It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:18 am


Contrebombarde Concert Hall Birthday

Discuss and share submissions to the Contrebombarde website.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

chorn

Member

  • Posts: 270
  • Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:23 pm

PostThu May 07, 2009 5:00 am

dwood wrote:"if it wasn't for all of us...all of us wouldn't be here"

... and especially if it wasn't for Martin Dyde.

CBCH has proved to have been an excellent idea, and it's been put together very well - somehow, I didn't expect anything so good when I first came across the idea.

Congratulations.
Offline

dwood

Member

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:57 pm
  • Location: Toronto, Canada

PostThu May 07, 2009 12:49 pm

Thanks again for giving feedback on CBCH.

On the Firefox issue: Apparently the bug has been fixed by Adobe (download at the bottom of the page)

https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-862

Regarding the comments on CBCH.

We opted for a "youtube" type model as opposed to a "moderator" type model. Obviously, there are pros and cons to each way of doing things but we have gone with the "youtube" model as having the best transparency.

Consider the quote below to be the official guidelines for posting on CBCH.

Contrebombarde Concert Hall's purpose is to be a collaborative, nurturing community for people of all skill levels who enjoy both classical and theatre pipe organs. Quality will vary, taste will vary, and genres will vary. Your job, as a member, is to take the skills you have and use it to edify the community.

You don't have to like all pieces. You don't have to be disingenuous with comments. However, I would suggest for every objectively critical comment you need to include at least 2 or 3 genuine compliments. If you cannot fill this ratio in good conscience, don't comment. Because, whatever you do write, is not going to enhance the community at all.

Lastly, criticism needs to be objective. Never attack someone's character or the character of a sample set producer.

More than anything now, the organ community needs champions who will build it up. Worldwide, the proliferation of the instrument is in crisis. The traditional Infighting and snobbery of the organist community are not helpful for expanding the pool of organists (or donors who fund the instruments). We need people like you (obviously not afraid to speak their minds) to be the ones to actively find ways to encourage others in positive ways; to nurture another, expanded generation of organists. I hope you will be one of those champions.


Sometimes people forget that they are posting on an open forum. They are not always cognizant that their own character, motives, agendas, biases, prejudices are also very transparent to everyone else when they post. It only takes a few posts to get an idea about the person posting.

So, if you are an encourager and a person interested in coaxing the best out of your peers and out of us manufacturers, you will be valued and listened to en masse.

If you are bitter, gossipy, clique-ish, divisive and otherwise looking to slight people, you will most likely be deleted, scorned and dismissed... And rightly so. Who wants to be around people like that?

We have given you the tools to encourage the behaviour you wish to see repeated (great performances, encouraging and helpful comments etc) and also the tools to minimize the impact of those with suspect motives.

CBCH gives you the opportunity to hear different sample sets and decide which ones you want to invest in. Use it that way so you don't get stuck with a set that sounds like it was recorded half-way down the nave.

Evil prevails when good people fail to act (I think the saying goes). So overwhelm the system with content you believe in and encourage others to do the same. The moderators only need to get involved to deal with bullies because it really is your community.

I did have to remove some comments about a month ago. They were over-the-top, abusive, personal attacks. There were some others removed by the recipient around the same time which were similar. There wasn't much redeeming social or musical value in those particular comments. So yes, I endorsed those actions.

Any subsequent deletions were at the discretion of the recipient.

What I continually love about Hauptwerk is the ability it has to re-form, re-define and re-invigorate a community and art-form. I hope it keeps inspiring you to make wonderful creations and spreading the word.
Offline
User avatar

PeterD

Member

  • Posts: 527
  • Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:21 am
  • Location: Surrey, England

PostThu May 07, 2009 3:18 pm

Hi Darryl

I have to say I think your guidelines for comments on CBCH have a certain "1984" quality to them.

You don't have to like all pieces. You don't have to be disingenuous with comments. However, I would suggest for every objectively critical comment you need to include at least 2 or 3 genuine compliments. If you cannot fill this ratio in good conscience, don't comment. Because, whatever you do write, is not going to enhance the community at all.

If the same guidlines applied to the HW Forum I suspect the whole thing would have withered on the vine a long time ago. Yes - even in the best mannered community, which HW is most assuredly, there are occasional minor tirades against individuals BUT they have been very minor and the recipients of criticism on this forum at least, have scarcely been shrinking violets in their own defence ( including sample set makers).

Your guidlines for CBCH will simply tend emasculate the whole process and this overeaction has arisen because somebody dared to say he didn't like PAB. Shocking ! That's rather sad particularly as CBCH is plainly being used to showcase sample sets... nothing wrong with that, quite the reverse,but if you don't like criticism then the best place for your demo's is on your own website. In any case CBCH has inevitably developed a language of its own...... the silences speak eloquently.

