Help with organ music requested

[Dax]

I guess nobody has time for this type of organ music.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/5ltw5t
Yes, it's from Peru.

I've always found a problem with most performances/recordings of Bach on church organs. Something to do with omnipresent harmonics and registration choices I suppose.
Nothing wrong with the sound of an organ of course.

Jehan Alain, anybody?

Or Liszt? (pace JdP)

[71 dB]

Yes, except shy of a big REL or Gotham, or maybe a big Velodyne DD series, there's really no such thing as a good sub.

Hah, I guess you have not heard of Genelec subwoofers?

Also, many people construct themselves high performance subwoofers at tolerable cost.

[Mandryka]

I used to have some enormous B and W speakers with massive woofers.

I "upgraded" to Quad electrostatics, which are a better speaker  in the midrange, for sure. But in the bass they aren't as powerful.

For most intents and purposes it doesn't matter, and the Quads are an improvement. But for organ music it sure does matter!

If I ever get back into organ music (which is not beyond the realms of possibility), I'll want to do something about that.

[Todd]

Hah, I guess you have not heard of Genelec subwoofers?

Yes, I have, and I know you're exceedingly proud of the firm because it is Finnish, and no I haven't heard anything from that firm.  I probably never will.  (Since Genelec is poorly distributed in the US and I would have to drive hundreds of miles to hear anything made by them, it's moot anyway.)  I have heard a good number of subs from a variety of firms, including some firms that do nothing but make subs, and almost everything I've heard doesn't make me want to buy a sub.  Smaller, cheaper subs, despite claims to the contrary, do not provide low distortion, omnidirectional bass.  They produce high distortion bass that gives away the location of the box. 

Then there's integration with the system.  More and more subs do not offer built in crossovers, especially in the "budget" range (which I define as under $2000), which means using a built in "parametric equalizer", which inevitably means poor integration.  Frequencies at the lowest end of the speakers' output are, for lack of a better word, more lumpy than normal in such a setup.  So then I'd have to buy some type of external crossover, if the sub could use it, and then fiddle with more electronics in the chain.  Throw in the fact that the gear I use requires special cables to use with other brands, and it becomes a mess, all for nothing of value. 

Now, if I had the space, I would consider a giant REL, which produce the best subs I've heard, just at enormous cost.  Gotham subs have a pretty good reputation, too.  And maybe that new monster from Paradigm.  And Velodyne, well, I hold out hope that there biggest subs are good, because their lower end ones sure have not been very good.  And that was based on some listening done earlier this year when I briefly entertained the idea of adding a sub to my "home theater" for bigger, better 'splosions.  I didn't like what I heard for even that, let alone music.

As to DIY gear, well, I leave that to DIYers.  Maybe some are great (I doubt it very much), maybe not, but I will not find out.

[drogulus]

Jehan Alain, anybody?

     Oh, yes. I'm exploring his work now, though I hesitate to recommend a composer I'm only just getting into except to people who are favorably inclined.

Yes, I have, and I know you're exceedingly proud of the firm because it is Finnish, and no I haven't heard anything from that firm.  I probably never will.  (Since Genelec is poorly distributed in the US and I would have to drive hundreds of miles to hear anything made by them, it's moot anyway.)  I have heard a good number of subs from a variety of firms, including some firms that do nothing but make subs, and almost everything I've heard doesn't make me want to buy a sub.  Smaller, cheaper subs, despite claims to the contrary, do not provide low distortion, omnidirectional bass.  They produce high distortion bass that gives away the location of the box. 

Then there's integration with the system.  More and more subs do not offer built in crossovers, especially in the "budget" range (which I define as under $2000), which means using a built in "parametric equalizer", which inevitably means poor integration.  Frequencies at the lowest end of the speakers' output are, for lack of a better word, more lumpy than normal in such a setup.  So then I'd have to buy some type of external crossover, if the sub could use it, and then fiddle with more electronics in the chain.  Throw in the fact that the gear I use requires special cables to use with other brands, and it becomes a mess, all for nothing of value. 

