Anglicanish Organists, Help Please!
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    Through HS and much of college, and by necessity at my first few jobs, I was a snobby stop-puller who never touched a piston. Now that I have command of a functional three-manual Romantic instrument., I have converted. That said, although I have set up two levels of progressive generals and accompanying sets of progressive divisionals, more anglico, and my swell is nearly always coupled to the great, I am still a novice.

    Specifically, how to approach the registration and expression strategically in an extended, very colorful piece, say, Stanford's Op. 105.6 in D minor? How to plan and what to plan, to make best use of the tonal resources at my command.

    Tonal disposition of my instrument.
    Thanked by 4CharlesW CHGiffen Jes eft94530
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    How blessed you are to not have a neo-Baroque screamer. LOL. This from someone who hates those and envies your instrument. You should have warmth from that organ, but try for as much clarity as possible. Unfortunately, you can muddle voice lines if you are not careful, and your singers will have difficulty hearing their parts. For example, l don't use 16' manual stops when accompanying singing. They are fine for some organ works, but create too much "muddiness" with voice lines. You do have the advantage of gradual crescendos and decrescendos which some of the "Baroqies" don't do as well. I guess the key thing is to work with the instrument, not against it. You can make some great music with this organ. Sometimes listening is more important than individual registrations. Get someone else to play and listen carefully to what you are hearing from where the congregation sits.
    Thanked by 2NihilNominis CHGiffen
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    registration and expression [...] Stanford's Op. 105.6

    I played it in Sep 2012 so it will take a bit of digging
    through boxes folders piles to find my score.

    What is your deadline?
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    No particular deadline...working it up for the joy of it right now!
  • MarkS
    Posts: 282

    Not knowing what your organ sounds like (but it looks lovely!) I would only make a few general observations about set-up, etc...what a former mentor of mine used to call the 'administrative' aspect of organ playing. A lot depends on your preferences. Many players like to keep their hands on the great in music like this, for instance, which requires more programming of pistons etc... than moving to a different manual for a registrational effect. Also a lot depends on how much you can depend on your swell shades for crescendos, rather than achieving them by adding stops. But, generally, for repertoire like this (I haven't played this piece, but I just pulled out the score, and I think I'll have to give it a whirl!), which doesn't require drastic or abrupt color changes, setting up your organ in a three tiered dynamic and coupling choir to swell and both to the great gives you the basis for your registration at forte; lower dynamics can be achieved through use of the swell shades, or by moving from the great to other manuals. It then becomes a matter of adding (or removing) stops to vary or intensify the sound, which can be done either through pistons or hand registering, or a combination of both.

    So for example (working in the dark, of course), I would set a general piston for
    Choir: maybe some stringy 8's—gamba and gemshorn?—and the clarinet (and maybe a 4'?) (possibly the mp sound at the first key change)
    Swell: something like a full swell sound—principal chorus, possible with mixture, and the oboe (possibly the first mf sound, with swell shades partially or entirely closed)
    Great: principal chorus through 2' (probably?)

    Then I would set some manual pistons to add 16' stops, additional reeds, the great mixture, etc., or plan to add and subtract by hand if that seems possible. I personally enjoy hand registering and find it really satisfying. Don't give it up!

    I hope I am being responsive to your question!

    I recently saw a well known player perform a similar piece on an instrument with a European-style sequencer, and he kept his hands on the great the whole time and relied on the sequencer for every change. I'm sure this is a great convenience, especially when playing on an unfamiliar organ, but it sure seems like cheating to me!

    Or, you could handle it the way this guy does!:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec0mkHszk50
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    I just printed the sheet music from IMSLP. Looking forward to playing it, too.
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    Mark S,

    Yes, thank you; that's very much what I was looking for!

    CharlesW,

    Very good cautionary tales; I think it's true that, whichever type of organ you are blessed [cursed] with (Romantic or Baroque), you should register *against* its natural proclivity. If you have a Romantic organ, the trick is to make your registrations clear and clean. If you have a Baroque organ, the challenge is to find warmth and richness in the sound palette.

    This, in the end, I think brings out the best of each organ and actively avoids what is worst in each type.

    MarkS, CharlesW, & possibly eft,

    Perhaps in a month or two we could each post our own recordings of the Stanford and compare our approaches?

    Can we hope to hold a candle to St. Thomas' new Director of Music, though?
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    I am first going to have to learn it. You know how the life of an aging, but busy DM and organist goes. LOL. My organ is a 10-rank Schantz (1953). Not the size to do that piece justice.
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    (Removed owing to misapprehension)

    Nonetheless, I think perhaps some comparative playing would be a fun exercise. A quasi-postgraduate organ seminar from the comfort of your living room.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    '...toaster...'
    The, um, 'word' is simulacrum for one, and simulacra for more than one.
    It calls a spade a spade and is academically irreproachable.
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    I'm nor feuding with Charles about his 'baroque screamers', and I shall not dump all post-baroque instruments into the 'tub' category. It seems seemly to me that we on this forum can do better and reach a higher level of academic maturity than to focus on the worst examples of organ building, or whatever else it is that we don't happen to prefer.