I once worked for a company that specified in bi-annual reviews that a score of "Average" was to be deemed "Good" as the company only employed better than average people. To try and constrain everyone to a view of a world in which all is ( largely) wonderful is a very similar "Alice in Wonderland" logic.

A great resource.. as I said before, keep it honest, open and candid

Best

Peter
Last edited by PeterD on Thu May 07, 2009 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

dwood

Member

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:57 pm
  • Location: Toronto, Canada

PostThu May 07, 2009 3:56 pm

Hey Peter,

I'm not saying what the user did was right or wrong when responding to the PAB comments. I'm saying it was up to them; Just like it's up to you how you respond to comments on your own posts. Somewhat the antithesis of '84.

The ones I erased early last month were of a totally different nature and should not be confused with any recent deletions. They would have been erased from any forum including, most likely, this one as well.

You can choose to like the "guideline" or not. It's entirely your call. It's just a guideline. That's just one way for relative strangers to approach things constructively.

We won't be getting involved except in rare extreme cases. We've only had one issue in over a year. If there has been a rash of censorship on CBCH, that's news to me. It has had nothing to do with the admin...(I never really liked the look of my face on the big screen and you certainly don't need my giant head in your livingroom).

Happy playing.
Offline
User avatar

PeterD

Member

  • Posts: 527
  • Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:21 am
  • Location: Surrey, England

PostThu May 07, 2009 4:43 pm

Magna res est vocis et silentii temperamentum
Offline
User avatar

imcg110

Member

  • Posts: 831
  • Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:25 am
  • Location: Scotland

PostThu May 07, 2009 4:52 pm

heu, modo itera omnia quae mihi nunc nuper narravisti, sed nunc anglice?
Offline

deWaverley

Member

  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:33 pm
  • Location: UK, Bath

PostThu May 07, 2009 5:29 pm

Vincit omnia veritas

Thank you PeterD for speaking so eloquently for so many of us who see blandness as the enemy of creativity.

Saepe creat molles aspera spina rosas

Beyond that, I shall heed the advice of your second post (for once).

deW

Iain : Lingua speciem involutam praebet, sed sat cito eam comprehendes :)
Offline

Fazioli

Member

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

PostFri May 08, 2009 6:20 am

Happy Birthday from Holland!!!

I'm afraid I was the one that posted the first comment on the PAB 2nd demo, and no it was not a very positive one.

I wanted to explain why I didn't like it.
It had nothing to do wit the performer, since I have great respect for him and I say that every time I post a comment on his postings.
I simply don't like PAB and because I didn't hear any PAB demo posted so far that sounded realistic in my ears and because I believe Hauptwerk is the best software instrument available and of a much better quality then any digital organ in the world, to me it make no sense to produce sample-sets that sound just like them.
I know many professional organists that don't yet know about Hauptwerk and sometimes it's very hard to explain a musician what it really is, how great this software is. Sample-sets like PAB are not of any help to me getting the people I know interested in Hauptwerk.
The problem was, I made a mistake to say this as a comment on the very first demo of the extended version of PAB. that was the reason why Joe deleted my comment and I understand this now. So I hope that the PAB gets better I really hope that!

All the best,

Roland
Offline
User avatar

mdyde

Moderator

  • Posts: 15446
  • Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:19 pm
  • Location: UK

PostFri May 08, 2009 6:39 am

Hello Roland,

I think it mainly comes down to the dry-vs-wet preference. Digital organs traditionally use dry samples (optionally with reverb/convolution applied across their output(s) as a whole) and with less speakers/impulses than there are pipes.
Best regards, Martin.
Hauptwerk software designer/developer, Milan Digital Audio.
Offline

Johannes Sørensen

Member

  • Posts: 228
  • Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:25 am
  • Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

PostFri May 08, 2009 9:06 am

I don't think it is (mainly) a dry-vs-wet question. We have dry sample sets - also with demos on corntrebombarde - without this some “sterile” sound.

Can it to some degree be a concert hall versus a church acoustic?

Best regards
Johannes
Last edited by Johannes Sørensen on Fri May 08, 2009 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

dwood

Member

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:57 pm
  • Location: Toronto, Canada

PostFri May 08, 2009 9:16 am

Magna res est vocis et silentii temperamentum


Exactly! Couldn't have said it better.
Offline

jcfelice88keys

Member

  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:24 am

An Apology and an Explanation

PostFri May 08, 2009 10:55 am

Fazioli wrote:Happy Birthday from Holland!!!

