Is it really a good idea of end users making new sample sets from existing sample sets? Are they expert organ builders now?
Can you really make a good sample sets by randomly selecting stops from different organs, and then simply, with some adjustments, create a new instrument successfully? Convincingly? My ears, listening to these efforts, say no, with one exception: the Artistide that follows the specification of the C-Coll at St. Ouen de Rouen. It took a team of very meticulous people many hours to make that work quite convincingly. But it remains a compromised approach.
Are end-users now suddenly expert organ builders? Capable of producing a new organ about every month even?
Is our Hauptwerk community truly served by these amateur efforts? Why do I say amateur? Not because these people aren’t expert sound engineers, for they probably are, but simply because they are not real organ builders and do not truly know or sufficiently appreciate what it takes to build a truly great pipe organ.
This goes back to the distinction between an ‘organ builder’ and an ‘organ maker’ (orgelbauer vs. orgelmacher):
The ‘builder’ can be just an assembler; he knows enough about organs to order the parts and pipes, and then basically assembles them. He himself is mostly nothing more than a furniture maker and/or electrician. On average, such organs are pretty bad and uninspiring. They mostly follow no particular style, and are left-overs of the decline period seen before the Organ Reform Movement. Many of such organs are not even enclosed, and have no mechanical action. Instead of pneumatic, it now has direct electric action.
The ‘maker’ builds the parts mostly from scratch; makes his own pipes, makes his own designs, and employs craftsman and artisans, and builds according to historically proven and inspired approaches and styles, and pays enormous attention to pipe scales, metal alloys, acoustics, final voicing, wind pressures, tunings, etc. Such organs inspire, are beautiful to see, etc. Mostly they are mechanical action instruments, but sometimes with electric stop action.
Quality sample set ‘makers’ fall into the latter “maker” category, while sample set assemblers fall into the first ‘assembly’ category above.
An organ is so much more than just a "box of whistles."
Cheers,
Adri
Can you really make a good sample sets by randomly selecting stops from different organs, and then simply, with some adjustments, create a new instrument successfully? Convincingly? My ears, listening to these efforts, say no, with one exception: the Artistide that follows the specification of the C-Coll at St. Ouen de Rouen. It took a team of very meticulous people many hours to make that work quite convincingly. But it remains a compromised approach.
Are end-users now suddenly expert organ builders? Capable of producing a new organ about every month even?
Is our Hauptwerk community truly served by these amateur efforts? Why do I say amateur? Not because these people aren’t expert sound engineers, for they probably are, but simply because they are not real organ builders and do not truly know or sufficiently appreciate what it takes to build a truly great pipe organ.
This goes back to the distinction between an ‘organ builder’ and an ‘organ maker’ (orgelbauer vs. orgelmacher):
The ‘builder’ can be just an assembler; he knows enough about organs to order the parts and pipes, and then basically assembles them. He himself is mostly nothing more than a furniture maker and/or electrician. On average, such organs are pretty bad and uninspiring. They mostly follow no particular style, and are left-overs of the decline period seen before the Organ Reform Movement. Many of such organs are not even enclosed, and have no mechanical action. Instead of pneumatic, it now has direct electric action.
The ‘maker’ builds the parts mostly from scratch; makes his own pipes, makes his own designs, and employs craftsman and artisans, and builds according to historically proven and inspired approaches and styles, and pays enormous attention to pipe scales, metal alloys, acoustics, final voicing, wind pressures, tunings, etc. Such organs inspire, are beautiful to see, etc. Mostly they are mechanical action instruments, but sometimes with electric stop action.
Quality sample set ‘makers’ fall into the latter “maker” category, while sample set assemblers fall into the first ‘assembly’ category above.
An organ is so much more than just a "box of whistles."
Cheers,
Adri