Positif Inspiration

Positif Inspiration

(And Continuous Improvement through Thorough Continuo Improvisation)

 

 

I certainly could resist inessential wordplay for titles, but choose not to. The cover of The American Organist magazine for this month, and a recent video of Sietze de Vries improvising made me think about the meaning behind the instrument as well as its future.

 

The picture on the cover was of this organ:

 

 

An unassuming image like this one has ignited a great deal of controversy online because of the fact that this instrument is digital rather than 'authentic'. Its sounds come from speaker stacks instead of pipes. As far as I know, this is the first occasion that The American Organist has permitted an all-digital instrument to grace their cover. Of course, the cover is basically ad space for organ builders but it shows at least a tacit approval on the part of the magazine.

 

Perhaps you can imagine the uproar that can come from advocates of a 2000 year tradition of organ building and playing. Verbal assaults approached levels found in YouTube comment sections. I don't remember reading any comments claiming digital as being superior, but it seemed to be arguing between those who had nothing but contempt for synthetic instruments and those that view them as having a useful niche to fill.

 

I don't see my opinion being very important in the debate but it did make me think about what is so important about having builders constructing pipes by their hands, and I think that it has to do with the unregulated nature of the instrument. Most every organ is different, ideally built to best take advantage of the space in which they will reside. Have a listen to this space in Rouen...

 

 

They also differ based on the artistic sensibilities of the builder. E.M. Skinner had certain orchestral sound colors he wanted to represent in his organs, colors that I'm ignoring and attempting to twist into a Bach plenum here:

 

 



 

 

It's not entirely unpleasant, but this is not what that organ was designed to do, and with a little more age and knowledge I've come to realize that this is not a unique offense. Sietze de Vries has talked for some time now about how organists prepare repertoire for a recital and then use it on whatever instrument they happen to be traveling to, regardless of whether the instrument will present it well. I briefly considered playing Dupre's Way of the Cross at my wife's local church but decided that the instrument was just not suited to present the piece, having only two manuals instead of three, a mostly inoperative combination action, and not enough variety of sound to present the many different moods. Additionally, I don't think the building is resonant enough to support the weight of the music.

 

Now, that is a pretty clear case of the wrong piece for the wrong instrument, but the more common offense is to try to play grand French Vierne symphonies on smaller German Baroque instruments, ones that just don't have a colorful palette of sound that Vierne's instruments had. My playing of German Baroque Bach on an orchestrally designed American instrument, created by a man purposely distancing himself from the Neo-Baroque movement of the time, is an example of this problem.

 

Sietze's solution is found often enough by proper preparation in knowing the instrument that he will be playing, and what music is most appropriate for it. He's actually approaching it from a different angle:  This instrument is a work of art, and here is some music that shows this organ for the work of art that it is. He's shifting the focus from the performer (Look at me! Look at what I can play!) to the instrument (Look at this organ! Look at what it can play!). I know of no other instrument that can be treated this way. Pianists will tell you that pianos differ greatly from each other in touch and sound, but it's much more rare to find a piano that can't present a certain genre of composition unless it's broken or an antique.

 

This brings me to the second way that Sietze uses the full unique resources of the instrument he happens to be playing: Improvisation.

 

 

 

The video above is one of my favorites, showing quite a few forms and styles (within a Baroque setting) this organ presents well. On an instrument like this, one can find many many ways to play it effectively. What I think is more impressive in a way is this video that popped up with Sietze improvising a Partita on a Lutheran hymn tune:

 

 



 

 

He's playing a tiny continuo organ, using only one single flute stop. There are no pedals, so the hands have to handle everything in the texture. This is the best example I know to demonstrate the usefulness of improvisation. Just imagine you are trying to find a piece of repertoire to play on this little instrument. "I want something Baroque, maybe a set of variations; since the timbre won't change, a partita would have the needed variety. It has to be a set that doesn't use the pedals. Also, I'm really looking for one based on 'Jesu, meine freude' since it's just the perfect tune for the occasion." Perhaps after some digging, you actually find something that fits the bill (I doubt you will find one with a l.h. cantus firmus in octaves as Sietze provides here) and you discover that it's not a particularly good work; the variations don't flow well and don't have enough rhythmic variety to sustain your interest. Also, it goes on for too long so some will have to be cut.... et cetera. It can quickly become a frustratingly lengthy process of trying to find something that may not even exist.

 

So improvise one. Is the world looking for a baroque partita on an  ancient tune that doesn't require registration changes or pedals? Not likely; perhaps in an 'Easy Organ' collection, though Sietze includes variants that use playing techniques too advanced for the 'Easy Organ' library. It's a piece that has no broad appeal, and so no reason to exist in an easily accessible book. However, it happens to be the perfect piece for this ONE occasion. That is more than enough to justify its existence; so it is brought into existence to be used for its one purpose, and then it is laid aside and never heard from again.

 

I suppose my point in all of this is that improvisation is something that, aside from its many virtues, takes advantage of and even justifies the many breeds and makes of organs and their stops. Digital or authentic, ancient or modern, spontaneous creation of music fills the void in the repertoire created by the lack of rigorous standardization in the making of organs. I was already enamored with the unique individuality of these instruments, but the addition of improvisation completes that relationship.

 

Anyway, back to studying. The AGO Fellowship exam is a few weeks away. I currently put my odds of passing around 50%.