particularly beauitful - nor regulated consistently.

[AnOrganCornucopia]

I seem to recall someone (MM?) saying that, at least in the world of theatre organs, M. P. Moller took all that was good about Compton and allied it to absolutely top-class voicing. At that time, Moller was under the control of Richard Oliver Whitelegg, an ex-Willis man (like G. Donald Harrison, like Harry Willis) who had been responsible for the tonal aspects of the Willis III rebuild at Salisbury, at which point I believe the Solo strings which PCND adores were added. Moller's church organs of the Whitelegg era are just fabulous.

[MusingMuso]

I think you have to differentiate between the set-combinations drawstops and the associated "red-cross" cancel, and the "Brindgradus," which was effectively a swell-pedal style crescendo, but very similar in operation to the German rollschweller.

There is no doubt that Brindley & Foster took pneumatic actions to the n'th degree, but they were reliable enough. The problems arose when the time came to re-build them.

Interestingly, not only did John Compton work for the company prior to setting up on his own, so too did Reginald Whitworth, who tried to persuade Brindley the 2nd and possibly Foster, to use electro-pneumatic actions.

The change in fashion was rapid, and with terraced dynamics in addition to penumatic action, B & F were very quickly left high and dry: effectively on the rocks financially around 1920, (no doubt struggling to find skilled tradesmen after WW1). They staggered on for awhile, but the end was inevitable really.

Quite close to me is a still functioning "Brindgradus" organ by B & F, and the last time I played it for wedding, it was in fine voice and with everything still working.

MM

[David Pinnegar]

Dear MM

Please excuse my ignorance but possibly I'm not the only person who might not know what is meant by "terraced dynamics" . . . please could you explain?

By the way, you quite lost me on your Agnostics Line post which clearly needs more than a minute or two to fathom . . . I'll comment appropriately there in due course when time graces one with its privilege . . .

Best wishes

David P

[David Drinkell]

I think I read once that, towards the end, Brindley and Foster and Abbott and Smth shared the same workshop and staff.  Their organs seem to be more territorial than those of Abbott and Smith.  There are very few in my old stamping ground of East Anglia.  The only one I know of in Norfolk was at Winterton, was fairly nasty and was removed some years ago.

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=N06787


  In Suffolk, the rather quirky four-manual at Kirkley, Lowestoft, was mostly Brindley, enlarged by N&B and restored by Boggis of Diss.

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D05333

Carlton Colville looks to be a nice instrument, visually and tonally (if the present spec is original).  I don't know it personally.  Carlton Colville is quite near Kirkley, so there may ahve been a connection.

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=D05333

It seems to be the case that the older jobs were better, and those with tracker action have survived.

Since it hasn't appeared in this forum and isn't in NPOR, here is the 1860 Brindley (contemporary with the building) in Kilmore Cathedral (Church of Ireland), Co. Cavan:

Great: Double Diapason (st.) 16, Open Diapason, Rohr Flute. Gamba (gr. to Open), Principal, Twelfth and Fifteenth II, Mixture IV, Trumpet.
Swell: Violin Diapason, Gedact, Octave, Mixture II, Cornopean, Oboe
Choir: Lieblich Gedact, Dulciana, Gemshorn, Flute, Clarinet (F18)
Pedal: Bourdon, Bass Flute
Couplers: Swell to Great, Great to Pedal
3 comps to Great, 2 to Swell
Compass: 56/30
All Swell stops terminate at tenor C, below which the Swell is coupled to the Choir

The organ has a good open site against the east wall of the north transept.  It looks vaguely Germanic, with a massively pedimented case with flat-back dummies (French mouths - the only time I recall seeing them on flat-backs) on the front and side.  Inside, the pipes are on chromatic soundboards.  There are only two couplers, so the tracker action is simple.  The console doors swing open on massive brass hinges to reveal parallel jambs, round-fronted sharps, widely-spaced drawstops and brass candle-holders.  Tonally, the Great chorus is a terrific roar.  The other departments are a good deal less commanding, but not so much as to be insignificant.  Altogether, this is a fine and omportant instrument in virtually original condition (c&r pedals and a balanced swell pedal in 1960), which has served since the church opened.

