A beautiful sound isn't required for the organ

This explains so much....

Adam, I'm aware that hand or finger touch doesn't define a beautiful or ugly sound at the organ. Proper registration and articulation take care of that issue. But if you're seeking a scapegoat for lack of solid piano study because a beautiful sound isn't required for the organ, then you've missed my point. You should note that some of this and the last several generations of organists were also solid, competent pianists as well: Marcel Dupre, Olivier Messiaen, Flor Peeters, Jeanne Demessieux (who won 1st prize in a piano competition while a student at the Paris Conservatoire), Anton Heiller, Cesar Franck, Josef Rheinberger, Felix Mendelssohn, Johannes Brahms.

Regrettably, we live in a world now of "instant gratification" with cell phones, computers, TV, etc. This attitude, unfortunately, has spilled over into music study as well. "A little bit of this, and a little bit of that" with regard to piano study is "good enough" for organ study. Now that we've fulfilled that "elementary piano obligation" and got it out of the way, we can move on to the organ. Why some people don't make the connection that what one learns from one instrument can be transferred to another. Many of my piano teachers told me that if one wants to create a beautiful singing line at the piano, don't listen to another pianist, but listen to a singer. I think musicians these days (myself included) don't trust "our ears" and what to listen for in music. Without a doubt, one can eventually learn to play the organ with some, little, or no piano study, or with careless or indifferent piano teaching. But the transfer and progress is very slow and frustrating, despite the fact that one learned some 2 & 3 part Inventions of Bach. How much one chooses to apply solid piano training/technique to the organ is up to the student. But in any event, it is a musical education and opens one's mind, ears and strengthened independent fingers to musical possibilities. In short, it's never wasted time to learn more, the ability to apply it elsewhere and shorten the transfer time.

At a Cliburn piano competition in the 1990s, I once met a respected piano pedagogue of piano literature at a respected music school. He was astounded at Freshman and Sophomore piano students in his classes at the music school who couldn't name some of the "legendary pianists". Finally two students answered with "Rubenstein" and "Horowitz". (Barely a "stab" at the number of famed concert pianists of the last 100 yrs.!!) These talented students could play some of piano repertoire for their auditions to be accepted to the school, but didn't know anything about the history of their instrument or the great legendary concert pianists who played it. It's an indifference attitude. No curiosity to read about or listen to recordings of famous pianists, or their teachers of a particular "school of playing". Just do the minimum of what I have to do. Most also don't know much about the literature written for their instrument either....only what they've studied. Sadly, the "Dumbing Down of America" is in full force in our society these days and it's also a part of the education system as well. It's no wonder we are behind the rest of the world in academia, technology, transportation, etc.

I've gotten off the beaten path a bit, but I find music study isn't exempt from the instant gratification or "short-cuts" attitude of people in our society today. Perhaps one day, a student can "text" an information exchange with their piano teacher on how to play the Two & Three Part Inventions, thereby getting on the organ bench even sooner.

I think what some have implied, is that piano background may be more beneficial when playing Romantic organ music. It can be highly pianistic in technique. Piano may not be as helpful with early Baroque works whose composers never saw or heard a piano. Individual preferences are a factor, too. After I studied and practiced the required amount of piano, I moved on to organ, an instrument I like much more.

"At a Cliburn piano competition in the 1990s, I once met a respected piano pedagogue of piano literature at a respected music school. He was astounded at Freshman and Sophomore piano students in his classes at the music school who couldn't name some of the 'legendary pianists'. Finally two students answered with 'Rubenstein' and 'Horowitz'. (Barely a 'stab' at the number of famed concert pianists of the last 100 yrs.!!) These talented students could play some of piano repertoire for their auditions to be accepted to the school, but didn't know anything about the history of their instrument or the great legendary concert pianists who played it."

That is scary.

piano... totally not necessary to playing the organ. it would be like requiring the soprano sax before playing the oboe.

Unda, I agree: Bach's music is not solely for whatever instrument he had available at the time: he wrote much of his music for keyboard in general, so it can really be played on anything with a keyboard.

I have often wondered, if Bach were able to return today, if he would say, "Stop screwing up my music!"

It would profit for an organist to study an instrument for which composers like Chopin, Schumann, Rachmanninov, Ravel, Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert wrote the most beautiful and imaginative repertoire. Let's also consider that Dupre, Messiaen, Vierne, Langlais, etc admired and respected deeply said composers and pianistic repertoire.

I have often wondered, if Bach were able to return today, if he would say, "Stop screwing up my music!"

