[rodgersorgan] Re acoustics and tuning
- From: "Noel Heinze" <noel.heinze@xxxxxxx>
- To: "RodgersUsers" <rodgersorgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:09:05 -0400
Jane, thanks for your comments...I agree that his playing seemed to lack a
degree of feeling, but I didn't say that in my Group post since I wanted to
keep it Rodgers oriented, and I attributed the apparent dry playing to the
acoustics and sterile tuning...maybe if the organ/acoustics/tuning were more
"user friendly" his playing would have seemed less sterile too. I want to hear
him again in a better situation, hope he will show more "life" or whatever. I
have heard many hot young organists (you too?); sometimes they just play too
fast, sometimes you can tell what they were trying to do but it didn't come
across, sometimes it's lack of awareness of the particular organ's
idiosyncrasies, etc. It boils down to listening to what's happening, i.e.,
they're not listening to themselves...they hear it in their mind, but if they
recorded it and listened to the playback objectively, they might notice that,
hey, it just doesn't sound like what they thought it did, so it won't sound
good to the audience either...hmm. They should at least sit in the nave/room
while someone else plays and learn what the beast sounds like "out there."
Example - playing too fast for the notes/pipes to speak. Maybe the piece is
supposed to be played that fast, but if you can't hear the notes/music, maybe
you should back off on the tempo, or use less staccato, or different stops, or
choose a different piece, eh? And what is the point of pumping the swell shoes
like a sewing machine or pump organ if the swell engines and shutters can't
keep up with your intentions, so the net effect is zilch...can't you hear that,
won't the listeners notice that? And what about that lovely flute that sounds
so warm and liquid at the console, just perfect for romantic soup, but "out
there" it exhibits hard chiff and thin harmonics...OK for some music, not OK
for the piece at hand. If the 32 reed comes across like the clappers of doom
in the chancel, does it sound like (as Virgil Fox said) "a snake pissing down a
rainspout" to the audience, or vice versa? If the acoustic is dead, what can
you do to fake a better sonic ambience, get the sound to fade instead of just
stop, blend instead of jerk, etc?
The occupational hazard of playing organs has always involved trying to get
blood out of the turnip/acoustic/music/instrument/etc. in spite of assorted
circumstances (including one's own skills/talents). The paramount "ruling
engine" is sound...music is aural, not visual, not "real." It is experienced
in the mind, the imagination, not palpably. It simply doesn't happen very well
unless the external crosses the blood-brain barrier and is internalized. Our
job is to make it happen as best we can, and we need to use our own ears
better. The great thing about Rodgers and instant record/playback audits,
whether via PR300 or other gizmo, is that we can have the gift the Gifty has
given us and can hear ourselves as others hear us, AND take corrective action,
manipulate some variables deliberately, consciously manage the external to
enable the internal...get the job done.
End of sermon, choir...
Noel Heinze, Asheville, NC
A MIDI Musical Christmas for the PR-300 and Organ Solo is in final production
at Frog Music Press!
To unsubscribe or change mail delivery (digest, vacation)
go to our website at www.frogmusic.com/rodgers.html
- Follow-Ups:
- [rodgersorgan] Re: Re acoustics and tuning
- From: Shirley J. Boyken
Other related posts:
- » [rodgersorgan] Re acoustics and tuning
- » [rodgersorgan] Re: Re acoustics and tuning
- » [rodgersorgan] Re: Re acoustics and tuning
- [rodgersorgan] Re: Re acoustics and tuning
- From: Shirley J. Boyken