"At universities and at the national level, there's a big commitment to organ music" ...

I wish that were true in Australia, where in 99% of cases since the 1970s, if you study the organ at all, you must do so through private instruction (as I did). This situation is starting to improve - the habitually punching-above-its-weight University of Wollongong in New South Wales has, I understand, an organ course, thereby putting to shame older and more glamorous campuses - but not improving rapidly enough.

I agree with Noel - that's not true at all. Universities have cut organ programs entirely, or reduced full-time tenure-track positions with adjuncts. Most universities, out of necessity, are market-based (ideally, they shouldn't be, but that's another subject). The reason they are being eliminated is because they just can't get enough students. They are really responding to the decline in church organists; the idea that they remain committed in spite of the decline in churches in spurious. Then it becomes a vicious circle.

The majority of organists in this country have been serving mainline Protestant churches. With those in decline overall, and many of them shifting to a type of music that doesn't require the organ, the landscape has changed drastically. I prefer to be optimistic. If you look at The American Organist and The Diapason, there are quite a few new organs going into Catholic churches. Let's face it - music in American Catholic churches has already hit rock bottom, and we're in an upswing. The future of the organ in America may largely be in Catholicism.

Jackson,

I know that is true - Houston has really surged of late in its organ culture, and there are some very fine students at the U. of Houston. Robert Bates is one of the finest teachers around, and one of the most innovative in performance. There are a handful of university programs that are thriving, and organ students will always have somewhere to go. The problem is mainly in smaller regional colleges, and that has an effect on local organ cultures. Many part-time church musicians come from these places. Small-college organ professors teach a lot of non-majors, typically students with good piano skills who can learn enough organ technique to be employed by a local church. And there are less likely to be organ teachers around in smaller communities, who can get the interested kids at least started.

It's not dire. The profession is not going to die. I think it's going to improve, and the Catholic Church will both encourage it and benefit from it.

I don't get the condemnation of orchestral/symphonic organs--surely there is place for Franck, Tournemire and Dupre in worship as well as Sweelinck, Bach and Buxtehude.

As far as transcription-playing is concerned: well, there are transcriptions and then there are TRANSCRIPTIONS, and transcription-playing is a real art that not all organists or composers master. Certainly the transcriptions of Edwin Lemare are truly artistic, virtuoso pieces.

When I hear the ride of the valkyries and such being taught and played at one of our nation's most highly prestigious universities, where genuine scholarship ought to be expected and esteemed I can only shake my head in disbelief. This is not 'romanticism' returned to favour. It is tasteless and cultivated foolishness. It is astounding that anyone, no matter how talented, would waste time learning what have to be challenging arrangements of music which not only was written for an orchestra in an opera house, but are wholly unfit for the organ. We have no dearth of genuine organ literature from all periods of history. We do not need this kind of intellectual vacuity, nor should it be rewarded with DMAs, PhDs, and full professorships. Yes, yes, I know; I can hear it coming: Bach made arrangements. So did others. And, I'm sure that there was quite a bit of music around in their day of which they did not nor would not have made arrangements.

Too, I am disappointed that anyone of us, presumably serious musicians all, would refer to baroque revival Schnitgers, et al., as damnable clones. So such persons prefer Franck to Buxtehude. That's fine. That is their prerogative. It isn't fine to hold what is of great artistic and scholarly merit up to ridicule and contempt. There is nothing of honour or worthy of respect in this.

It is not news that we are experiencing a neo-romantic period in literature and organ building. This is a good thing which was bound to happen at some point. We have fads in the organ world, too. My favourite eras are most anything before Mozart and most anything after Tournemire, with organs that can faithfully play all of those. This does not leave me refering to damnable romantic instruments which are better consigned to infernal consumption. I am fond of much romantic literature, though I don't generally enjoy learning it or playing it. I do appreciate others doing so on appropriate instruments.

We are fortunate, very fortunate, to have baroque (and even pre-baroque!) instruments on which to bring to life the music of those eras. Ditto romantic and later organ building fashions. No fashion will remain in vogue forever: today's neo-romantic flair will sooner or later have seen its day, too. I treasure some of the Cavaille-Coll 'clones' that are gracing our churches now. They have a worthy place amongst the Clicquot 'clones' which we are equally fortunate to enjoy. We should not want to be like some person who is a great Kipling scholar but who thinks that 'damnable' Shakespeare should be consigned to the flames. Such attitudes are not those of a true scholar.

