It is currently Thu Apr 18, 2024 12:55 am


Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

Playing or learning the organ, hints, tips and tricks, registrations, techniques, fingerings, ...
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

ernst

Member

  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:27 am
  • Location: Lima, Peru

Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostSat Apr 14, 2012 8:13 pm

Dear forum members,

I'm wondering whether it would be useful to have a more structured forum section for sharing sample set experiences. For existing users, who explain tips and experience with a specific sample set. The forum does offer ample possibilities for such threads, but because they may be in a general category like "Hauptwerk Instruments" or "Performance practice" maybe they don't stick out sufficiently and may not get the casi "permanent" position they may deserve.
To see how this might work, I kick off for the Dom Bedos organ model, the organ constructed in 2009 by Bartolomeo Formentelli for the church of San Domenico in Rieti, Italy.

First, I would like to make some personal comments.
(1) My capability and education as an 'organist' is extremely limited, and I only start this thread because I miss such a learning and exchange option currently and hope that others, with more luggage than I have, may get involved.
(2) I am amazed that so little is being written about the Dom Bedos organ model. I have some 20 sample sets, of which say 10 are of the somewhat larger and more expensive type. But despite that I have some reputable and praised sample sets, I find myself almost exclusively using the Bartolomeo Formentelli Rieti sample set - and I keep enjoying it after hours of playing, though sometimes, reluctantly, I change to drier sets to better improve my playing.

Some observations.
- the (original) stop lay-out I find quite confusing. I have 3 manuals, the first two I use as Positif de Dos (Rückpositiv) and GO. The remaining three virtual manuals I have combined on my 3rd manual.
- I miss the bottom octave of the Bourdon 8 of the Echo, for example when I use a registration with a loud, a modest and a soft manual and I try to play a part of the piece on the soft (3rd) manual with just the Bourdon 8.
- I use still very simple registrations, mainly the principals and bourdons and occasionally an bourdon 8 / Nasard / Tierce combination.
- I almost always use the so-called Barnes-Bach temperament (used a tool to make that).
- I have just installed a pedal board and started to learn to play it, so I have no experience there still.
- The mean issue to me is the sound - the incredible sound of this organ. It never bores me, and after any other try I get back to Dom Bedos. The way the pipes speak, their mild colour and liveliness, the subtle way the sound starves after release - well, how can you describe sound in words...

A question. When a play a choral (or a fugue), and I use a modest registration, the voices stand out clear against the acoustics (the reverberation) - a very nice mix. However, when I use a much heavier registration all of a sudden I feel the sound gets a lot muddier - so much so that is starts to bother me. Is that normal, is that generally the case?

I do hope that this leads to useful contributions of opinions, experience and suggestions.

Ernst

Note: edited to be more concise.
Offline
User avatar

mdyde

Moderator

  • Posts: 15474
  • Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:19 pm
  • Location: UK

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostSun Apr 15, 2012 6:11 am

Hello Ernst,

I'm wondering whether it would be useful to have a more structured forum section for sharing sample set experiences. For existing users, who explain tips and experience with a specific sample set. The forum does offer ample possibilities for such threads, but because they may be in a general category like "Hauptwerk Instruments" or "Performance practice" maybe they don't stick out sufficiently and may not get the casi "permanent" position they may deserve.
To see how this might work, I kick off for the Dom Bedos organ model, the organ constructed in 2009 by Bartolomeo Formentelli for the church of San Domenico in Rieti, Italy.


I don't think we'd want to get into having separate sub-forums for each of the different sample sets (it would probably add quite a bit of admin work for us and I'm not convinced there would be enough posts in each to justify it - sorry) but of course if you want to start threads within the existing forum structure for the purpose, as you've done with this one, then I expect people would find that useful.
Best regards, Martin.
Hauptwerk software designer/developer, Milan Digital Audio.
Offline
User avatar

Purator

Member

  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:52 pm
  • Location: Leipzig, Germany

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostSun Apr 15, 2012 7:24 am

Hi,

I still am wondering why the Pedal-Section is so small and imho weak, while the GO is based on a 32'...

Greetings
Purator
Offline
User avatar

ernst

Member

  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:27 am
  • Location: Lima, Peru

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostSun Apr 15, 2012 2:43 pm

Purator wrote:I still am wondering why the Pedal-Section is so small and imho weak, while the GO is based on a 32'...Purator


Hi Purator,

I agree. I am considering to use a CODM - but I have no experience with that so that's a long term future project - in order to make this and some more changes. You can allocate the Montre 32', and others, to the pedal (I have done that for the 16' before for St Michel) but then the problem is that until you terminate that allocation those stops will always sound when you touch a pedal key.

I have made though the lowest Cis key work on the manuals and pedal (tip on the PCorgan forum).

Do you have this sample set?

Ernst
Offline
User avatar

Purator

Member

  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:52 pm
  • Location: Leipzig, Germany

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostSun Apr 15, 2012 2:49 pm

Hi,

Do you have this sample set?


no, currently not. I am still figuring out which sample set to start with, and the Dom Bedos is one of my favourites as I love the War-Trumpet. But with the really small Pedal-section it is for me not quite suitable. So if someone in the future might create a CODM file with a stronger pedal section (a 32-16-8-4 diapason chorus might already do it), it will become mor favourable...

Greetings
Purator
Offline
User avatar

ernst

Member

  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:27 am
  • Location: Lima, Peru

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostSun Apr 15, 2012 4:27 pm

mdyde wrote:I don't think we'd want to get into having separate sub-forums for each of the different sample sets (it would probably add quite a bit of admin work for us and I'm not convinced there would be enough posts in each to justify it - sorry) but of course if you want to start threads within the existing forum structure for the purpose, as you've done with this one, then I expect people would find that useful.


Probably you're right Martin that the number of posts would not justify a separate category, and surely it would add to the management effort of this site. Though I would love it personally....

Ernst
Offline

gerrit

Member

  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:29 am
  • Location: Netherlands

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostMon Apr 16, 2012 2:41 am

If you want to really appreciate an organ like this, with all it's qualities that seem strange at first sight, you have to know something about French Baroque registrations practice.

Why is the Pedal devision so small? Because the Pedal was mainly used not for the bass part, but for tenor cantus firmus parts. That is why the lowest stop of the Grand Orgue (32) is lower than that of the Pedale (16).

Why does the sound get muddy when using heavy registrations? Maybe because you are combining the wrong stops. On an organ like this, for example, you should never combine mixtures and reeds or mixtures and tierces. Reeds are combined with cornets and tierces, mixtures and cymbales are used without reeds or tierces.

When I first used this organ, I also found it difficult to find heavy registrations that sounded good, and so I also confined myself to lesser registrations. But then I realized I had to study some French Baroque registration practice, and now the organ sounds great!

Why is the lowest octave of the Echo missing? Because the Echo was mainly used for what it's named for: echo passages. These passages often have a bass part that is an octave higher (which increases the echo effect) so the lowest octave is not needed. The Echo can also be used for a soprano cantus firmus, and then the lowest octave is not needed either. This holds also true for the Recit.
Gerrit Veldman

Free sheet music available at my website.
Offline

Fazioli

Member

  • Posts: 358
  • Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 2:59 pm
  • Location: Utrecht - Netherlands

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostMon Apr 16, 2012 5:50 am

gerrit wrote:you should never combine mixtures and reeds


When playing French baroque music? or never ever..
Offline

gerrit

Member

  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:29 am
  • Location: Netherlands

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostMon Apr 16, 2012 6:39 am

Fazioli wrote:
gerrit wrote:you should never combine mixtures and reeds


When playing French baroque music? or never ever..

