Paging Fredrik - Walcha plays Bach (organ work)

Dear Tam,

I am sure you are right that it is the mono series from 1947 to 53, which of course is now out of copyright. The DG Archiv issue has ten discs, which seems to point to the same conclusion.

Not sure what to say, because to avoid breaching the copyright on the current CD reissue they would have to use pre 1955 LP or EP issues, which actually probably are significantly less nice tahn the latest Archiv CD set, but they may actually have purloigned the remastered version.

This issue could not be based on the stereo remake actually, because that was done between 1956 and 1969, I think. They would be in terrible trouble doing that, though proving the edition was CD or LP based from the mono series might be impossible in court, or at least very costly.

ATB from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,

Thanks. That's rather what I thought (anyway, the stereo set is twelve discs).

However, despite sound quality issues, given the cost is about 1/4 the DG set it may be worth a punt.

Annoyingly, I can seem to find nothing on the web about the label.

regards, Tam

Tam and Fredrik

You are right, this is the mono cycle from Cappel and Lübeck 1947-52, and it is identical with the Archive CD release except for the sequence of the works on the sets. As I own some of the original LPs as well as the two years old Archive CD rerelease as well as this new issue, I have compared the sets, and I think (well, I don´t really know), that the source material for this "new" release is the Archiv CD edition. The sound has been "bettered" by the addition of a little reverberation, not altogether a bad thing, since the acoustics in the St. Peter and Paul church in Cappel is very dry. The organ wasn´t built for the church, but for another church and was later moved to Cappel, and the organ is in fact too big for the church. So a big organ in a small room with dry acoustics is not the most favorable condition, and I think the "new" release has got a tad more athmosphere than the earlier releases, even if that athmosphere is artificial. And it has been realized in good taste, and not in excess. I think it is recommendable, not the least considering the cost (10 Euros).

Regards,

Dear pe-zulu,

Thanks for this.

I must say, I'd be pretty surprised if they had used the Original Masters set, as that would surely be illegal.

It is amazing what they can do with surface noise and the like when mastering from old vinyl, providing it's in reasonable condition. The CD Masters broadcast from last Saturday I recommended in another thread (I think the Jochum one) is well worth a listen.

Open up realplayer, go to file-open location and paste this in:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/shows/rpms/radio3/cdreview.rpm

Then drag the timer forward so it's about two and a half hours in (there's some really interesting stuff, including a demonstration of a CEDAR declicking machine) - it's good until we get to the nonsense about 'accidental stereo'.

regards, Tam

Dear pe-zulu,

It says something I suppose, but the rather dry recordings at Cappel are one of the reasons I think they are so splendid. Everything is clear! The idea of something them down with a little bit of artificial reverberation is not something that would please me. In other words I decided to get the official issue!

I am fairly in a tiny minority in regarding clarity as more improtant than opulence in music replay! In my view the dryness of most 78 recordings with their accurate representation of the performed articulation without any reduction in the singing lines of course, makes them inherently more musical than most modern efforts.

I prefer the dry accoustic of London's Royal Festival Hall to any other hall for this same reason!

All the best from Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by Fredrik_Fiske:
I prefer the dry accoustic of London's Royal Festival Hall to any other hall for this same reason!

I haven't been to that many concerts there, but the last one I attended (Mackerras, surprise, surprise, doing, among other things, Janacek's Glagolitic Mass) I was a little apprehensive because of all the stick the acoustic there has received over the years. But, to be honest, I thought it was pretty good. I wonder what things will be like once they've finished all their works?

regards, Tam

Dear Tam,

The plan is to something like double the reverberation, thus rendering it that much harder to listen into the sonority, just like every other large hall on the plannet except the Musikverein, which when it has a big audience in is dry like tinder!

Opera Houses tend to very dry accoustic, and the Paris Opera is perhaps the most startelingly clear one. You could hear a pin drop in there, and yet it does not tend to harshness!

When empty the Great Hall is actually rather echo-ey, but EMI used to know how to deal with that (as shown by the later Furtwangler recordings there like the Beethoven Fifth from 1954) by damping every surface possible with sound absorbent material from the line of the stage back. That got it very similar to the effect of a big audience being present.