Organs are organs. They are not orchestras. And the worst thing that ever happened to them was trying to make orchestras out of them.

It isn't the European instruments - well, maybe Schnitgers - that are damnable, its some of the clones by American builders that are damnable. Especially, the ones built in the 1960s. The newer American instruments are much better than they were then.

I have heard that Wagner transcription. It never pretended to be concert literature but was a fun piece done in good humor. We had a blast with it locally at an AGO meeting a few years ago.

We must be blessed in my area. There are organ departments that are alive and well at 4 colleges within 50 miles. The instruments are pretty good, too.

Also, CharlesW, the neo-baroque organs in America from that era are hardly clones. They made some mistakes, partially because it was difficult to gain access to historic instruments in the communist bloc. They were a worthy, if misguided, attempt, and present day historically oriented builders do it much better.

They were a worthy, if misguided, attempt, and present day historically oriented builders do it much better.

No question they are now better. I remember, also, that E. Power Biggs made a series of recordings in which the microphones were too close to the pipes. Suddenly, we had a generations of American builders creating rattling flutes, thinking they were building in authentic chiff.

CharlesW, I don't know how anybody could listen to the Hamburg Jakobikirche Schnitger and call it "damnable."

Listen to the Hildebrandt at Naumburg. It is better than anything Schnitger ever built.

how many Schnitgers have you played? Heard live?

Only recordings by supposedly good organists. They didn't sound so great and had a bit of, it seemed to me, an acidic tone. Maybe you have to be German of that era to appreciate them, or perhaps an American from the "Organ Reform" school. For what it is worth, I don't like the Dutch organs of that time period, either.

[edited by admin]

So, CharlesW, your experience of anything German or Dutch has been gained entirely from the comfort of your own armchair. I suppose that says it all, really...

I get the best recordings I can find. But I have never made any secret of not caring for those instruments or much of the music of that time period. Major exception, the French music is very appealing.

P.S. I'm not German on an American proponent of the organ reform movement. Not that ethnic background should have any bearing on this discussion anyway...

Ethnic background is not so important, but certain types of instruments were produced in certain regions at a certain time. They do have a distinctive sound that one either likes or doesn't. I am sure some don't care for the French and English organs I favor. That's fine.

We have a couple of those instruments in town that doneill would consider to be one of those mistakes he referenced - and they were built by reputable builders.

Charles, I did not label those organs as mistakes. I said that they made some mistakes in trying to copy historic instruments. And yes, that Hildebrandt is amazing. Central German organ building in general is somewhat different than north German organ building. Silbermanns and Schnitgers don't sound the same. Bach works better at Naumburg. Buxtehude works better at Hamburg. But your derisive comment was about Schnitger. I challenged you on it, and you changed the subject.

Doneill, yes and no - depends on which bits. I heard BWV 532 at Hamburg and it's perfect there - admittedly, a piece that shows the influence of Buxtehude, but the debate about what the perfect Bach organ' is seem to be far from over.

But your derisive comment was about Schnitger. I challenged you on it, and you changed the subject.

No change of subject. I hate those instruments and quite a bit of the music written for them. Catholicism is a multi-national religion covering a long time span with instruments to match. Given that North Germany was mostly Lutheran, I have never found the music produced there to really fit well within the framework of Catholic liturgy. I also had so much of it forced on me in college - under an organ reformer - I decided I wouldn't play it once I got out of there.

Back to the subject of lack of organs or organists. I have noticed that many organists, when buying a pipe organ, want a concert instrument. Those are expensive. If your particular church can afford one, that's great. I suspect most can not. Many churches that say they can't afford a pipe instrument could afford a service instrument. It doesn't take 50 ranks to support mass. Leave the concert instruments to the big parishes and universities. Perhaps there is a "concert" mindset involved that works against smaller but adequate instruments.

The Small Organ Project - Palestrina, we'd all be interested in a report on actual progress - how many organs have been designed and what difficulties you have run into in interesting pastors and organists.

The Project is ongoing and its specifics will remain under wraps for now, owing to negotiations.

There could be an interesting academic discussion about what constitutes a Catholic organ. That's an interesting topic, and not obvious, especially after Vatican II's emphasis on congregational singing. Unfortunately, this discussion got off the rails. Sorry if I contributed to that. And yes, Palestrina, I was grossly over-generalizing regarding Bach and Buxtehude - sorry for that as well. Offering opinions regarding personal preferences and what may be better for a given situation are fine, but can we stay away from insulting language? Saying that instruments are "damnable" and should be burned is extreme, because that goes beyond personal preference.

Saying that instruments are "damnable" and should be burned is extreme, because that goes beyond personal preference.

I vote nay against restricting peoples actions because of personal preference, though it might be better if I had any idea what right personal preferences, unknown to us, have in curtailing the obvious and well-known stark, raving madness of a former school teacher/librarian.

Appreciable aspects of the German stylus fantasticus were the direct and studied descendants of Frescobaldi's toccatas and ricercars as found in the Fiori Musicali and other such works. I have frequently used carefully selected examples of this genre for both pre- and post- voluntaries. In fact, at a parish at which I have been engaged for this very Easter Day I am playing Bach's great A-Minor prelude as an opening voluntary. It has a dramatic approach to climax and triumph which are perfect for setting the tone for this celebration and introducing the entrance hymn, which is 'Victory'. To say that this, or any other, body of beautifully crafted music is ipso facto not suitable for Catholic liturgy is, I believe, an exercise in myopia and an impoverishment of the musical affect which accompanies our worship.

It is true, as doneill says, that, generally, Catholics somewhat expect rather unassertive literature. He also points out that Vatican II has opened the way to a greater intellectual and emotional involvement of the people in the mass. More, it didn't just open the way but expects and presumes it. It follows that our choices of music reflect this, rather than provide a blanket of soothing pap. When I choose organ music I do not ask 'is it "Catholic"': I ask 'does it contribute in some way, texturally, mood-wise, emotionally, to the theme of the day', which means that it may be loud, triumphal, prayerful, quiet, calm, busy, tuneful, simple, complex, and so on, as reflects the day's lectionary. Preludes, further, should in some way compliment and lead into the entrance hymn, which should follow them immediately, without any words spoken by anyone. (Catholics are the only people who have to be told before mass what church they are in and what day it is and who is celebrating and to turn of their gadgets. [But that is another peeve for another conversation].)

Ball State University has a thriving organ program and a full-time, tenured professor. It used to be the wonderful Kirby Koriath, but now is the dynamic Raul Prieto Ramirez.

BGSU is famous for the organ students it has turned out.

See the bottom four instruments listed here:

http://www.leekpipeorgans.com/consultation/for-sale.html

The small organ market is totally flooded now and larger instruments are also sitting waiting for the wrecking ball.

My friend Christine Canavan from Franciscan University of Steubenville was featured in the original Arlington Catholic Herald article. She is a sacred music major concentrating in organ.

It's much easier to attract vocalists to the program, and it is ostensibly cheaper. OTOH, in an economy where we are educated based on the return, it's ironic, because my friends who are only vocalists seem to have the odds stacked against them.

(1) Flentrop, while a very solid builder, is not at all representative of the entire history of north German/Dutch organ building.

(2) Of course C.P.E.'s music is tuneful. There was a huge shift in popular style at that time. J.S. Bach's "math formula" is in the tradition of theological intellectualism, which includes the great Catholic polyphony. Do you reject that as well?

Ah, thanks. That explains some things. It is natural to assume that anybody on this forum would be favoring the Roman Catholic tradition, but perhaps that is not a safe assumption. It is rare for an organist to be Eastern, for obvious reasons, but I know a few.

I think Bach is more in the line of post-Trent polyphony, though.

Charles, when you write sentences like:
"Perhaps the problem is that they are German"
it is hard to make sense of what you are saying.

What are the characteristics of German-made organs that you don't favor? Some insight about the distinctions in organ styles would be informative for those of us who aren't organists.

I'm trying to understand your comments in a way that says something more sophisticated than "German anything = bad", because I trust that you are not a person who harbors ethnic prejudices.