I'm afraid I was the one that posted the first comment on the PAB 2nd demo, and no it was not a very positive one.

I wanted to explain why I didn't like it.
It had nothing to do wit the performer, since I have great respect for him and I say that every time I post a comment on his postings.

I simply don't like PAB and because I didn't hear any PAB demo posted so far that sounded realistic in my ears and because I believe Hauptwerk is the best software instrument available and of a much better quality then any digital organ in the world, to me it make no sense to produce sample-sets that sound just like them.

I know many professional organists that don't yet know about Hauptwerk and sometimes it's very hard to explain a musician what it really is, how great this software is. Sample-sets like PAB are not of any help to me getting the people I know interested in Hauptwerk.

The problem was, I made a mistake to say this as a comment on the very first demo of the extended version of PAB. that was the reason why Joe deleted my comment and I understand this now. So I hope that the PAB gets better I really hope that!

All the best,

Roland


Hello All,

I must confess to not following this thread, because I was the first well-wisher of the Contrebombarde Happy Birthday celebration. In the days to weeks that followed, I was unaware that a separate discussion had occurred involving my choice to delete a negative comment regarding the PAB extended library.

You have my heartfelt apology for causing any ill feeling in either this forum or the CBCH. I was motivated to delete the first comment because a comment was made to the effect that if the person had heard the PAB Extended version as an example of Crummhorn Labs, he would have never pursued Crummhorn any further.

As a result, I did send Mr. Fazioli a private message, so as to acknowledge his feelings and to state my own. Here is the entire content of the private message I sent to Roland. The words are in italics to capture every word of the PM.

Hello Mr. Fazioli,

You have chosen a great name by which to represent yourself in the Hauptwerk / Crummhorn community. I have had the pleasure of playing a few Fazioli pianos 7' and their approximately 10' or 10-1/2' counterparts. They are absolutely superb pianos in terms of build quality and sheer silkiness of touch and evenness of tonal response.


I wanted to contact you privately rather than speak out in the public forum; hopefully you don't mind my choosing to communicate with you privately. Firstly, I must thank you for your kind remarks about my playing. The Franck has been a piece I have been playing since the early 1970's, and it is a very dear favourite of mine to study and perform.


I clearly do understand your preference of hearing French romantic organ literature on a Cavaille-Coll or similar instrument. As you are keenly aware, the French instruments have a "voice" that is unmatched anywhere else in the world. Along a similar path of thought, I suspect that even the Dutch Schnitgers speak with different tones than, say, North Germanic ones. Perhaps it is due even to the climate that trees (made into pipes) are grown, and even the ambient temperature / humidity conditions that cause the woods to age over the decades and centuries.


I must confess to having never heard a Cavaille-Coll in a live setting, much less than even played one. Perhaps it is because of my USA upbringing that most of the instruments I have heard live and performed on are more similar to the Aeolean-Skinners and even the Pesci-Mulhanssen of the type captured in the PAB. And although I can appreciate the fine character of the Metz or Caen CC's, I am not disturbed nearly as much as many Hauptwerk members are about those so-called monster machines (or "American Classic" sounds).


In a way, it's ironic, because the very, very first time I heard the Crummhorn Metz CC, I had nearly the exact (rather negative) reaction to it that you seemed to have of the PAB organ. I specifically remember the piece being the Finale movement to Vierne's Symphony #1 in D. I listened to it for less than 30 seconds -- I had heard enough of the Metz CC!!!


So what's the point of this Private Message? I suppose it is that, in this worldwide community of organ enthusiasts and performers, we each tend to enjoy those sounds we are most familiar experiencing for ourselves.

Regarding the Metz CC, it is tuned at approximately A=435Hz, and I (born with absolute pitch) get very annoyed listening to tunings less than, say, A=440 or 442Hz. I CAN tell the difference immediately.

Now, I believe I read that you have worked on pianos, possibly for a living? Well, I also tune pianos regularly, and I am very keen on equal temperament. Perhaps it is the tuning scheme that is different that is very noticeably "different" from what I am used to tuning a piano by the aural method.

Perhaps a common ground analogy might go something like this: Do you remember the first time you studied Beethoven's Symphonies? More likely than not, we humans tend to latch onto the way we originally hear something as being "authentic" in our own minds' ears -- when someone performs it faster or slower, or more rubato, or whatever, most subsequent performances never seem to live up to our expectations.


Maybe an analogy of organ literature might be the Virgil Fox school versus the E. Power Biggs school, versus Karl Richter or Marie Claire Alain's performances of J.S. Bach's major organ works. To me, it seems to be that people tend to "identify" with a certain performance style, simply because we associate with what we have heard and remembered in our corresponding youthful minds.