I doubt it. He seemed to appreciate innovation, improvisation, and adaptation. He was keen on newly invented instruments and tonal theory.

While his contemporaries considered him to be somewhat old-fashioned, he was anything but a museum-keeper.

J.S. Bach actually had and used a harpsichord with pedals. And Mozart had a fortepiano with independent pedals (separate set of strings from those of the keyboard). Robert Schuman had more than one pedal piano and composed music for the instrument. My recollection is hazy, but I thought I once saw a photograph of Wanda Landowska playing a pedal harpsichord (or pedal piano).

Pedal harpsichord, by Yves Rechsteiner is a marvelous article, replete with pictures of interesting examples.

Bach doesn't care 'how' you play his music... he just wants you to play it well. He didn't even care which instrument played which part because his music is transparent and doesn't require a particular instrument on a part.

Nice to hear you say that, Francis! I know he doesn't care, he's dead. LOL. But still nice to hear you say that.

Earl_Grey, get off that limb before I saw it off. :-) I haven't seen a G&P in many years. About 12 years ago, a solemn procession to the dumpster was made by some locals with Glory & Praise in hand. They were never seen again - the G&Ps that is. Not saying where I was at the time.

So true, Francis! It's not like the registration or the voicing is rubricsed as something required. Just make beautiful music and don't overthink it!

Do you mean D, G, A or do you mean I, IV, V in every key?!

C F G capo 2 to be more precise! I think Bach would have wanted it that way. ;)

Better yet, tune your guitar this way:

E,B,E,G#,B,E

and use a metal pipe to change chords... of course, you will only have major chords to play with, but what the heck! Probably be more interesting than 99% of what hacking guitar players do now anyway.

For minor chords, you could have a second guitarist.

Given what Dupre did in his Bach editions, I'd take his advice with a tablespoon of salt!

I don't think that it's about having a piano technique at all. To be honest with all of you, if I had my time over, I'd force myself to learn clavichord. It's the instrument that Bach and his predecessors used for practice, and is painfully honest about failures in wrist weight and so on. Joel Speerstra's book on the subject is worth a read.

Some exquisite pieces here:

http://www.harpsichord.com/Gallery/gal_frmset.html

Though one could take Dupre "as a grain of salt", his maitre Widor was also insistent on piano technique as the basis of organ technique. Sure, you can blow off Dupre, but have you listened to his recordings? The man had technique and so did his students. One of my teachers also studied with Helmut Walcha and Walcha made the same claim. So, don't limit that claim to the French.

Clavichords are great, but not easily available. Pianos: easily available. Pretty much answers that question. Bottom line,: piano technique is necessary for playing anything past 1850 and certainly does not hurt anything before 1850. There is too much repertoire needing technique from the piano. Par example: give a pop to the Durufle toccata from the Opus 5 Suite or the Widor 6th symphony or the Langlais Fete without help from the piano. How about Reger or Distler to give equal credence to the Germanic school.

I'll see you at the piano, like I do everyday. Not always fun, but necessary.

Bon courage mes amis.

@ Gavin. Please cite your source for the quote of Langlais. I am aware of many things Langlais said, but that is not one of them. I wish to know your source. I heard Langlais personally speak kindly of Dupre and his brilliance.

Thanks, Kevin in Kentucky. Well, there is of course Langlais's famous March 1975 interview in The Diapason. But there, Langlais' censure of Dupré is confined to Dupré's playing of Franck (and to the editing of Franck which was published under Dupré's name; see Graham Steed's 1999 Dupré book for a discussion of how much, or possibly how little, Dupré had to do with that edition).

Dupré's playing of Bach, unless I have totally misremembered the interview, is not mentioned at all by Langlais, either positively or negatively. Still less did Langlais describe Dupré's overall organ ability as "rotten".

"Incidentally, the pneumatic and the tracker are two completely different organs (instruments) and you would have to experience the dif for your yourself."

Sorry I couldn't resist. :)


And guitar technique is completely different from all keyboards techniques!

And you can quote me on any of the above, if you feel the need to do so.

What if I just quote this part. Would that be okay?

Adam

Actually, that line is copyrighted © Copyright 2013 Francis Koerber, and no part of that statement may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted or retransmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the author.

Adam

Yes, I would be flattered!

You are using your legs and you know best what you can work with. If you are comfortable playing the non-AGO pedal board, then go for it. We who are short of leg tend to have difficulty with flat pedal boards. ;-)