Page:EB1911 - Volume 20.djvu/299

 the most sparing and careful employment of them is undesirable. Expression is not possible unless the stops are enclosed in a swell box—a most desirable arrangement. In all cases hurry is to be avoided. A calm steadiness, a minute finish of all the phrasing, forms most of the difference between first- and second-rate players.

With reference to the general treatment of modern music we quote the preface to Mendelssohn’s Organ Sonatas: “In these sonatas very much depends on the correct choice of the stops; but, since every organ with which I am acquainted requires in this respect special treatment, the stops of given names not producing the same effect in different instruments, I have only indicated certain limits, without specifying the names of the stops. By fortissimo I mean the full organ; by pianissimo usually one soft 8-foot stop alone; by forte, full organ without some of the most powerful stops; by piano, several soft 8-foot stops together; and so on. In the pedal I wish everywhere, even in pianissimo, 8-foot and 16-foot (tone) together, except where the contrary is expressly indicated, as in the sixth sonata [this refers to a passage where an 8-foot pedal is used without 16]. It is therefore left to the player to combine the stops suitably for the different pieces, but particularly to see that, in the simultaneous use of two manuals, the one keyboard is distinguished from the other by its quality, without forming a glaring contrast.”

Importance is attached to the above directions as to single stops. The habit of mixing up two or more stops unnecessarily results in the loss of the characteristic qualities of tone which reach their highest value in single stops.

A habit is prevalent of using couplers in excess. One hears the swell coupled to the great during an entire service. The characteristics of the two manuals, which, separated, lend themselves to such charming contrasts, are lost in the mixture, just as the characteristics of single stops are lost when employed in groups. It is common to see an English organist keep the right foot on the swell pedal and hop about with the left on the pedals. This cannot be called pedal-playing. Both feet should be used, except where the swell pedal is actually required. It is a common habit to hold a note down when it should be repeated. It should be struck again when indicated. The repetition is a relief to the ear.

The older organists commonly filled up their chords, striking pretty nearly every concordant note within reach. The effect of this was in many cases to destroy effects of parts, or effects of restraint leading to contrasts intended by the composer. There is a well-known case of a climax about a line before the end of Bach’s “Passacaglia.” Here there is a pause on a chord of four notes; one low in the bass (pedal); two forming a major third in the middle; and one high in the treble. Some players fill in every concordant note within the reach of both hands. Others consider the effect of Bach’s four notes superior. The writer thinks that the average listener prefers the full chord, and the polyphonic hearer the thin arrangement of parts. Of course the parts are lost if thick chords are used. Restraint in the use of the pedal is also sometimes intended to lead up to a contrast which is lost if the pedal is introduced too soon.

Contrast and variety are essential elements in organ effects. A suitable phrase repeated on solo stops of different characters; a see-saw in a series of rhythmical chords between two manuals of different characters—contrasts generally—are charming when suitably employed. Phrasing we cannot describe here. It is just as important in the organ as in any solo instrument, or in song.

There has been a tendency to attempt too much in the imitation of orchestral instruments. While such stops as good flutes and good imitations of wind instruments have their value, the imitation of stringed instruments and of the orchestra in general

is undesirable. The organ’s own proper tones are unequalled, and it is a pity to make it a mere caricature of the orchestra.

The writer has had the opportunity of inspecting two of the installations known by the name of R. Hope-Jones; both under the care of an able enthusiast in the matter, Mr Collinson, of Edinburgh. The Hope-Jones system consists of two parts: a mechanism, and a system of pipe-work. These must be considered separately. The mechanism is entirely electric. One example consisted of an application of this mechanism to a fine organ by Willis. The conditions were as favourable as possible, with temperature regulation and constant use. Yet even in this case the contacts failed occasionally. The difficulty about repetition appeared to have been entirely got over, the performance being satisfactory when the contact was in good order. These contacts appear to be the weak part of the system. All the mechanism, couplers and all, is worked by means of these contacts. With the care which is taken no difficulty is found in getting the arrangement to work in the case of the Willis instrument. The system is very complicated, with double touch couplers throughout, by means of which a solo can be effected on one manual by varying the pressure. The study of the double touch appears very difficult. Stop handles are done away with. They are replaced by rockers, the faces of which are about the size of small railway tickets. The appearance is as if the surface where the stop handles would be was plastered over with these rockers. They turn on a horizontal axis through the middle, and a touch of the finger at top or bottom opens or closes the stop. The other instrument was Hope-Jones throughout, pipes and mechanism. The curator was the same as in the case of the Willis instrument. But, the hall being little used, there was no temperature regulation, and very little use. The state of the mechanism was inferior, the contacts failing freely. It could not be regarded as an admissible mechanism from the writer’s point of view. As to the pipe-work, the effect was remarkable; but it could not be regarded as genuine organ work, as the player admitted. Our requirement in the matter of action is a perfectly unfailing connexion between key and pipe. And in this respect we adhere to a preference for the old tracker action, where possible. Anything that leaves a possibility of failure in the connexion we regard as inadmissible.

History of the Ancient Organ.

The earliest authentic records of the organ itself do not extend beyond the second century, but the evolution of the instrument from the Syrinx or Pan-pipe goes back to a remote period. The hydraulic and pneumatic organs of the ancients were practically the same instrument, differing only in the method adopted for the compression of the wind supply; in the former this was effected by the weight of water, and in the latter by the more primitive expedient of working the bellows by hand or foot. What is known, therefore, of the evolution of the organ before hydraulic power was applied to it is common to both hydraulic and pneumatic organs. The organ of the ancients was a simple contrivance, consisting, in order of evolution, of three essential parts: (1) a sequence of pipes graduated in length and made of reed, wood or bronze; (2) a contrivance for compressing the wind and for supplying it to the pipes in order to make them speak, the ends of such pipes as were required to be silent being at first stopped by the fingers; and (3) a system for enabling the performer to store the wind and to control the distribution of the supply separately to the several pipes at will. The pipes of the syrinx were the prototypes of No. 1; the bellows and the bag-pipe—which was but the application of the former to the reed—foreshadowed No. 2. The third part of the organ was composed of contrivances and common objects used by carpenters, such as boxes having sliding lids running in grooves, levers, &c.

It seems probable that the syrinx was recognized by the ancients as the basis of the organ. Hero of Alexandria, in his description of the hydraulic organ, calls it a syrinx. Philo of Alexandria (c. 200 ), mentioning the invention of the hydraulis(us) by Ctesibius,