    Ha! Now that I've said that!... let me hasten to caution NihilNominis and others that, far from avoiding 16 foot manual registers when playing a l'Anglicaine, it is incumbent upon them to study the artful use of the same in hymn and anthem playing, as well as in other literature. Anyone aspiring to be 'Anglicanish' in his or her playing must come to terms with sixteen foot manual use. To me an organ, baroque, romantic, or modern, which has no sixteen foot great and positiv or swell ranks is 'not all there'. A really really complete organ of any school of tonal design will have the gamut from sixteen foot up, both reeds and flues, on all manuals.

    I am, now and then, treated to the remark, 'you're Anglican, aren't you', by priests (even a bishop or two) and an assortment of others after they have heard me play a mass. There can be no higher compliment.

    Thanked by 2MarkS NihilNominis
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    Actually, the Schantz is perfectly voiced and scaled for the room. It has plenty of volume, but only one reed, a trumpet. It does, however, have a commanding presence in that very live room with all hard surfaces. Some of the stops one might desire, such as an oboe, are not there.

    In last summer's console rebuild, I had a 32' Resultant added which gave greater depth to the pedal division. Future plans are to bring the trumpet out of the Swell chamber and put it on the unenclosed Great - it is too loud for a Swell trumpet, anyway. Also, add pipes to the bass of the trumpet to create a 16' reed, and add an oboe to the swell. Work in progress. But again, what works well for congregation singing and choir accompaniment, doesn't mean the resources are there for some concert literature.
    Thanked by 3NihilNominis MarkS eft94530
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    Sounds good, Charles!
    Schantz organs have a very good sound and are tonally respectable. I shouldn't feel this way, but every time I play one I can't help thinking that it doesn't really sound like a Skinner. Why I should make this comparison with Schantz and not with others I don't know. Schantz has its own quite nice sound, which I do admire. I think the absolute worse sounding American builders are reuter and Wicks. reuter recently did a 'renovation' which absolutely demolished a fine late fifties vintage neo-baroque Holtkamp here in Houston. For many years it was Houston's premier neo-baroque organ. Now it is rather put in the shade (compounded by the reuter rebuild) by Fritts, Fisk, Pasi, Noack, le Tourneau, et al.
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    Charles,

    My apologies, I had interpreted your earlier angst about neo-Baroque "screamers", as it were, as a lament about your own instrument. I am glad the Schantz worthily fills your room with sound and do not harbour any death-wish against it.

    I certainly would never presume to prejudge or insult what I knew to be an organist's well-loved instrument...that is tantamount to insulting a child, in many cases.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • MarkS
    Posts: 282
    Perhaps in a month or two we could each post our own recordings of the Stanford and compare our approaches?


    I'm in! I should be good to go in a couple of weeks— my upcoming church repertoire is mostly pretty familiar stuff. Anyone else?
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    NihilNominis -

    Your organ is very well endowed with flue work - rather lacking in reed work. For hymns and certain parts of ordinaries, etc. you might wish to exploit the great trumpet as a solo stop, reinforced as necessary with the diapason. Also (couplers, if any, are not listed) try this an octave lower, or even (if you have a sub-coupler) at both 8 and 16 for a strong hymn tune or such, accompanied as required from the swell and pedal.

    Too, the diapason itself (with necessary non-reed fleshing out) makes a very nice solo sound for leading congregations, accompanied appropriately from the swell.

    I think that your organ has much potential, but regret that it is rather weak in mixtures, mutations, and reeds. 'Full swell' is really out of reach for you. On the other hand, you have some nice four foot! celestes in the swell and choir. These are awfully good for certain ethereal 'effects' in some anthems and other literature (even carefully chosen verses of Anglican chant), or even for judicious use in improvising during communion and such. I am fond of playing Brahms' Es ist ein ros' entsprungen on the celestes of several manuals. I got this from a very old Lessons and Carols LP.

    Maybe more later.
    Thanked by 3MarkS NihilNominis CHGiffen
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    Mark, I am also in!

    Mr Osborn,

    Thou hast nailed it. There is a dulce mixture and now a mixture ii\iii as well on the Swell, but the reeds are especially lacking. The Great diapason is actually a bit small for a solo stop. But the Celestes are amazing.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    What is your favoured literature?
    How do you anticipate playing it with the tonal resources (colour) at your command?
    Is period or 'near period' sound important to you?
    How do you envision accompanying ordinaries? hymns? Anglican chant? anthems? etc.?
    Do you anticipate sacred recitals? Of what literature?
    What makes this a good organ for congregational leadership?
    These are just a few concerns that come to mind.

    For me, an organ without a definitive principal chorus, effective mixtures and mutations, without effective and colourful reeds, would be incredibly difficult to inspire singing, let alone play literature that will grace liturgy. There must be everything from a quiet meditative aid to the transcendent fire of jubilation - these and everything in between.

    What are the strengths that you see in this instrument?

