Live in Concert 18.03.14 - RFH Organ Concert

[Flosshilde]

That's interesting, as it always was a solid wall at the back
(there's a corridor and dressing rooms etc so no windows at all)

I thought there probably was - I couldn't see any sign of any window outside that would correspond. They must have had a black wall beind the pipes with lights either reflecting or inserted giving the impression of a night view.

And are there wooden shutters that opened when the organ was in use? Or am confusing that with the shutters over the screen in the BFI cinema?

[rauschwerk]

Did no one listen in the end?

I heard the first half hour and the last 20 minutes in the car and enjoyed it a lot. I'm delighted to be going next week to hear the Poulenc concerto and Saint-Saens 3rd symphony.

In the 1960s they decided to dismantle the organ in order to finally finish the RFH. In the last concert before that, Ralph Downes played the Poulenc and the Times critic (anon) wrote something like, "We could only wish that he had chosen to play something more worthy of his artistry, the instrument and the rest of the programme." Truly, some people were really sniffy about Poulenc's music in those days.

[MrGongGong]

I thought there probably was - I couldn't see any sign of any window outside that would correspond. They must have had a black wall beind the pipes with lights either reflecting or inserted giving the impression of a night view.

And are there wooden shutters that opened when the organ was in use? Or am confusing that with the shutters over the screen in the BFI cinema?

There were shutters that covered the whole of the front of the organ so you didn't always see it.
They were put back after the refurbishment of the hall

[mercia]

I didn't fully understand the technicalities that Mr McV described in the interval, but that we are now hearing parts of the organ (the lower frequencies ? ) better than ever before because of structural changes to the hall itself. I thought it sounded splendid, personally I like the clarity possible from a drier acoustic.

[Vile Consort]

I didn't fully understand the technicalities that Mr McV described in the interval, but that we are now hearing parts of the organ (the lower frequencies ? ) better than ever before because of structural changes to the hall itself. I thought it sounded splendid, personally I like the clarity possible from a drier acoustic.

A dry acoustic is something of a handicap to organ tone. Some pieces suffer more than others. I thought the Taverner suffered badly. There were clearly moments where we ought to have been listening to the sound echoing round the building before moving on to the next phrase. As Jennifer Bate says about Messiaen's music - those long rests don't mean there should be silence; they should be filled with the sound of the foregoing tumult dying away.

But I understand that the acoustic of the RFH is not drier than it was, as you suggest, but less dry. Still rather on the dry side for the organ, but I got the impression it now sounds warmer and more full-bodied, presumably because we can hear the bass rather better. On the strength of what I heard broadcast last night, I at last feel it might be worth my while to go to a recital there once more. I went to one in the mid 70's and found it underwhelming.

It is very easy for the microphones to lie, and judging an organ from a recording or broadcast can be very misleading. I remember purchasing an LP of the organ of King's College, Cambridge whilst I was an undergraduate and playing it to a friend without saying where it was. He frankly didn't believe it was the same organ we had been listening to on Saturday evenings after evensong.

In a very resonant building such as a cathedral, the cognoscenti will choose a place where balance between clarity and reverberation is to their taste. At a recent recital at Ripon I changed seats at the interval, moving almost to the back of the nave - it sounded much better from there.

[mercia]

I didn't express myself properly, I meant I prefer a comparatively dry acoustic for some organ music (particularly Bach), not that the RFH is drier than it was [which I wouldn't know one way or the other].
I think I shall enjoy Friday's recital more than last night. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03y3fvl

[OldTechie]

Yes, the acoustic is not drier than it was, just the opposite. They have done a lot of work to make it more live. For instance they removed a lot of carpet form the floor, and made the underside of the seats reflecting rather than absorbent. It was more live when I went to hear Ralph Downes in the 1960s because there was an artificial reverberation system installed with microphones mounted in Helmholtz resonators in the ceiling over the audience. Each had its own amplifier feeding its own speaker somewhere over the stage. So they had a multi-band equaliser with the band selection done acoustically in the hall, and the gain of each amplifier adjustable to achieve the desired result. It worked fairly well for a few years but spiders etc upset the resonators and they turned it off. (Not as bad as the echo chanbers in the BBC Lime Grove studios which were inclined to stop working when the rats ate the loudspeaker cones.) The really big change was to move the two walls either side of the stage so they reflect some sound to the orchestra so they have some chance of hearing what they are doing - and it was that which forced them to make the organ chamber smaller.

Mrs OT and I were there last night and the iPlayer versions is not always as good a representation of what we heard as it should be, though I think it is a fair representation of the acoustics.

The Gigout with its brass arrangement was very different in the hall. The brass introduction was a crisp and sharp fanfare for the new organ. It's really quite soggy and soft on iPlayer in comparison. I think they may have used microphones hung over the brass section, so the sound projected by the trumpets to the middle of the rear stalls where we were sitting did not make it into the microphones. Maybe that's not so bad, because in the hall the organ sounded a bit unable to compete with the brass whereas they are better matched on iPlayer. The pedal section sounded a touch weedy compared to my expectations (based on the recent Chandos recording of the work played by Ian Tracey on the Liverpool Catherdral organ), and iPlayer loses a bit more.