I meant: on this organ. It just sounds bad and it was not the practice in French baroque. So, I think it is clear that on this organ mixtures and reeds are not meant to be combined.
Gerrit Veldman

Free sheet music available at my website.
Offline
User avatar

ernst

Member

  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:27 am
  • Location: Lima, Peru

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostMon Apr 16, 2012 1:07 pm

Thanks Gerrit for your explication.

gerrit wrote:Why is the lowest octave of the Echo missing? Because the Echo was mainly used for what it's named for: echo passages. These passages often have a bass part that is an octave higher (which increases the echo effect) so the lowest octave is not needed. The Echo can also be used for a soprano cantus firmus, and then the lowest octave is not needed either. This holds also true for the Recit.


I understand and makes sense.
Just, thus probably "misusing" the organ, I wanted to use my 3rd manual (i.e. 3rd/4th/5th of the sample set) as a "complete" manual in trying to avoid registration changes during playing. I play e.g. the final chorus of the Matthäus (Wir setzen uns mit Thränen nieder) for which I use three registrations, and the softest one (pp) I play on my 3rd manual and the only suitable soft stop I have there is the Bourdon.


gerrit wrote:Why is the Pedal devision so small? Because the Pedal was mainly used not for the bass part, but for tenor cantus firmus parts. That is why the lowest stop of the Grand Orgue (32) is lower than that of the Pedale (16).


I understand I am creating the problem. I use a French/Italian organ to play mainly Bach. I do have e.g. Gottfried Silbermann/Freiberg, very suitable for Bach, but I love the Dom Bedos one, now I have it, more.....

gerrit wrote:Why does the sound get muddy when using heavy registrations? Maybe because you are combining the wrong stops. On an organ like this, for example, you should never combine mixtures and reeds or mixtures and tierces. Reeds are combined with cornets and tierces, mixtures and cymbales are used without reeds or tierces.


I will mention the registrations concerned, for BWV737 Vater unser im Himmelreich (note: I play it manualiter).

(1) GO: Montre, Prestant, Doublette - beautiful and clear.

(2) GO: Montre, Prestant, Nasard, Doublette, Grosse Fourniture, Cymbale.
Pos: Larigot; Pos/GO.
I think this is (sort of) a Plein-Jeu which follows, I believe, the guide-lines you mention above? Still, to me, registration (2) sounds "muddy" (I know no better word) than (1). And I have not included the principals of the Positif yet.

Just as an experiment, I also tried
(3) GO: Montre, Prestant, Doublette
Pos: Montre, Prestant, Doublette; Pos/GO.
and this to my ears still sounds a lot clearer than (2).

Well, I have still to learn a lot. Maybe you don't think that (2) is muddy, or I am mistaken in this stop combination....

I'd love to have your comments.
Ernst
Offline

Fazioli

Member

  • Posts: 358
  • Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 2:59 pm
  • Location: Utrecht - Netherlands

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostMon Apr 16, 2012 7:38 pm

gerrit wrote:
Fazioli wrote:
gerrit wrote:you should never combine mixtures and reeds


When playing French baroque music? or never ever..

I meant: on this organ. It just sounds bad and it was not the practice in French baroque. So, I think it is clear that on this organ mixtures and reeds are not meant to be combined.


It's an excellent sample-set of a somewhat odd instrument. The reeds are really nice!, the principals and mixtures are great too, but the flutes and cornets (and there are a lot of them) are all sounding as if they are leaking wind. And then there is this burglar alarm button at the left with a little bird on it. I wonder where they use that for.
Offline

OrganoPleno

Member

  • Posts: 652
  • Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:08 pm

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostTue Apr 17, 2012 10:13 am

Fazioli wrote: And then there is this burglar alarm button at the left with a little bird on it. I wonder where they use that for.


That would be the "Rossignol" or "Nightingale", on other organs called "birdola" or "pajarito". A couple of little flute pipes are made to bubble through a dish of water, creating an outrageous chirping or warbling sound that can be used for "special effects". Both times I've heard it on live organs it was pretty overwhelming, so I guess "burglar alarm" could be another good name for that Stop!
Offline

Buluca

Member

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 12:44 pm

Re: Dom Bedos - sharing user experiences

PostThu Apr 25, 2013 4:44 pm

.

Return to Performance practice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests