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

Canterbury Cathedral

Started by Barrie Davis, July 17, 2013, 12:20:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

pcnd5584

#20
Quote from: flared_ophicleide on April 29, 2014, 02:36:44 AM
Quote from: flared_ophicleide on April 25, 2014, 10:46:09 PM
If I had to guess, I'd say that the Nave organ would be installed before the Quire organ is reconstructed. But again, I could be wrong. What if they want to base the Nave organ on the reconstructed Quire organ?

... Regarding the Nave....  This could be problematic due to the limited possibilities of placing even a modest 4-manual therein.  I have to say, Dr. Chris Batchelor, Mark Venning, and any others who have final say in a design, have an interesting dilemma to sort out here.

And whatever remains of the 4 million quid, thereafter, can be put toward building maintenance and any outstanding broken items.



I think that it would be virtually impossible to place a pipe organ of any reasonable size in the Nave of Canterbury Cathedral, without ruining the visual aspect of this beautiful building. (Unless, as I already suggested, an instrument was suspended from the Nave vault.)

Perhaps concentrating on the instrument in the Quire, and making this as good as possible might be one solution. One other possibility is to utilise another of the (fairly shallow) 'shelves' under the windows of the North Nave Aisle, as Mander Organs did for the existing Nave Organ. IF the cathedral authorities would countenance the re-working of the existing case, in order to provide a little more room*, then it might be possible to provide something along the lines of this:

PEDAL ORGAN

Open Diapason  (M; bass on front)  16
Sub Bass  16
Quint  (Derived)  10 2/3
Principal  (M; ext.)  8
Stopped Flute  (W; ext.)  8
Super Octave  (M; ext.) 4
Bombarde  (M) 16
Great to Pedal
Bombarde to Pedal


GREAT ORGAN

Bourdon  (12 from Pedal)  16
Open Diapason  8
Rohr Flute  8
Octave  4
Fifteenth  2
Mixture  (19-22-26-29)  IV
Posaune  8
Sub Octave
Bombarde to Great


BOMBARDE ORGAN

Open Diapason  8
Harmonic Flute  8
Prestant  4
Flauto Traverso  4
Furniture  (15-19-22-26-29-33)  IV
Cornet  (1-8-12-15-17:  G20)  V
Bombarde  (12 from Pedal)  16
Trompette Harmonique  8
Clairon Harmonique  (Ext.)  4
Nave on Quire Clavier I
Nave on Quire Clavier II
Nave Great on Quire clavier II
Nave Bombarde on Quire Clavier IV


Whilst there is more extension and borrowing than is ideal, nevertheless, with good quality voicing and workmanship, such a scheme might provide the answer to the lack of organ tone in the Nave.



* For example, if the case were to be made a couple of feet deeper, with a greater 'waisting-out' at impost level, then this (together with a similar case in the next bay east), would provide room for somewhat greater resources. This would have the attraction of being one solution to loss of floor space. Such a scheme would result in minimal loss of same. Alternatively, a new case could be made, whic spans both bays and has a continuous impost at the front.[./font]
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

flared_ophicleide

Pcnd. With regards to extension and borrowing, the size of the room and its associated acoustic would actually be feasible. To be safe, one could adopt the principles that John Compton used in his work.

With this in mind, I remember reading about how Marcel Dupre remarked that he couldn't tell that Downside Abbey's organ's 90-some stops were derived from just 38 ranks.

Yet it is clear that your 3-division tonal design is largely straight.  This could work and just the Great of which would definitely be adequate for bringing the tone of the main organ out into the Nave.

David Drinkell

I think we need to remember that, overall, the present set-up at Canterbury works rather well, although the Quire organ could do with some added variety in Romantic voices.  The present Nave Organ seems to pull the sound of the Quire organ down into the building and it is not unduly difficult to accompany massed singing in the Nave.  I don't see much advantage in a bigger instrument in a similar position to the present Nave Organ, and a Bombarde division there might be a touch painful for people sitting near to it.