[revtonynewnham]

Dear MM

Please excuse my ignorance but possibly I'm not the only person who might not know what is meant by "terraced dynamics" . . . please could you explain?


Best wishes

David P

Hi

Terraced dynamics in organ terms is a build up in steps by adding stops (as on a stop crescendo with a limited number of steps) as opposed to the smooth build-up of a swell box, and manipulating it to coverr the addition of stops in big crescendos.

Baroque music is sometimes said to amply terraced dynamics.

Every Blessing

Tony

[MusingMuso]

Tony is right, but my undertsanding and use of the term is slightly different, if substantially the same. (This doesn't mean that I may be using the term incorrectly).

If we had a Schulze organ handy, it would be easy to demonstrate, but basically, the Great Organ is totally dominant and usually very loud. (Also a feature of Arthur Harrison organs). The Swell organ is next in loudness, but quite underpowered as compared with, (for example), a Fr.Willis organ. The Choir Organ would often be to the rear of the instrument and voiced quietly, and at Armley, the fourth Echo manual was originally buried beaneth and behind the Great and Swell, with the effect that it was extremely delicate if not almost unaudible.

This was typical of the earlier German romantic organs built by Schulze and others, and what it means in practical terms is what Tony states: that of vivid tonal dynamic contrasts, but with little build-up assisted by an assertive Swell organ in a good box.

In fact, playing Reger is almost an impossibility on a Schulze organ, which takes many by surprise.

In essence, the Schulze amd Brindley style was soon out of date, as music became ever more expressive.

So to recap, it is my use of the term which translates as Great ff, Swell mf and Choir pp, with very little swell expression being possible in such a way that it permits a gradual build-up of power.

I hope that makes sense, but if anyone knows a diferent term other than "terraced dynamics," I would be happily corrected.

MM

[AnOrganCornucopia]

So, as MM has experience of these organs, what would one play on them? The Great would be too big for Baroque repertoire, but the other departments lacking power for most other repertoire?

[pcnd5584]

Tony is right, but my undertsanding and use of the term is slightly different, if substantially the same. (This doesn't mean that I may be using the term incorrectly).

If we had a Schulze organ handy, it would be easy to demonstrate, but basically, the Great Organ is totally dominant and usually very loud. (Also a feature of Arthur Harrison organs). The Swell organ is next in loudness, but quite underpowered as compared with, (for example), a Fr.Willis organ. The Choir Organ would often be to the rear of the instrument and voiced quietly, and at Armley, the fourth Echo manual was originally buried beaneth and behind the Great and Swell, with the effect that it was extremely delicate if not almost unaudible.

This was typical of the earlier German romantic organs built by Schulze and others, and what it means in practical terms is what Tony states: that of vivid tonal dynamic contrasts, but with little build-up assisted by an assertive Swell organ in a good box.

In fact, playing Reger is almost an impossibility on a Schulze organ, which takes many by surprise.

In essence, the Schulze amd Brindley style was soon out of date, as music became ever more expressive.

So to recap, it is my use of the term which translates as Great ff, Swell mf and Choir pp, with very little swell expression being possible in such a way that it permits a gradual build-up of power.

I hope that makes sense, but if anyone knows a diferent term other than "terraced dynamics," I would be happily corrected.

MM

This is also my inderstanding of the term, as it relates to the pipe organ. Perhaps an even clearer example would be the average four-clavier (or even three-clavier) Cavaillé-Coll instrument.

[Gwas_Bach]

Simples... http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=P00563

There simply never has been a 16-stop organ that versatile before. It does pretty much everything convincingly. Now, it just needs an acoustic to speak into...

This must surely give the St-Martin a run for its money in terms of 'bang for your buck'...

http://www.npor.org.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=N01725

[AnOrganCornucopia]

Hmm, quite possibly!