Now, if I had the space, I would consider a giant REL, which produce the best subs I've heard, just at enormous cost.  Gotham subs have a pretty good reputation, too.  And maybe that new monster from Paradigm.  And Velodyne, well, I hold out hope that there biggest subs are good, because their lower end ones sure have not been very good.  And that was based on some listening done earlier this year when I briefly entertained the idea of adding a sub to my "home theater" for bigger, better 'splosions.  I didn't like what I heard for even that, let alone music.

As to DIY gear, well, I leave that to DIYers.  Maybe some are great (I doubt it very much), maybe not, but I will not find out.

     What about something like this?

   

     SVS AS-EQ1

     You could use the onboard calibration to correct for both the sub and the room. I would love to have one of these.

     Where was I? Oh yes....one last plea for sanity in a baroquified world.

     
     

[Todd]

What about something like this?



SVS AS-EQ1

You could use the onboard calibration to correct for both the sub and the room. I would love to have one of these.

I've thought about similar products, but then I also thought to myself that I am far too lazy to do all that fiddling, at least for the time being.  (Then getting RCA to DIN plugs will be another expense/pain that I'd rather not deal with for the time being.)  My current setup gets me low enough.  At least for now.

I must say that I had forgotten all about the syndicated radio show Pipe Dreams, which is of course devoted to pipe organ recordings.  I caught about half of it yesterday.  As if to reiterate the significance of Bach, the show's host mentioned that Bach is the center of the organ repertoire around which all other composers orbit, or something similarly celestial.  Then he played some Bach pieces that struck me as more than a little good.  I will have to investigate Bach a bit more, methinks.

[Opus106]

As if to reiterate the significance of Bach, the show's host mentioned that Bach is the center of the organ repertoire around which all other composers orbit, or something similarly celestial.  Then he played some Bach pieces that struck me as more than a little good.  I will have to investigate Bach a bit more, methinks.

They are actually extremely good, but that's another matter. Mind if I ask what the works you heard were?

[Todd]

They are actually extremely good, but that's another matter. Mind if I ask what the works you heard were?

I can't remember, to be honest.  I think one was a Prelude in G.  It was pretty good.

[Opus106]

I can't remember, to be honest.  I think one was a Prelude in G.  It was pretty good.

In any case, I'm happy to hear of some progress (if I can call it that).

[Todd]

I finally pulled the trigger on some organ music, and I ended up going for a bit more than I was originally planning for.  I opted for the near complete Walcha Bach compilation after so many here praised the artist, plus my additional searches on the recordings yielded nothing but high praise for the set.  I also opted for Vierne's complete organ symphonies.  Should make for some interesting listening.  I've got a lot to digest now.

My first haul of organ music:

 

 

[Josquin des Prez]

Happy listening! 

[Josquin des Prez]

BTW, i see you have chosen the Rudolf Innig recording of Brahm's organ works. He's very good, much better then Robert Parkins on Naxos, which i found to be plodding and soporific, but his tempos are a bit hectic. Be sure you invest an effort trying to keep up with him and keep a firm view of the contrapuntal texture eitherwise the music is going to sound like incomprehensible mush the moment you lose focus.

[drogulus]

My first haul of organ music:

     That's a very good start IMNSHO. The Vierne collection may not appeal due to the reverberant recording. It may suit you, though, since I prefer organ recordings on the dry side for the sake of clarity.

[Philoctetes]

I'm very late to the party, but for me organ music begins and ends with the piece I'll link to below. For me it fulfills my conception of how the organ should sound, mind you this is my opinion though.

http://www.youtube.com/v/EpzghPhlfDs

All of my favorite organ pieces come from the "French" school of music. So Messiaen, Widor, Tournemire, Dupre, Durufle, and Vierne.

I also love the playing of Dupre and Latry but really in the end, I don't think one can go wrong when selecting organ music. It's the only instrument I've come across where I've loved everything compositionally.