A large west end organ would be musically (and, potentially, visually) stunning, but it might be difficult to argue for it as a liturgical necessity.

Sylvestrina - difficult to describe, because different examples were voiced in various ways, with various harmonics brought out as may have been felt appropriate.  However, a salicional with a very quiet flute to give it substance might come close, or a quiet version of a good Swell gemshorn.  The idea certainly seems to have been based on Skinner's Erzahler, which EMS described as kaleidoscopic.

Side-tracking again to octave couplers (one day I will get round to a proper setting out of why I think a full set is invaluable),  last Sunday I extemporised a little partita on 'O filii et filiae' before the 11:00 Choral Eucharist.  I had one 8' or 4' flute on each manual.  By use of the octave couplers, I could find a distinctive and different registration for each variation - flipping up and down octaves, cancelling unisons, etc.  It's easy to do this with a row of tabs, but difficult with drawstops.  St. James' Cathedral, Toronto is a classic example of how not to do it - every conceivable type of coupler, including Pedal Octave and Unison Off, all done by drawstops, all the drawstops lettered in black.  It's very difficult to see the state of play at any given time and the jambs are very tall (the console is by Walker, the organ by virtually anyone who happened to be passing).

pcnd5584

Quote from: flared_ophicleide on May 01, 2014, 11:49:17 PM
Pcnd. With regards to extension and borrowing, the size of the room and its associated acoustic would actually be feasible. To be safe, one could adopt the principles that John Compton used in his work.

With this in mind, I remember reading about how Marcel Dupre remarked that he couldn't tell that Downside Abbey's organ's 90-some stops were derived from just 38 ranks.

Yet it is clear that your 3-division tonal design is largely straight.  This could work and just the Great of which would definitely be adequate for bringing the tone of the main organ out into the Nave.

To be honest, I am not a particular fan of either manual extension or the work of John Compton (and, yes, I have played several of his instruments, including one quite large extension instrument in original condition). However, in this case, I decided, on grounds of space, to include a small amount of extension on ranks which would be less noticeable.

Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

pcnd5584

#24
Quote from: David Drinkell on May 02, 2014, 05:33:31 PM
I think we need to remember that, overall, the present set-up at Canterbury works rather well, although the Quire organ could do with some added variety in Romantic voices.  The present Nave Organ seems to pull the sound of the Quire organ down into the building and it is not unduly difficult to accompany massed singing in the Nave.  I don't see much advantage in a bigger instrument in a similar position to the present Nave Organ, and a Bombarde division there might be a touch painful for people sitting near to it.

A large west end organ would be musically (and, potentially, visually) stunning, but it might be difficult to argue for it as a liturgical necessity.

Yet it is possible that one or more of the cathedral musicians thinks that a Nave organ is worth considering. I must admit that I thought that the effect of the Quire organ in the Nave at Canterbury was rather like that at Chichester. To a small extent, the Nave organ does help to project the main organ into the Nave. However, once the upper-work (particularly the Mixture) is out, then the Quire organ fades into the background.

With regard to the Bombarde division, I did not intend that it was voiced in the manner of that at Westminster Abbey. Wind pressures would be moderate, even the reeds would not 'shout', but rather add richness, clarity and body.



Quote from: David Drinkell on May 02, 2014, 05:33:31 PM
Sylvestrina - difficult to describe, because different examples were voiced in various ways, with various harmonics brought out as may have been felt appropriate.  However, a salicional with a very quiet flute to give it substance might come close, or a quiet version of a good Swell gemshorn.  The idea certainly seems to have been based on Skinner's Erzahler, which EMS described as kaleidoscopic.

I am quite surprised at this - reading many of the letters of HWIII (in The American Classic Organ, by Charles Callahan), it soon becomes clear that HWIII had exacting standards for voicing - and that every detail was prescribed and laid down by Willis himself. Of course, the acoustics of a building would have an effect, as would the wind pressures, although these again were often standardised, depending on the size of the building and the specification of the instrument in question.

Quote from: David Drinkell on May 02, 2014, 05:33:31 PM
Side-tracking again to octave couplers (one day I will get round to a proper setting out of why I think a full set is invaluable),  last Sunday I extemporised a little partita on 'O filii et filiae' before the 11:00 Choral Eucharist.  I had one 8' or 4' flute on each manual.  By use of the octave couplers, I could find a distinctive and different registration for each variation - flipping up and down octaves, cancelling unisons, etc.  It's easy to do this with a row of tabs, but difficult with drawstops.  St. James' Cathedral, Toronto is a classic example of how not to do it - every conceivable type of coupler, including Pedal Octave and Unison Off, all done by drawstops, all the drawstops lettered in black.  It's very difficult to see the state of play at any given time and the jambs are very tall (the console is by Walker, the organ by virtually anyone who happened to be passing).

Salisbury Cathedral is similar, although there the unison couplers (as at Truro Cathedral) are lettered in red, whilst the inter-departmental octave couplers are lettered in black. However, I still dislike couplers in a long row. In fact, I detest the look of stop keys, tabs or rocking tablets; I find them aesthetically unpleasant. I should always prefer stop control to be solely by draw-stop. Aside from the fact that in four-clavier organs it tends to push the music desk higher than I find comfortable, I simply do not like searching for the coupler I want in a long line of closely spaced stop-keys.

Whilst I take your point that occasional charming effects may be obtained through the use of octave couplers, surely on an instrument of even moderately large size there is ample tonal variety without resorting to such devices. The only time I have specified a 'full' set of octave couplers, was on the instrument in Saint Aldhelm's, Branksome - II/P 36 - since I felt that, on this smaller instrument, the extra couplers would help to provide some accompanimental flexibility, which would otherwise be curtailed by the size of the instrument.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

David Drinkell

#25
Quote from: pcnd5584 on May 02, 2014, 10:05:11 PM
Quote from: David Drinkell on May 02, 2014, 05:33:31 PM
Sylvestrina - difficult to describe, because different examples were voiced in various ways, with various harmonics brought out as may have been felt appropriate.  However, a salicional with a very quiet flute to give it substance might come close, or a quiet version of a good Swell gemshorn.  The idea certainly seems to have been based on Skinner's Erzahler, which EMS described as kaleidoscopic.

I am quite surprised at this - reading many of the letters of HWIII (in The American Classic Organ, by Charles Callahan), it soon becomes clear that HWIII had exacting standards for voicing - and that every detail was prescribed and laid down by Willis himself. Of course, the acoustics of a building would have an effect, as would the wind pressures, although these again were often standardised, depending on the size of the building and the specification of the instrument in question.

Indeed, HWIII permitted no deviation from his voicing instructions, but he himself observed that the construction of the Sylvestrina permitted a certain amount of latitude in the tone, it being possible to bring out different harmonics as desired.

Quote from: David Drinkell on May 02, 2014, 05:33:31 PM
Side-tracking again to octave couplers (one day I will get round to a proper setting out of why I think a full set is invaluable),  last Sunday I extemporised a little partita on 'O filii et filiae' before the 11:00 Choral Eucharist.  I had one 8' or 4' flute on each manual.  By use of the octave couplers, I could find a distinctive and different registration for each variation - flipping up and down octaves, cancelling unisons, etc.  It's easy to do this with a row of tabs, but difficult with drawstops.  St. James' Cathedral, Toronto is a classic example of how not to do it - every conceivable type of coupler, including Pedal Octave and Unison Off, all done by drawstops, all the drawstops lettered in black.  It's very difficult to see the state of play at any given time and the jambs are very tall (the console is by Walker, the organ by virtually anyone who happened to be passing).

Salisbury Cathedral is similar, although there the unison couplers (as at Truro Cathedral) are lettered in red, whilst the inter-departmental octave couplers are lettered in black. However, I still dislike couplers in a long row. In fact, I detest the look of stop keys, tabs or rocking tablets; I find them aesthetically unpleasant. I should always prefer stop control to be solely by draw-stop. Aside from the fact that in four-clavier organs it tends to push the music desk higher than I find comfortable, I simply do not like searching for the coupler I want in a long line of closely spaced stop-keys.

Whilst I take your point that occasional charming effects may be obtained through the use of octave couplers, surely on an instrument of even moderately large size there is ample tonal variety without resorting to such devices. The only time I have specified a 'full' set of octave couplers, was on the instrument in Saint Aldhelm's, Branksome - II/P 36 - since I felt that, on this smaller instrument, the extra couplers would help to provide some accompanimental flexibility, which would otherwise be curtailed by the size of the instrument.


It's a lot more than occasional charming effects - the possibilities are virtually limitless. Paul Hale has pointed out that, on a Skinner organ, one has a number of different ways of building up, and can then work down by a completely different route.  The couplers are an important and integral part of this.  It's more like orchestration than registration.

I think Willis tablets (similar to those used by Austin) look quite handsome.  The Skinner type, also used by Casavant, are plainer and slightly less easy to handle.  With regard to console height,  the extra height necessitated by a row of tablets is more than compensated for by that saved by not having coupler drawstops on the side jambs.  Hereford, with tabs, is a lot easier to handle than Salisbury (or the old Canterbury console) - providing one is used to the system.  It's more compact, too, as is usual with the Skinner-type console.  Mine has four manuals, 55 drawstops and 34 couplers and I can easily see over the top of it.  The English convention that drawstops should be in double rows tends to make a console taller, but in practice the North American  practice of triple or even quadruple rows is no less easy to manage.

One works with what one has.  I use all 34 couplers regularly, even the more unusual ones.

pcnd5584

Quote from: David Drinkell on May 04, 2014, 12:37:48 AM
It's a lot more than occasional charming effects - the possibilities are virtually limitless. Paul Hale has pointed out that, on a Skinner organ, one has a number of different ways of building up, and can then work down by a completely different route.  The couplers are an important and integral part of this.  It's more like orchestration than registration.

I think Willis tablets (similar to those used by Austin) look quite handsome.  The Skinner type, also used by Casavant, are plainer and slightly less easy to handle.  With regard to console height,  the extra height necessitated by a row of tablets is more than compensated for by that saved by not having coupler drawstops on the side jambs.  Hereford, with tabs, is a lot easier to handle than Salisbury (or the old Canterbury console) - providing one is used to the system.  It's more compact, too, as is usual with the Skinner-type console.  Mine has four manuals, 55 drawstops and 34 couplers and I can easily see over the top of it.  The English convention that drawstops should be in double rows tends to make a console taller, but in practice the North American  practice of triple or even quadruple rows is no less easy to manage.

One works with what one has.  I use all 34 couplers regularly, even the more unusual ones.

Yes - but it is not the height of the draw-stop jambs which pushes up the music desk.

As it happens, I am playing again at Salisbury today, for  a visiting choir. I have never had any difficulty managing the stops on this instrument. The only slightly annoying thing is that the General Cancel also withdraws the piston coupler (which is unusual). This might be fine for some repertoire, but it is a little inconvenient when accompanying a choir.

I much prefer the look of the Salisbury console (and the former one at Canterbury), to that at Hereford - on a large HWIII console with rocking tablets for couplers, the stop jambs often looked squat.


Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

David Drinkell

Quote from: pcnd5584 on May 05, 2014, 08:21:05 AM
Yes - but it is not the height of the draw-stop jambs which pushes up the music desk.[/font]

Ah, but Salisbury or the old Willis III console at Canterbury have a row of generals above the top manual, the music desk being a fair height above that.  It is hardly lower than those at Hereford or Truro.  The couplers make the side jambs inconveniently tall and, although one may reasonably be expected to remember which speaking stops are on, and can check with a quick sideways flick of the eyes, it is handy to have the couplers always in full view in front. 

pcnd5584

#28
Quote from: David Drinkell on May 05, 2014, 03:50:54 PM
Quote from: pcnd5584 on May 05, 2014, 08:21:05 AM
Yes - but it is not the height of the draw-stop jambs which pushes up the music desk.[/font]

Ah, but Salisbury or the old Willis III console at Canterbury have a row of generals above the top manual, the music desk being a fair height above that.  It is hardly lower than those at Hereford or Truro.  The couplers make the side jambs inconveniently tall and, although one may reasonably be expected to remember which speaking stops are on, and can check with a quick sideways flick of the eyes, it is handy to have the couplers always in full view in front.

I would agree with you regarding the general pistons - about the worst place to put them. However, I did notice that at least now the Pedal and G.O. piston coupler and the Generals/Swell foot piston transfer have been disconnected from the General Cancel.

However, I found the height of the jambs to be fine, although I should prefer the stop layout to be more balanced, with three staggered paired columns on each jamb.

I am still not convinced about the couplers. Since the unison inter-clavier couplers are engraved in red at Salisbury, it is comparatively easy to see which are drawn. However, with a long row (of thirty or so, in an instrument of this size), I would find it far harder to tell at a glance which couplers were engaged.

Mind you, those Solo strings are absolutely gorgeous. In addition, the build-up is one of the smoothest I know.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

David Drinkell

Quote from: pcnd5584 on May 06, 2014, 02:10:26 PM
I would agree with you regarding the general pistons - about the worst place to put them. However, I did notice that at least now the Pedal and G.O. piston coupler and the Generals/Swell foot piston transfer have been disconnected from the General Cancel....

....I am still not convinced about the couplers. Since the unison inter-clavier couplers are engraved in red at Salisbury, it is comparatively easy to see which are drawn. However, with a long row (of thirty or so, in an instrument of this size), I would find it far harder to tell at a glance which couplers were engaged.

Mind you, those Solo strings are absolutely gorgeous. In addition, the build-up is one of the smoothest I know.


Yes, a set of Solo strings similar to those at Salisbury would sound wonderful at Canterbury.  I wonder what happened to the old ones.  I agree about the build-up, too - I wonder if the acoustics are helpful here.

Is there a perfect place for General Pistons?  I think, on balance, I prefer them to be on the bass toe pistons with a switch (or rocking tablet in the keyslip) to give either Swell or General.  North American organs usually have them to the left of the swell pedals (some organists from the smaller country south of us, even quite famous ones with rhinestone slippers, do most of their registration with generals and the general crescendo pedal).

A Gt & Ped Combs which goes off on the General Cancel is an awful nuisance, but the stop itself is an oddity, being more often on than off and sometimes left out when the organ is not in use.  Perhaps it would be more logical to have a device to uncouple Great and Pedal combinations, but, again, I think a rocking tablet in the keyslip would be best.  North American organs tend not to have this coupler, but instead a separate set of thumb pistons for the Pedal, situated to the left of the Great pistons and G/P reversible.  This has advantages, but the disadvantage that the inter-manual reversibles have to go to the right of the department pistons, where they are well-nigh useless.

KB7DQH

#30
Changing the subject (we will return your computer to the thread momentarily ;)  What relationship is there between the Royal College of Church Music and Canterbury Cathedral?  Oddly enough events eight time zones West have prompted me to ask :o  Background can be found herehttp://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1848.msg8372.html#msg8372 :o :o :o andhttp://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1853.msg8435/topicseen.html#msg8435

Eric
KB7DQH
The objective is to reach human immortality—that is, to create things which are necessary to mankind, necessary to the purpose of the existence of mankind, and which have become the fruit that drives the creation of a higher state of mankind than ever existed before."

David Drinkell

Quote from: KB7DQH on May 06, 2014, 07:55:16 PM
Changing the subject (we will return your computer to the thread momentarily ;)  What relationship is there between the Royal College of Church Music and Canterbury Cathedral?  Oddly enough events eight time zones West have prompted me to ask :o  Background can be found herehttp://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1848.msg8372.html#msg8372 :o :o :o

Eric
KB7DQH

No connection except that the RSCM moved its headquarters to Canterbury during World War II and thr cathedral organist, Gerald Knight, subsequently became director of the RSCM at Addington Palace.

pcnd5584

#32
Quote from: David Drinkell on May 06, 2014, 03:56:43 PM
... A Gt & Ped Combs which goes off on the General Cancel is an awful nuisance, but the stop itself is an oddity, being more often on than off and sometimes left out when the organ is not in use.  Perhaps it would be more logical to have a device to uncouple Great and Pedal combinations, but, again, I think a rocking tablet in the keyslip would be best.  North American organs tend not to have this coupler, but instead a separate set of thumb pistons for the Pedal, situated to the left of the Great pistons and G/P reversible.  This has advantages, but the disadvantage that the inter-manual reversibles have to go to the right of the department pistons, where they are well-nigh useless.

Yes - but even more irritating is the fact that it is necessary to press two pistons simultaneously (and which are not adjacent to each other), in order to balance the Pedal and G.O. divisions tonally. I have encountered his 'feature' when playing hired toasters and can find no advantage whatsoever in replacing a piston coupler with separate pedal thumb pistons. However, as you say, the Pedal and G.O. piston coupler is often drawn virtually continuously. Ours stays out all the time (unless a visitor pushes it in). Harrison organ which possess the piston coupler Pedal to Swell Pistons* usually isolate this stop from the General Cancel, too. I do not think that I can ever recall either of these stops being pushed in at Exeter Cathedral.



* There are one or two instruments by other builders which also possess this coupler. Chichester is one; however, Dr. Alan Thurlow was formerly Sub Organist at Durham Cathedral, from 1973-80. This Harrison organ has both piston couplers which, I understand, is where Dr. Thurlow got the idea of incorporating the Pedal to Swell Pistons coupler in the rebuild at Chichester. When correctly wired, this stop provides for an entirely separate set of Pedal combinations, in order to balance those of the Swell Organ. There are other - less useful - versions. The Civic Church of Saint Peter, Bournemouth, has two stops (which do not appear on the NPOR entry), labelled to the effect of 'Pedal and Swell pistons' and 'Pedal and Choir Pistons' - or similar. These stops are entirely useless, since all they do is duplicate the standard Pedal combinations. Thus, if  the Clarinet is set on Choir piston eight, on drawing the coupler 'Pedal and Choir Pistons' and pressing Choir piston eight again, the full Pedal will come into play.

Quite what either Rushworths or John Belcher were thinking here remains a mystery to me.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

David Drinkell

I take the point about pressing two pistons, but in practice, one doesn't need to change the Pedal all the time, but merely have it maintain balance.  It makes a difference if one's Pedal Organ has a full chorus, but there aren't many of them around outside the Netherlands.  Even those that look good often don't work out as well as one might expect.  I believe that at Liverpool Cathedral (the Anglican one), it's normal to have a neutral medium Pedal on most of the time and leave off the piston couplers.  The Pedal upperwork tends to quarrel with the acoustic.

We all couple most of the time.  Even so, we're luckier than Bach, who generally had no choice.

I think, ironically, that the North American system works very well for me, simply because I only have three Pedal generals.  Thus: 1] Bourdons 16 and 8, 2] add the Tibias (normal moderate open woods, but of H-J origin), 3] the lot. 

The more I consider these things, the more I am put in mind of Riepp's comparisons between cuisine and registration at Ottobeuren.  The Pedal generals provide a roux, which forms the basis for what goes on top.  I can vary this by adding or subtracting stops, or I can add upperwork by coupling the Solo Stentor (not a fearsome beast as its name suggests) at 8' and 4'.

I am in a culinary mood: I just finished making a chicken stew.....

More modern organs have more Pedal generals (and more Pedal upperwork), but I don't find them any more versatile.

More generally, I'm inclined to the view that pistons are a basis from which to work rather than an end in themselves.  I have five pistons to control a 13 stop Great and the same number for a 15 stop Swell.  I don't feel the need for any more and I rarely change them - but I don't use what they provide without modification very much either.  Like my chicken stew, I can produce a number of final results, depending how I treat the basics.

The toaster I play at the College has only generals and I hardly touch them at all, except that I have No. 10 set to give a fair amount of Great and the Swell Trumpet, which (because of the Armageddon like tendencies of toaster swells) produces a really good Tuba when I want to put the wind up someone.

JBR

Please forgive me, but are there any examples of 'double touch pistons'?  By that, I mean pistons in manual key slips that, pressed to the first detent, bring on a combination for that manual as normal and, if pressed beyond the first detent, bring on a suitable pedal combination as well.  The same could apply to pedal toe pistons, of course.

Unless I'm mistaken, such a system could obviate the need for a 'great and pedal combinations coupled' stop and could provide a similar facility for other manuals too.
A missionary from Yorkshire to the primitive people of Lancashire

David Drinkell

Yes, Compton used them, among others.  They tend to be fiddly things to adjust and not entirely reliable, so they're an example of a good idea which doesn't work out so well in practice.

revtonynewnham

Hi

I've never found any problems with Compton's double-touch pistons - a far more sensible idea IMHO than "great & Pedal Pistons coupled" which makes it impossible to pre-set the Great registration if you're playing on another manual & pedals!  I've also not had problems with their double-touch cancelling stop keys or drawstops - another very useful idea.  (I did have issues with Rushworth & Dreaper's double-touch cancels - I guess they tried to economise or "improve" the design after they took over Compton.  The one organ of theirs, which I used to play annually, was a nightmare as the 2nd touch springs were far too weak - adding the Great Mixture or Swell to Great could all too easily cancel the rest of the Great stops!)

Every Blessing

Tony

David Drinkell

George Thalben-Ball had a story about being invited to the opening of a cinema and asked to play 'God save the King' on the organ at the end.  Enquiring of the organist,  a piston was pointed out which would provide a drum roll at the beginning. 

'....But he didn't tell me that if I pressed the pedal too firmly, something quite different would happen.  Well, I pressed the pedal in a businesslike way - and all the effects f the organ started to perform!  The National Anthem began with bicycle bells, motor horns and (very loudly from one side of the room) voices calling "Cuckoo! Cuckoo!"  I can still see Gracie Fields looking down at me in amazement.'

JBR

Thank you gentlemen.  So, a good idea if well installed and adjusted.
A missionary from Yorkshire to the primitive people of Lancashire

pcnd5584

Quote from: JBR on May 09, 2014, 10:45:43 PM
Thank you gentlemen.  So, a good idea if well installed and adjusted.

Well, possibly.

It depends on how one intends to use the instrument.

As far as I can recall, the Compton units had a strong spring resistance for the second-touch, which necessitates a deliberate, firm pressure, in order to achieve the desired result. in practice, this usually means that one cannot make rapid piston changes (at least, not with the double-touch for the Pedal combinations), since this would require more pressure than normal, so a quick 'flick' at a piston would simply not suffice. Therefore, one would need a hand free in order to effect the extra movement required. Rapid changes in faster music are sometimes difficult or impossible to bring off cleanly with this system. Perhaps the fact that there are not many instruments in the UK with this type of system is indicative of practical difficulties.

Personally, I much prefer the piston coupler drawstops.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man