DG's efforts in the same Hall were far less successful. Decca abandoned it and moved to another smaller Hall. The Decca Ring was recorded there, but the stage extended right out to near the middle of the Hall, and the accoustic effect is rather pecculiar. Nothing like a concert hall or even any opera house!

All the best from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,

Not sure I like the sound of that (if you'll pardon the pun). Then again, I don't think it's terribly likely I'll be going there any time soon anyway. I must say, I don't think lots of reverberation is all that natural. Then again I don't know quite what it is about the concert halls I really love that makes them so fine (the Snape Maltings for smaller stuff, the Usher Hall for larger works).

I think I'll probably end up getting this Walcha set (if only because I can ill-afford either of the DG boxes right now (though I do intend to get the stereo cycle at some point).

I must say, looking though amazon, and then at various sites that catalogue Walcha's output, there is a shocking amount languishing hidden (or nearly so) in the record companies' vaults. (Can you tell I'm having trouble waiting for my Goldbergs/Well Tempered - the earlier EMI recordings - the later DG Well Tempered looks to be even harder to come by).

regards, Tam

quote:

Originally posted by Tam:
I must say, I'd be pretty surprised if they had used the Original Masters set, as that would surely be illegal.

The Archiv CD set released about two years ago, I wrote about above, which I think is used as the basis for the new Duc- bargain release, is excactly the one, you mention as The Original Masters set, - but maybe they got a licence, or else they would become persecuted at once. Strange on the other hand , that nothing about licence is written in the booklet. A third possibility, which I can´t say anything concrete about, and which I consider to be only of theoretical importance, is, that they used the Japanese Archiv LP releases. The set has been available in Japan on vinyl for a long time, and the quality said to be far superior to the European releases. What in the end assures me, that the Duc release is legal, is the fact, that firms with some reputation like Amazon and Jpc list the it. Am I too naive maybe?

Regards,

quote:

Originally posted by Tam:
I think I'll probably end up getting this Walcha set (if only because I can ill-afford either of the DG boxes right now (though I do intend to get the stereo cycle at some point).

I must say, looking though amazon, and then at various sites that catalogue Walcha's output, there is a shocking amount languishing hidden (or nearly so) in the record companies' vaults. (Can you tell I'm having trouble waiting for my Goldbergs/Well Tempered - the earlier EMI recordings - the later DG Well Tempered looks to be even harder to come by).

Dear Tam

Whatever Fredrik thinks, the Duc bargain release of the Walcha mono set is rather good, and the added effect discrete. Fredrik is likely to frown, but the added effects make the impression of an organ in a church more likeable, and nothing is blurred at all.

I have sent you a mail about the harpsichord recordings.

Regards,

quote:

Originally posted by Fredrik_Fiske:
It says something I suppose, but the rather dry recordings at Cappel are one of the reasons I think they are so splendid. Everything is clear! The idea of something them down with a little bit of artificial reverberation is not something that would please me. In other words I decided to get the official issue!
I am fairly in a tiny minority in regarding clarity as more improtant than opulence in music replay!

Dear Fredrik

This is not a question about opulence, but a question about the relation between the organ and the church room. Every organ builder constructs an organ so, that it sounds most natural and integrated in the room, for which it is built. The Cappel organ, as I explained above, was not built for the church room in Cappel, and for that reason there is a bad relation between this organ and the room, in this case even made worse by Eric Thienhaus´close miking (the renowned engineer, who also miked the Walcha harpsichord recordings). So I think, that in this case there is too much organ and too little room, sounding as if your listening position were too close to the organ. This has very discreetly and tastefully been changed a little by the addition of a very small amount of reverberation, and everything is still perfectly clear and transparent. The sound is neither more or less "opulent" than it was before.

Regards,

Dear Ppe-zulu,

This very issue was the subject of a lovely Thread between R de S (Rodrigo de Sa) and myself maybe two years ago. I expect you could do a search, as it was very interesting, and prompted me to get the old set in the Archiv issue.

At the time I think I was complaining that every recording of Bach I knew on the Organ suffered from too much accoustic and too little Organ! [Or even much to dense and large an instrument used]. So naturally I was delighted by the old recordings being so relatively dry, and clear. I believe R de S described the effect Mondriaanesque, which is apt, I would think!

My view is really that Walcha and Theinhaus obviously approved the way the recordings were, and it is part of the slightly stark way the whole project goes. So for me it is just splendid. I know the Cappel Organ was originally at Hambourg in a much bigger Church and so there is a mismatch of a big instrument in a small Church, but given Walcha's fairly spare registration, the original recordings are certainly not dense or harsh, though the sound world is on occasion stark. I like that severity! I am sure that I am in a tiny minority!

Are you in touch with Rodrigo? I lost his email when my computer broke one time, and my address changed also so we have completely lost contact. If you have his email address could you send mine to him, which at least gives him the privacy to ignore me, or make contact as he wanted. That would be kind. Thanks from Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by Fredrik_Fiske:
Are you in touch with Rodrigo? I lost his email when my computer broke one time, and my address changed also so we have completely lost contact. If you have his email address could you send mine to him, which at least gives him the privacy to ignore me, or make contact as he wanted. That would be kind. Thanks from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik

You are completely right that Walchas most often light registrations compensate somewhat for the problem. But having played the organ myself some years ago, I find, that as a listener I prefer to stay at a little distance from the instrument, not having the pipes up into my nose. The sound is usually more balanced and integrated from a little distance. And I think the sound-perspective of the Cappel recordings is a little to close. Actually I know more recordings with too distant sound-perspective.

Yes I am in contact with Rodrigo, and I shall send him your address to morrow.

Kindest regards,

Dear pe-zulu,

It is always so nice being at a slight variance with you on details and seemingly agreeing so much on the big picture, or so it often appears to me. I am sure the newer mastering of the Cappel records is splendid, actually, but I still think I would have gone for the older ones!

Thanks for agreeing to send to Rodrigo, for I think we have a lot to catch up on! Not least about 20 hours worth of Bach recordings he used to think were fantastic, and which I now have and have enjoyed them as much as his vision of them suggested I would. More thanks to you for that as well!

All the best and goodnight from Fredrik.

Dear Frederik

I shall try to explain the effects of close miking (and listening) on the sound of an organ.

The sound of the organ will become louder, and the reverberation will usually become less prominent as to relative volume, of course only when the organ is playing, not in pauses. What we prefer is a matter of taste.

But the internal balance of the organ sound will change too. You can´t build an organ so as to sound equally integrated and balanced from everywhere in the church. The optimal listening position depends on the size of the organ and the size of the church, but if you stand (or mikes) too close, the sound of the Rückpositiv will become too prominent in relation to the Hauptwerk. And the high stops (2´ , 1´ and mixtures) will also become too prominent. They are meant to act as a reinforcement of the partials of the foundation stops, and they must melt imperceptibly into the sound of these. But close miking and listening will tend to make them too audible, and then you perceive them like individual high registers, and the overall sound will tend to be sharp, in a way the organbuilder didn´t intend.

In Cappel the miking is obviously too close, and these effects are clearly audible. An addition of a very small amount of reverberation can add a tad of sensation of room, but it can´t help against the imbalance of the sound. I shall add, that the Duc bargain edition fortunately isn´t perceptibly filtered, but listening more to the CDs makes me think, that the bass has been very discreetely boostered, and this is definitely not to my taste. But still, this is excellent value for ten Euro´s.

Regards,

Dear pe-zulu,

R de S explained that fairly clearly, and I went to the set expecting some un-eveness, which is apparent, and as I said before I expect the Duc set is perfectly pleasing. But the recordefd cycle was not achieved very quickly and Walcha and his engineer must have approved the way the recordings were made. There is an almost painful clarity to it, and yes, you get the chance to listen right into the sonority, and it would be more blended if the microphone was further back. I rather enjoy the effect, and am not worried at all by the generally close sonority though I can see it might not be to all tastes.

Better this than muddle or doubt. As for the Ruck-positiv being prominet in relation to the Haptwerk, again I find this a real bonus on recording!

And for the general listener, you will be now know of two masterings of the old set, and have a fair exposition of the different sonorities of the two sets. And that is all to the good as well!

All the very best, dear pe-zulu, from Fredrik