[AnOrganCornucopia]

Basically, the Great Organ is totally dominant and usually very loud (this is a feature of Arthur Harrison organs). The Swell organ is next in loudness, but quite underpowered as compared with a Fr.Willis organ.

Erm, that certainly wasn't the case at Worcester, nor is it at St Mary Redcliffe - nor, in fact, with any Arthur Harrison organ I've ever encountered.

[MusingMuso]

Ah!  You've found a hole in my statement, and quite rightly.

My choice of the word "dominant" was ill-judged, and it isn't what I meant.

Now slope off to your nearest big Arthur Harrison organ and play the Swell flues to Mixture. Then compare that with the Great chorus without couplers.

In terms of phonic output, the difference is huge, but of course, it is the Swell reeds which re-dress the balance.

Having lived with the organ of Halifax PC for some time, I know from experience that the TYPE of sound is just as important as the sheer VOLUME of sound, and of course, the Swell organs on big Arthur Harrison organs are very bright. It's a sound which carries well and projects well.

However,a couple of years ago or so, I slipped into the back of Halifax PC for the end of the carol service, and during the final hymn, Philip Tordoff added the Open no.1 and Octave 4ft, (both on higher pressure). At the back of the church, the effect was immense: a great flood of Diapason tone washing down this very large church. The Swell, meanwhile, was still there, with the bright quint mixture and the reeds pealing through the foundational tones.

However, you really do need to isolate those big Diapasons from the rest, and just play on them alone. They are a very big sound indeed, and this is what I actually meant.

Psychologically, our perception of brightness is not the same as our perception of outright foundational power; the former often sounding "balanced" when it may be considerably less powerful.

MM

[AnOrganCornucopia]

I hope you don't mind but I've expanded my quote of your words to make it a little clearer to what I refer (though it seems you understood anyway!).

[pcnd5584]

Basically, the Great Organ is totally dominant and usually very loud (this is a feature of Arthur Harrison organs). The Swell organ is next in loudness, but quite underpowered as compared with a Fr.Willis organ.

Erm, that certainly wasn't the case at Worcester, nor is it at St Mary Redcliffe - nor, in fact, with any Arthur Harrison organ I've ever encountered.

Actually I would have said that the obvious meaning of MM's quote is a true and accurate picture.

You are certainly incorrect regarding Worcester. I played the old organ for a number of services and I can assure you that the G.O. was indeed very loud - with the Swell and Choir very much secondary divisions. And this has been my experience with the other H&H instruments which I have played - although I cannot speak for Redcliffe, since this is one which I have not played.

This is why, in some ways, an instrument by FHW is better for playing Bach, since there is a better chance of finding a reasonably strong secondary chorus - albeit with tierce mixtures.

[MusingMuso]

So, as MM has experience of these organs, what would one play on them? The Great would be too big for Baroque repertoire, but the other departments lacking power for most other repertoire?

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

I missed this reply on the day.

The "German System" in English organs is always associated with William Hill and Dr Gauntlett, but actually, the "German Style" of Schulze was a bit different, and was the style more or less copied by Brindleyespecially, and others less faithfully.

As regards repertoire, experience shows that the Schulze style fits the music of Liszt, Reubke and Rheinberger especially. Indeed, Graham Barber recorded the Reubke at Armley, which is available on a magnificent CD. I would also suggest Mendelssohn and music written for mid-Victorian organs ; perhaps some of the early romantic English repertoire. I've heard a very good Cesar Franck "Piece Heroique" at Armley, and even pieces such as the Dubois and Mushel Toccata, for instance.

Actually, Bach works very well at both Doncaster and Arnley, so you can be assured that it works equaly well with any of the other named builders; especially since Binns never voiced over-loud on the Great, and the dynamic change between Great & Swell is not as marked. The loudness of Armley and Doncaster is tempered by the fact that they are enormous buildings.

Hope this explains.

Best,

MM