John Scott's playing of BWV 582 was a delight. Not having to compete with the brass, he was able to get a much better balance and found some lovely sounds. The iPlayer version seems a reasonable approximation to real life. It was very different to the Davide Goode version on the 1714 Freiberg Cathedral Silbermann organ (on Signum) that I have. Oddly it sounds to be four times the size of the RFH organ though it is much smaller. Playing one after the other is a bit painful as the Silbermann organ pitch is very high (a=476.3Hz.) Perhaps some of the difference is the reverberation.

Isabelle Demers playing the Mendelssohn from memory had me on edge. We had recently attended a recital where someone had tried that on a well known Bach prelude and fugue, and had got lost to the extent of having to stop and restart. Ms Demers had no such issues and her precision performance made it through iPlayer well enough.

Alison Balsom's arrangement of Bach's keyboard arrangement of Vivaldi's violin concerto was much better in the hall than on iPlayer. She and David Goode had obviously spent some effort in getting the balance between the organ and the trumpet absolutely perfect. This included some very delicate and quiet trumpet playing by Ms Balsom, which I guess is probably not easy. However the BBC obviously did not like this balance and thought she should be a touch louder when transmitted.

The Maxwell Davies was absolutely right for the occasion - but maybe is less fun on iPlayer even though the sound is OK.

The Tavener start to the second half was stirring stuff, and that seems to get through iPlayer.

Jane Parker-Smith gave us a fine rendition of the Franck and her own Mephisto Waltz transcription. I'm not sure about the Mephisto Waltz on an organ, I'll stick to the orchestra and piano versions.

The Dupré is a vituoso piece for both the organ and the organist. I thought Ms Demers was excellent, but maybe the organ did not offer her quite the power the piece deserves. (Another one where I find myself comparing it with a CD I have - in this case Daniel Moult on Bridlington Priory Organ.)

[Flosshilde]

Thanks, OldTechie - a very interesting & useful comparison/review.

[Mattbod]

I am very catholic when it comes to organs and I have a soft spot for organ revival movement instruments like this. I think it is ludicrous to call them neo baroque as they don't sound anything like a baroque instrument in my opinion but they do have a certain charm along with organs by US builders such as Lawrence Phelps and Hotlkamp (though the latter are normally a bit too comb and paper for me). I must say though that I would much rather go and hear the organ at the Royal Albert, even after its brutalisation and toning down by Mander (ugh) or Westminster Cathedral than this organ but it does have a certain power and charm although I am not sure Arthur Harrison would approve as this organ is about as far from his masterpiece at St Mary Redcliffe Bristol as one can imagine.

The most serious flaw with this organ the completely dead acoustic and, despite what others have said here, I can hear no difference at all, to me the sound still ends as soon as you take your fingers off the keys. The organ sounds as it always did in my opinion (indeed I don't think Harrisons would have been allowed to make any tonal alterations) but I would have to hear the organ live again to make a judgment. If anyone is interested in this organ Ralph Downes' book "Baroque Tricks" where he talks of hearing the pipes ringing out in the hallways of the RFH only to hear the deadness when the organ was situated in the concert hall. It was a sorry sorry saga and Downes describes it very well (see also Stephen Bicknell "The History of the English Organ" and Lawrence Elvin "The Harrison Story" too if you are interested). However if one does want to hear a similar sound with a much more resonant acoustic, I would suggest going to hear Harrison and Harrison's organ (also Downes involvement I think) at Coventry Cathedral. I know it has Rochesson reeds anyway!

Someone was asking here for recent recording of the Festival Hall Organ pre-restoration an I there is one by Gillian Weir which is worth the cost for the illuminating essay by William Mc Vicker in the booklet as well as Dame Gillian's superb playing.Here is the link, it is easily available on Amazon etc:

http://gillianweir.com/discography/gillian-weir-on-stage-at-the-royal-festival-hall-london/

As to the performance itself, I was not much impressed by all the fluff with the kiddy choirs, glamour girl Balsom and the Gigout with brass. I think my highlight was the beautifully wrought performance of the Bach Passaglia and Fugue in C Minor and the superb performance or the Liszt "Ad Nos"in his following concert. He is a very fine performance indeed and the dead acoustic means that any mistakes are immediately apparent. To be honest I think the following recitals will be better as John's Friday recital shows. Thomas Trotter is something to look forward to as is Olivier Latry who is one of the very finest players in the world.

Sorry to be a bore but as an organist I am delighted that BBC Radio 3 are finally giving attention to this instrument!

P.S: Just found Vaughan-Williams' letter of protest at the planned organ in the Elvin book. Here it is for anyone who is interested:


Sirs,

I have read with apprehension an article in praise of the proposed new organ of the Royal Festival Hall. Judging from the specification, this new organ will to my mind accentuate the objectionable "bubble and squeak" tone of organs on the Continent. Is it really proposed that we should abandon in favour of this unpleasant sound the noble diapasons and rich soft mixtures or our best church organs.

I admit that we have some bad organs in England, but at their worst they cannot surely make so nasty a noise as most of those on the Continent. As to the so called "Baroque" organ, which I presume I have heard at its best at the hands of the most distinguished performers, I can only compare it to a barrel organ in the street. This type of instrument is said to be right for playing Bach. For myself I want nothing better than Bach as played by Dr Harold Darke on his typically English Organ at St Micheal's Cornhill.


RALPH VAUGHAN-WILLIAMS

Dorking