    (Oh, and about one of your initial confessions way up above - pistons, next to dogs, are man's best friend. This from the mouth of one who is often called, without much in the way of ratiocination, a 'purist'.)
    Thanked by 2NihilNominis CHGiffen
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    I certainly would never presume to prejudge or insult what I knew to be an organist's well-loved instrument...that is tantamount to insulting a child, in many cases


    No apologies needed. It isn't a great instrument but is adequate for the space and our mass needs. It is a service instrument. It has been the only pipe instrument in a Catholic parish in town for many years. Would I like more, yes. The parish can't afford a new one, so I make the most of it and have improved it when possible.

    Jackson, the organ techs tell me that Schantz and Casavant are the two best-built North American organ brands. Properly maintained, they have very long lives.
    Thanked by 3NihilNominis M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen
  • JesJes
    Posts: 576
    Ok, my best piece of advice is to go to an organ builder and tune organs for a week with them. They will teach you heaps about registrations and styles associated with it because they have seen it all. You need to find an organ builder that is in charge of a large performance venue or of churches that hold concerts. Because they will know what the performers have demanded and what the performers used.

    I can't other than that give you much advice.
    Have you been in touch with the Oxford Ordinariate people? They are really nice and helpful!
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    This from the mouth of one who is often called, without much in the way of ratiocination, a 'purist'.)


    It's the knee pants and buckle shoes that give you away. LOL.
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen
  • MarkS
    Posts: 282
    It's true that after seeing the stop list I had many of the same reactions as Mr. Osborn. But I have also learned to have some faith in organ builders—the key is to understand the thinking behind the tonal design, and how it works in the room. It's possible that this instrument sounds better in the space that one would assume from the specs. In any event, it's our job to make the best music we can with the instrument that's been allotted to our care—and then start the long term process of planning and fund-raising to improve the instrument if that turns out to be both necessary and possible!
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    Well, indeed, Mr Osborn has heard a recording of this organ in its room with a choir and complimented it! The reeds and mixtures are adequate for support, but I could use more color.

    Here is that recording
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn CharlesW
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    Nice, really nice.
  • MarkS
    Posts: 282
    Yes, that will do!
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    ...knee pants and buckle shoes...
    Yes, those and the powdered wig.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW CHGiffen
  • francis
    Posts: 10,828
    Schantz and Casavant are the two best-built North American

    hmmm
    Thanked by 2liampmcdonough CHGiffen
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,416
    ...two best built...
    I've heard that about Schantz and Casavant.

    I've also heard high words for Schoenstein's craftsmanship - though I can't abide their instruments. Actually, Jack Bethards is really an awfully nice fellow - a devout high church Episcopalian who seems very knowledgeable about and sympathetic towards the Ordinariate.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    WICKS 6290 (w = Walker Technical digital stop)
    PEDAL GREAT SWELL ANTIPHONAL
    32 Resultant(P) 16 Bourdon 8 RohrFlute 8 Principal
    16 Principal(w) 8 Principal 8 Salicional 8 HolzFlute
    16 Subbass(G) 8 Bourdon 8 VoixCeleste(w) 8 SpitzFlute(w)
    16 LieblichGedeckt 8 Salicional(S) 4 Principal 8 SpitzCeleste(w)
    8 Octave 4 Octave 4 FluteOuverte 4 Principal
    8 Bourdon(G) 4 Bourdon 2-2/3 Nazard 4 HolzFlute
    8 RohrFlute(S) 2 SuperOctave 2 Principal 2 Principal
    4 ChoralBass(G) III Fourniture(w) 2 BlockFlute 2 HolzFlute
    16 Bombarde(S) 8 FanfareTrumpet(w) 1-3/5 Tierce 8 Clarinet(w)
    8 FanfareTrumpet(G) MIDI 2 16 Basson(tc) Chimes(w)
    8 Trompette(S) GREAT 4 8 Hautbois Harp(w)
    4 RohrSchalmei(w) 8 Trompette Tremolo
    MIDI 4 4 Clairon 16 FanfareTrumpet(G)
    III PleinJeu 8 FanfareTrumpet(G)
    blank 4 FanfareTrumpet(G)
    blank
    blank ANTIPHONAL PEDAL
    Tremolo 16 Subbass(w)
    MIDI 1 8 Principal
    SWELL 16 8 HolzFlute
    SWELL Off 4 Principal
    SWELL 4 16 Fagotto(w)
    COUPLERS
    Great 8 4
    Swell 8 4 Swell 16 8 4 Swell 16 8 4
    Antiphonal 8 Antiphonal 8

    http://imslp.org/wiki/6_Short_Preludes_and_Postludes,_Op.105_(Stanford,_Charles_Villiers)

    page 18
    m 1 General 9 Ant 100%
    m 10 Ant 0%
    page 19
    m 14 Great
    m 17 General 10
    page 20
    m 10 General 9 .. General 8
    m 11 General 7
    page 22
    m 16 General 8
    page 23
    m 4 General 9 (+Ant Clarinet 8)
    m 11 General 10

    Clearly these pencil marks are insufficient.
    Still looking for the registration sheet.
    I will update this post when I find it.
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
Add a Comment