I believe the same analogy may be drawn between one's like / dislike of a certain organ building style that might run counter to other people's dislikes / likes of exactly the same instrument. I thought it might be unfair to Csaba Huszty's product if I left your original comments intact.

Surely, there was no intention to snub you when I deleted our eloquently explained comment; I am glad we have had a chance to exchange ideas.

If you have any opinions, comments, questions on any subject of your choosing related to organs, organ building, performance practice, literature, etc., etc., I would be more than willing to discuss them with you at length.

Cheers, and thank you for reading this far. Enough of my rambling for now.

Joe


<The Private Message Ends here.>

Thank you for reading this far; again, if I inadvertently caused harm or ill feeling among anyone in this forum, you have my deepest apology.

Sincerely,

Joe
Offline

adri

Member

  • Posts: 1545
  • Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:33 am
  • Location: Belgrade, Serbia

PostFri May 08, 2009 12:12 pm

Hmmmmmm....all interesting points and well taken.

And yet, can a so-called compromis organ really do justice to organ musics from all periods and styles and national origins, when the organ building styles were vastly different as to:

1. pipe metal alloys
2. wood materials
3. scaling
4. voicing
5. wind pressure
6. type of wind supply
7. case work (open or enclosed)
8. depth of organ case, type of projection
9. divisional layout
10. stop lists
11 acoustics
12. etc.

Yes/no ????????????????

I remember getting quite bored listening to Handel's Messiah being perfomed on modern instruments, an overly large choir and a modern-romantic interpretation approach. I truly felt, that while these performances can be inspiring, nevertheless something essential of the music had gotten lost, and I wondered if it could be recaptured. When I finally heard a performance by a group on period instruments, I was happy beyond belief. What a difference ! The music came back to life, the way it was meant to sound (or at least far closer than the romantic approach).

Any ONE organ cannot do justice to both J. P. Sweelinck and Cesar Franck at the same time, as all the following things should be different:
1. tuning
2. pipe scales, style of making them, metal alloys, voicing
3. wind supply and wind pressure
4. stop list
etc.

Hence, historically, stylistically, and musically some organs do not succeed.

The comment about that we like is simialr to what we grew up with and becomes the measuring stick through which we judge other organs and performances consequently is a remark I can appreciate for its obvious kernel of truth, but it is also a potentially problematic remark, because if you like e.g. Sweelinck on a Skinner organ, and that's the way you grew up with this music, you will never understand that music until you play it on a suitable old Dutch organ or a good imitation thereof. Such diversions from established habits are eye openers!

What is so great about HW is that it gives us a hance to experience music on more appropriate instruments than we would have at our disposal otherwise, and teaches us invalubale lessons. All eye(=ear) openers!

With all this said, I nevertheless also keep an open mind, because who knows, Bach, if he had traveled to Holland, may have liked a Dutch Hinsch, Batz or Chr. Muller organ better than a Silbermann or Hillebrandt?

One closing thought: an instrument that is truly a masterpiece of good design, good materials, inspiring musical quality, and has been built with tlc in-house, will always surprise people of the wide gamut of music that can be played on it, while an instrument that purports to be a please-all, one-size-fits-all kind of thing and which has been designed and assembled from delivered parts (which is alas often the case!) often fail at doing anything good, and thus will leave many people musically cold.

There is a church nearby to where I live, which spent a million dollars (so they told me) on their organ, including adding lots of new pipe and digital stops and a new console, and I played a wedding on it for a friend of mine, and the ca. 100-stop and way too loud instrument left me totally cold. Nothing worked really well, and no music sounded good on it to me. In short: I hated it. Large does not automatically mean good. A subjective opinion by a Dutchman who grew up with old organs? Perhaps in part yes. But am I totally wrong here? No. Because I am still foremost a musician first, and that's how we judge things.

At least it's good we have choices; pick what you like and what makes you happy. I ultimately don't care what gets your musical fires going.

My 2 cents....
Offline

deWaverley

Member

  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:33 pm
  • Location: UK, Bath

PostFri May 08, 2009 1:18 pm

adri wrote: Because I am still foremost a musician first, and that's how we judge things.


Voilà!
Offline

Antoni Scott

Member

  • Posts: 982
  • Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:18 pm

Contre-Bombarde first year.

PostFri May 08, 2009 10:53 pm

Happy Birthday Contre-Bombarde.
Bloody marvellous web site. I really enjoy listening to Hauptwerk organs and the Hauptwerk contributing community. In fact I haven't purchased a CD in a year.

Antoni
PreviousNext

Return to Contrebombarde Concert Hall

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests