Organ pipe physics(modartt.com)
modartt.com
Organ pipe physics
https://www.modartt.com/organteq_physical_modeling
14 comments
Why no expansion packs? I guess because the product isn't popular. I tried it, but Organteq just doesn't sound good. Hauptwerk is so much better.
It took Modartt many years to get a decent piano model. For a long time, the more critical plugin users disliked Pianoteq. It had a sound best described as plastic (the material), synthetic. Since version 5, the sound has improved, and since Pianoteq can do things even the largest sample library can't (we're talking .5TB for some libraries!) at a fraction of the CPU and memory cost, it has become a lot more popular.
Organteq just isn't there: it sounds synthetic, and its reverb is really lacking. It's also not very CPU friendly. It also doesn't really compete on price, so I expect no change unless Modartt invests heavily, but since the market is smaller than for piano sounds, don't hold your breath.
It took Modartt many years to get a decent piano model. For a long time, the more critical plugin users disliked Pianoteq. It had a sound best described as plastic (the material), synthetic. Since version 5, the sound has improved, and since Pianoteq can do things even the largest sample library can't (we're talking .5TB for some libraries!) at a fraction of the CPU and memory cost, it has become a lot more popular.
Organteq just isn't there: it sounds synthetic, and its reverb is really lacking. It's also not very CPU friendly. It also doesn't really compete on price, so I expect no change unless Modartt invests heavily, but since the market is smaller than for piano sounds, don't hold your breath.
The open source Aeolus physically-modelled organ is at least as good as any other pipe organ synthesis engine, unless you insist on glossy UIs (it does have a graphical UI though).
https://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/linuxaudio/aeolus/
https://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/linuxaudio/aeolus/
Speaking of open source pipe organs, there is also Grandorgue, however this one unlike Aeolus is sample-based https://github.com/GrandOrgue/grandorgue
so many interesting instruments so little time. found some demos on youtube and this one sounds great.
never heard of this VST before and it seems likely to have predated my interest in music production. I found a few videos online and aside from clunky UI seems pretty decent with some reverb. When I have some time I'll compare it against some sample based virtual instruments.
Aww, seems to need a MIDI input, guess I’ll have to wait until I get home in March to try it.
Impressive tininess. The Arch Linux package is 879.54 KiB. And yes, there’s dynamic linking with the contents of other packages like libx11, jack and alsa-lib, but I think the total most people will be adding will be 1.11 MiB. But then, I had to replace jack2 with pipewire-jack to get it to work, and that saved 1.18 MiB, so installing Aeolus literally saved me disk space!
(Yeah, I know I could have done jack2 → pipewire-jack independently, and yeah, I know I’ve added a few files to /var/cache/pacman/pkg/ so that I didn’t actually save disk space, but hey, I like the narrative.)
Impressive tininess. The Arch Linux package is 879.54 KiB. And yes, there’s dynamic linking with the contents of other packages like libx11, jack and alsa-lib, but I think the total most people will be adding will be 1.11 MiB. But then, I had to replace jack2 with pipewire-jack to get it to work, and that saved 1.18 MiB, so installing Aeolus literally saved me disk space!
(Yeah, I know I could have done jack2 → pipewire-jack independently, and yeah, I know I’ve added a few files to /var/cache/pacman/pkg/ so that I didn’t actually save disk space, but hey, I like the narrative.)
I don't think [4] is a marketplace in the sense that the expansions are from third party creators. They are all created by Modartt themselves, one by one over the past 15 years. After all, you can't just sample another instrument, there is a lot more work involved.
That might also be the answer why this doesn't yet exists for Organteq. It just takes time.
But your reason why you need good selection of expansions might be valuable market insight for Modartt. I know they appreciate feedback, I've talked to them before, so I'd suggest you tell them your concerns.
That might also be the answer why this doesn't yet exists for Organteq. It just takes time.
But your reason why you need good selection of expansions might be valuable market insight for Modartt. I know they appreciate feedback, I've talked to them before, so I'd suggest you tell them your concerns.
> But your reason why you need good selection of expansions might be valuable market insight for Modartt. I know they appreciate feedback, I've talked to them before, so I'd suggest you tell them your concerns.
Good point.
Disclaimer: I'm just a hobbyist but I know a few professional organists.
TL;DR: each organ is unique, pipe organs are not produced in series like pianos.
The main reason for people use something like Organteq or Hauptwerk, is usually to practice organ at home. Unlike what happens with other instruments, it is very rare for an average person to own their own pipe organ, so digital reproductions are the way to go for pretty much everyone.
But here's the problem: organs are very, very different one another. With piano, you could practice e.g. on a Kawai at home then perform a recital on a Yamaha; the two pianos don't have the same sound and the same action, but they are close enough that you can practice on one instrument then perforom on another. This is not the case with organs: a baroque organ and a romantic organ will be completely different in terms of registrations, pedalboard extension and shape, manuals etc. etc. - not only that but each pipe organ ever built, is a completely custom instrument.
For example, all Steinway D-274s ever built, despite some differences due to the year and place of construction, are still the same model (model D-274). But with organs, it's almost never the case that the same organ is built twice. Each single instrument is completely unique, and that's why we identify them by opus number, and we have catalogues of all the organs ever built, like for example this one https://ohta.org.au/organs-of-australia/
So, the main problem for someone setting up a practice organ is to have access to a digital model that is either that exact organ, or at least a very similar instrument to the one they will use to perform in public. For hobbyists like me who don't plan to perform, there is still a need to at least have a certain type of organ available, because of the great diversity of organs.
Good point.
Disclaimer: I'm just a hobbyist but I know a few professional organists.
TL;DR: each organ is unique, pipe organs are not produced in series like pianos.
The main reason for people use something like Organteq or Hauptwerk, is usually to practice organ at home. Unlike what happens with other instruments, it is very rare for an average person to own their own pipe organ, so digital reproductions are the way to go for pretty much everyone.
But here's the problem: organs are very, very different one another. With piano, you could practice e.g. on a Kawai at home then perform a recital on a Yamaha; the two pianos don't have the same sound and the same action, but they are close enough that you can practice on one instrument then perforom on another. This is not the case with organs: a baroque organ and a romantic organ will be completely different in terms of registrations, pedalboard extension and shape, manuals etc. etc. - not only that but each pipe organ ever built, is a completely custom instrument.
For example, all Steinway D-274s ever built, despite some differences due to the year and place of construction, are still the same model (model D-274). But with organs, it's almost never the case that the same organ is built twice. Each single instrument is completely unique, and that's why we identify them by opus number, and we have catalogues of all the organs ever built, like for example this one https://ohta.org.au/organs-of-australia/
So, the main problem for someone setting up a practice organ is to have access to a digital model that is either that exact organ, or at least a very similar instrument to the one they will use to perform in public. For hobbyists like me who don't plan to perform, there is still a need to at least have a certain type of organ available, because of the great diversity of organs.
> "it is very rare for an average person to own their own pipe organ"
Rare, but not completely unheard of. Donald Knuth has one in his home.
https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/organ.html
Rare, but not completely unheard of. Donald Knuth has one in his home.
https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/organ.html
I know more than one person that has one. Usually these are home-built by the person playing them or their spouse. Every now and then they are up for sale but they usually are large enough that buying one is a pretty major decision.
also, I wrote _average_ person and DK certainly isn't one ;-)
Another reason for physically modelled or excellently sampled pipe organ synthesis: even when an actual pipe organ exists, maintenance has historically become more and more of an issue for its owners, and thus implementing it digitally (with huge attention to detail) can be a way for an organ's unique character to live on even when its owners can no longer afford to keep it functional.
Part of the reason is that an organ isn't 'just' an instrument, it is a building which happens to contain an organ. In order to properly model an organ in a particular setting you'd need to model the building as well and that is getting into a wholly different level of complexity.
Pianos are more or less designed to sound 'the same' (with some obvious differences between major brands and some pianos that have been constructed very explicitly to sound different, such as the Klavins instruments).
https://klavins-pianos.com/products/
So within reason you can model a particular piano just by specifying make and model and look up a bunch of parameters in a table.
With an organ in a 'virtual' church you could specify the exact disposition (the number and kind of sets of various pipes and other complications) of the organ, and you could supply some basic parameters of the space (size, area, placements of the ranks and so on). But I suspect that if you did that you'd not get even close to what the real instrument in its actual setting sounds like. Organs are super temperamental, air pressure, humidity, temperature, intonation, various stuff that is broken (almost no mechanical organ is ever in perfect shape), mechanism sounds (which can appear very different even within the same make and model) and so on.
This is a stupendously hard problem and as a happy user of Pianoteq I'm impressed with Modartt even attempting this and I really hope they will succeed in being able to switch seamlessly between different venues and to place an organ of a different manufacturer into an existing church (just to give one example of what that would make possible). But I'm not going to hold my breath for it and sample based organs (including the free GrandOrgue) still hold a significant edge compared to Modartt's organ simulator. But for piano it is now so good I almost prefer it to the real thing for practice. Not that I'm such a discerning user, more that I've grown up with pianos and they're always (unless very recently tuned) a bit out of tune and that can be quite annoying. The software based one is always perfectly tuned and sounds as good or even better than the best sampled instruments (personal favorite from the sample side of the aisle: Yamaha P-515 Bosendorfer sample set is extremely good).
Pianos are more or less designed to sound 'the same' (with some obvious differences between major brands and some pianos that have been constructed very explicitly to sound different, such as the Klavins instruments).
https://klavins-pianos.com/products/
So within reason you can model a particular piano just by specifying make and model and look up a bunch of parameters in a table.
With an organ in a 'virtual' church you could specify the exact disposition (the number and kind of sets of various pipes and other complications) of the organ, and you could supply some basic parameters of the space (size, area, placements of the ranks and so on). But I suspect that if you did that you'd not get even close to what the real instrument in its actual setting sounds like. Organs are super temperamental, air pressure, humidity, temperature, intonation, various stuff that is broken (almost no mechanical organ is ever in perfect shape), mechanism sounds (which can appear very different even within the same make and model) and so on.
This is a stupendously hard problem and as a happy user of Pianoteq I'm impressed with Modartt even attempting this and I really hope they will succeed in being able to switch seamlessly between different venues and to place an organ of a different manufacturer into an existing church (just to give one example of what that would make possible). But I'm not going to hold my breath for it and sample based organs (including the free GrandOrgue) still hold a significant edge compared to Modartt's organ simulator. But for piano it is now so good I almost prefer it to the real thing for practice. Not that I'm such a discerning user, more that I've grown up with pianos and they're always (unless very recently tuned) a bit out of tune and that can be quite annoying. The software based one is always perfectly tuned and sounds as good or even better than the best sampled instruments (personal favorite from the sample side of the aisle: Yamaha P-515 Bosendorfer sample set is extremely good).
> "organs are very, very different one another."
Anna Lapwood addressed this in a recent TikTok. She said that for every new organ, she takes a whole day before the concert to familiarize herself with the instrument, then a night of sleep and a good part of the day the of the concert. She is a professional organist who toured the word, so for almost everyone else it will certainly take longer.
Anna Lapwood addressed this in a recent TikTok. She said that for every new organ, she takes a whole day before the concert to familiarize herself with the instrument, then a night of sleep and a good part of the day the of the concert. She is a professional organist who toured the word, so for almost everyone else it will certainly take longer.
Tuning the model parameters to sound like a sampled piano sounds like an interesting optimization problem.
There is also Aeolus (free software) for those who wish to have complete control over the model!
Organ building is a slowly dying art, with the companies building and maintaining them slowly going out of business. We have loads of churches and church organs in the Netherlands still, so there still is some business, but at the same time a lot of them are being replaced by digital keyboards.
I have a cousin who is a professional organ player, he gets to play on the big ones, he's a composer and conductor, he's recorded a few albums and the like. "Small fry" in the bigger music world, but he's one of the people keeping the tradition and craftsmanship alive. I had a look on his website (I don't really keep up with family much), he plays on 150, nearly 200 year old organs sometimes.
I have a cousin who is a professional organ player, he gets to play on the big ones, he's a composer and conductor, he's recorded a few albums and the like. "Small fry" in the bigger music world, but he's one of the people keeping the tradition and craftsmanship alive. I had a look on his website (I don't really keep up with family much), he plays on 150, nearly 200 year old organs sometimes.
Indeed, and it's a great loss. If there is one thing I respect religion for then it is the music and the centuries long maintenance of some of the greatest (in every sense of the word) musical instruments that humanity has produced.
I still have this dream of making a small pipe organ one day.
I still have this dream of making a small pipe organ one day.
I’m strangely interested in pipe organs, largely because to my ear Toccatta and Fugue in D Minor(BWV 565) is one of the most thrilling pieces of music, like something sent from heaven. It saddens me that people just think of it as a tune to play at Halloween and in vampire movies.
It's amazing. There are also some piano renderings that are quite impressive but on an organ it really comes into its own. It's also probably the only organ piece that many people know. As for it being sent from heaven: Bach is absolutely un-earthly both in the quality and the quantity of his output. Given the state of the art at the time he gave it such a huge move forward you have to wonder where we'd be today musically if not for him.
And that 1970s prog rock cover: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgbgUrp1a70
That said, it shines on a real auditorium sized pipe organ.
> you have to wonder where we'd be today musically if not for him.
Err, probably using lute music[1] transposed for organ[2] and adapted[3] as film soundtracks[4] I guess.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM6hd8EPFl0
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nf3eU-Y6Ew
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ9_6W6bVoQ
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adv9gYQWqb8
That said, it shines on a real auditorium sized pipe organ.
> you have to wonder where we'd be today musically if not for him.
Err, probably using lute music[1] transposed for organ[2] and adapted[3] as film soundtracks[4] I guess.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM6hd8EPFl0
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nf3eU-Y6Ew
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ9_6W6bVoQ
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adv9gYQWqb8
Too late at night here to play this on the speakers but I'll certainly get to it tomorrow morning. Thank you!
Wow! I never saw this before and I don't know how I missed it. Also, that video is decades ahead of its time.
It's a great cover | interpretation, with some serious drum attack from Tristan Fry.
I bought a guitar amp in 1982 via the local paper (Perth, Western Australia) and went out to pick it up - turned out to be in Kevin Peek's back woods recording studio and had an afternoon of noodling about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Peek
I bought a guitar amp in 1982 via the local paper (Perth, Western Australia) and went out to pick it up - turned out to be in Kevin Peek's back woods recording studio and had an afternoon of noodling about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Peek
That's one very colorful character, to put it mildly.
I've had some fun restoring DX-7's and sometimes they (or the wreckage) come with stories and previous owners attached.
I've had some fun restoring DX-7's and sometimes they (or the wreckage) come with stories and previous owners attached.
> There are also some piano renderings that are quite impressive but on an organ it really comes into its own.
I'd say an electric guitar orchestra beats an organ on this piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqgQ7IYhvRg
I'd say an electric guitar orchestra beats an organ on this piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqgQ7IYhvRg
I’m a big fan of Messiaen’s organ compositions. Back 20 years ago, I sang in the cathedral choir with an amazing organist who would occasionally play Messiaen as a postlude. Watching him play organ was watching Keith Moon play the drums—all four limbs were moving in what appeared to be chaos¹ and amazing sounds resulted.
My own limited attempts at organ playing have shown me that I’m not an organist. Among other things, the fact that the console and pipes are frequently separated by enough distance that the speed of sound plays a role in aural feedback while playing can make playing a pipe organ a challenge, and that’s before the role of stops, foot pedals and the lack of a sustain pedal² come into play
⸻
1. The piece that I’m remembering required frequent changes of the stops on the organ.
2. AKA, the sloppy keyboardists’ savior.
My own limited attempts at organ playing have shown me that I’m not an organist. Among other things, the fact that the console and pipes are frequently separated by enough distance that the speed of sound plays a role in aural feedback while playing can make playing a pipe organ a challenge, and that’s before the role of stops, foot pedals and the lack of a sustain pedal² come into play
⸻
1. The piece that I’m remembering required frequent changes of the stops on the organ.
2. AKA, the sloppy keyboardists’ savior.
I acquired a Kawai DX1900 drawbar organ (three manuals, two octaves of pedal board, 144kg+26kg+16kg—not a dinky little thing) in December 2022 and have greatly enjoyed playing and learning about that type of instrument (though I’ve been away from home since July 2023, and am really looking forward to getting back to it). My pianos were neglected! But I’ve found it has helped my piano playing a lot too, and most notably I depend on the sustain pedal much less than I did, in a few short months.
I’ve never had the opportunity to play a pipe organ, and other sorts don’t tend to lean into stop banks that you can rapidly swap between so much, and this drawbar organ doesn’t have that kind of thing at all—changing mid-piece is much more impractical, and so done much less. All up, I’m confident it’s an easier instrument to play than a pipe organ, but still with a lot of the same qualities. (But it’s not just an inferior pipe organ—it’s its own thing.)
I’ve found it fascinating what works and what doesn’t: I played a wide variety of things, my expectation of how well a piece will transfer has not always been correct, in one direction or the other.
Anyway, pianos and organs are definitely quite different instruments, but there’s also a lot of overlap in the techniques and skills, and playing one will improve significant aspects of your playing of the other.
(Nice three-em dash, BTW. I settled on —⁂— as a divider, but seriously contemplated two-em and three-em dash, which I do still use in other situations.)
I’ve never had the opportunity to play a pipe organ, and other sorts don’t tend to lean into stop banks that you can rapidly swap between so much, and this drawbar organ doesn’t have that kind of thing at all—changing mid-piece is much more impractical, and so done much less. All up, I’m confident it’s an easier instrument to play than a pipe organ, but still with a lot of the same qualities. (But it’s not just an inferior pipe organ—it’s its own thing.)
I’ve found it fascinating what works and what doesn’t: I played a wide variety of things, my expectation of how well a piece will transfer has not always been correct, in one direction or the other.
Anyway, pianos and organs are definitely quite different instruments, but there’s also a lot of overlap in the techniques and skills, and playing one will improve significant aspects of your playing of the other.
(Nice three-em dash, BTW. I settled on —⁂— as a divider, but seriously contemplated two-em and three-em dash, which I do still use in other situations.)
That's a beast you've got there! The usual way these change hands is when the owner moves out and leaves the organ behind ;)
The previous owner had got it new for AU$6,000 around 1980—serious cash! I got it for $100 (and then spent about an extra $150–200 on fuel &c. due to living some hundreds of kilometres away), and it had been listed on Gumtree for a couple of months, with only one other bloke having expressed interest (he played and enjoyed it, but declared himself a Yamaha man). There’s just not much interest in these beauties.
There was a full-on national news article a year or two back about some suburban house somewhere with a pipe organ that was for sale but only for someone who’d appreciate and use it. Pipe organs are part of the house; but these organs, I dunno, I feel that they’re big enough most buyers wouldn’t want to let you leave ’em behind.
Oh look, another interesting one in the Melbourne area now, https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/frankston/keyboards-pianos/c.... Uncommon indeed. Hmm, if it’s still on the market when I get back in March… even if I need to get rid of some furniture to fit it conveniently… drawbar organ, electric organ, upright piano and digital piano quartet? Sigh, really wish I had more space to conveniently fit all this and a grand piano or two. They’re all such different instruments despite seeming similar in some ways that I kinda want ’em all.
There was a full-on national news article a year or two back about some suburban house somewhere with a pipe organ that was for sale but only for someone who’d appreciate and use it. Pipe organs are part of the house; but these organs, I dunno, I feel that they’re big enough most buyers wouldn’t want to let you leave ’em behind.
Oh look, another interesting one in the Melbourne area now, https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/frankston/keyboards-pianos/c.... Uncommon indeed. Hmm, if it’s still on the market when I get back in March… even if I need to get rid of some furniture to fit it conveniently… drawbar organ, electric organ, upright piano and digital piano quartet? Sigh, really wish I had more space to conveniently fit all this and a grand piano or two. They’re all such different instruments despite seeming similar in some ways that I kinda want ’em all.
I wished I could do my instruments justice. I've re-vamped an older (70's) electronic organ that had super nice keyboards, the electronics were shot so I midified it and then stuck GrandOrgue in it on a little touch screen PC. It sounds way better than the $500 or so that it cost (as good as the sample set ;) ).
Speaking of home pipe organs, the one that’s likely to be best known to HN readers (or of the most interest) belongs to Donald E. Knuth.
> console and pipes are frequently separated by enough distance that the speed of sound plays a role in aural feedback while playing can make playing a pipe organ a challenge
Yes, this can get quite extreme. And then there are churches where some of the organ sounds are purposefully piped to the other side of the building to be injected in different places. That can really add to the delay and the confusion.
Yes, this can get quite extreme. And then there are churches where some of the organ sounds are purposefully piped to the other side of the building to be injected in different places. That can really add to the delay and the confusion.
Some scholars believe it to be an early work - possibly Bach was 19 years old. No copy in Bach's hand has ever been discovered, so there's no certainty. It is a wonderful, memorable piece of music but Bach was pretty good at that and not just at the keyboard.
Some believe(d) it to be written by someone else! No candidate was found, though. It's definitely an earlier work. It's much more in the style of (e.g.) Buxtehude than Bach's later works. If you like BWV 565, the Toccata and Fugue, you could check out e.g. BuxWv (a numbering like BWV) 149 and 156.
My Catholic diocese has enjoyed a significant recent tradition of love for sacred music, and to that end, several churches have installed very recent and modern pipe organs as a very permanent and enduring support for congregational worship.
Our prior bishop wrote a series of documents on sacred music, and two of the churches which have installed brand-new organs are the Cathedral and the Basilica.
I am not sure that Roman Catholics, much less the general public, understand the critical role played by a pipe organ in choral singing and leading the assembly. There is absolutely no comparison: not a percussive piano banging on metal strings, not a plectrum on a lute such as guitar, no synthesizer can come anywhere close. Electronic organs can approximate the sound, but not the feel, grandeur, and mighty power of a full-throated organ.
The reason that liturgical Christians have used pipe organs is because of the close approximation of the human voice from the very pipes. A pipe organ works (needless to say) by passing air through columns and making it vibrate at specific frequencies. This is very close to the mechanism used in the human voice. Therefore, it is effortless, even for an inexperienced singer, to summon up a passable tune when led by a competent organist. There are myriad cues which can be employed to wordlessly signal when singing will start and stop, and whether the upcoming strophe is proper to a soloist, the choir, or the whole assembly to come in at once.
In my days at a chorister, we did indeed rely on grand piano, acoustic guitars, eletronic 1980s-tech organ, and even drums/bass/violin, so unfortunately I did not enjoy much choral experience next to an authentic pipe organ. But now I worship from the pews with one of the best instruments in hundreds of miles, an experienced dedicated schola, and a skilled professional organist/director. Needless to say, it was a breathtaking and gorgeous Christmas as we added a brass ensemble and sang our hearts out.
Pipe organs never fail to disappoint the tech nerd in us. My own cathedral has a special camera which they use every week, during live streams, to display the manual as the organist plays it, and believe me, pipe organs are cutting-edge tech nowadays, using computer monitors, interfaces, MIDI and all the trappings, to produce good old-fashioned sound from real pipes. I feel it is truly a unique traditional instrument that can be the best of both worlds, and indeed our own church affirms its "pride of place" in liturgical worship at all times.
Our prior bishop wrote a series of documents on sacred music, and two of the churches which have installed brand-new organs are the Cathedral and the Basilica.
I am not sure that Roman Catholics, much less the general public, understand the critical role played by a pipe organ in choral singing and leading the assembly. There is absolutely no comparison: not a percussive piano banging on metal strings, not a plectrum on a lute such as guitar, no synthesizer can come anywhere close. Electronic organs can approximate the sound, but not the feel, grandeur, and mighty power of a full-throated organ.
The reason that liturgical Christians have used pipe organs is because of the close approximation of the human voice from the very pipes. A pipe organ works (needless to say) by passing air through columns and making it vibrate at specific frequencies. This is very close to the mechanism used in the human voice. Therefore, it is effortless, even for an inexperienced singer, to summon up a passable tune when led by a competent organist. There are myriad cues which can be employed to wordlessly signal when singing will start and stop, and whether the upcoming strophe is proper to a soloist, the choir, or the whole assembly to come in at once.
In my days at a chorister, we did indeed rely on grand piano, acoustic guitars, eletronic 1980s-tech organ, and even drums/bass/violin, so unfortunately I did not enjoy much choral experience next to an authentic pipe organ. But now I worship from the pews with one of the best instruments in hundreds of miles, an experienced dedicated schola, and a skilled professional organist/director. Needless to say, it was a breathtaking and gorgeous Christmas as we added a brass ensemble and sang our hearts out.
Pipe organs never fail to disappoint the tech nerd in us. My own cathedral has a special camera which they use every week, during live streams, to display the manual as the organist plays it, and believe me, pipe organs are cutting-edge tech nowadays, using computer monitors, interfaces, MIDI and all the trappings, to produce good old-fashioned sound from real pipes. I feel it is truly a unique traditional instrument that can be the best of both worlds, and indeed our own church affirms its "pride of place" in liturgical worship at all times.
> There is absolutely no comparison: not a percussive piano banging on metal strings, not a plectrum on a lute such as guitar, no synthesizer can come anywhere close. Electronic organs can approximate the sound, but not the feel, grandeur, and mighty power of a full-throated organ.
The whole point of TFA, as well as the software it is really about, along with other excellent attempts to physically model pipe organs (e.g. Aeolus) is that actually a synthesizer can come very close indeed.
The whole point of TFA, as well as the software it is really about, along with other excellent attempts to physically model pipe organs (e.g. Aeolus) is that actually a synthesizer can come very close indeed.
Great to hear about the revival of sacred music in your diocese.
Do you happen to have any links to the documents that your previous bishop wrote?
Do you happen to have any links to the documents that your previous bishop wrote?
> Do you happen to have any links to the documents that your previous bishop wrote?
https://www.catholicsun.org/2011/12/15/liturgical-music-as-p...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/01/19/a-short-history-of-li...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/02/16/sacred-musics-role-in...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/03/15/practical-points-for-...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2011/12/15/liturgical-music-as-p...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/01/19/a-short-history-of-li...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/02/16/sacred-musics-role-in...
https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/03/15/practical-points-for-...
What music were you using before? Was it not sacred? As someone from a christian tradition that uses exclusively a capella liturgical music I'm having trouble understanding what this distinction means.
The controversy in the Catholic Church is that the Second Vatican Council ushered in many, many pervasive changes to the liturgy. First and foremost is the move to the vernacular from uniform use of Latin. The vernacular liturgy means that there are hundreds of different texts requiring musical settings and they all require their own linguistic expert composers to handle that. Vernacular hymns also lend themselves to regional and profane instrumentation, so the use of guitars, tambourines, flutes, autoharps, rockstar drums and bass really took off with these reforms.
In principle, the Catholic Church doesn't object to a particular type of instrument being used for sacred music, as long as the text is sacred and the instrument is not overtly profane. BUT she still exhorts us to give "pride of place" to certain classical styles of sacred music, the Latin language, and the pipe organ itself. That's still non-negotiable, but really falls by the wayside when you consider restrictions on budget and talent. There are not that many professional-volunteer organists or Gregorian-chant schola directors to go around.
So the reality is that any church that did have a bona fide pipe organ, or even a good electronic one, these gathered dust while people slung their acoustic guitars and tambourines around while playing music that's indistinguishable from Simon & Garfunkel. I mean it didn't necessarily get that bad, but we did practically abandon those classical styles in favor of new vernacular experimentation.
In practice, Catholic parishes exhibit a wide disparity of musical style, and this will be tuned by the liturgists and pastors according to the needs and tastes of their faithful. Many pastors find it advantageous to mix Latin, classical, a cappella, and modern CCM all in the same liturgy, or some will segregate it out so that Traditionalists can enjoy a liturgy dedicated to traditional music, singing, and instrumentation.
What are the implications of constructing brand-new traditional pipe organs in our two "flagship" churches? What does it mean that our previous bishop wrote down a series of four documents on the form and function of sacred music? Regionally, they have set the tone and established a legacy for decades to come. Pastors may do what they like, but Cathedral worship is often the "Gold Standard" for a diocese to imitate and promote.
At the very least, constructing a permanent pipe organ in a church is a capital investment that can't be easily shoved aside. The pastors and parish councils will indeed be very reluctant to sideline something that cost 5-6 figures in favor of "easier" music.
In principle, the Catholic Church doesn't object to a particular type of instrument being used for sacred music, as long as the text is sacred and the instrument is not overtly profane. BUT she still exhorts us to give "pride of place" to certain classical styles of sacred music, the Latin language, and the pipe organ itself. That's still non-negotiable, but really falls by the wayside when you consider restrictions on budget and talent. There are not that many professional-volunteer organists or Gregorian-chant schola directors to go around.
So the reality is that any church that did have a bona fide pipe organ, or even a good electronic one, these gathered dust while people slung their acoustic guitars and tambourines around while playing music that's indistinguishable from Simon & Garfunkel. I mean it didn't necessarily get that bad, but we did practically abandon those classical styles in favor of new vernacular experimentation.
In practice, Catholic parishes exhibit a wide disparity of musical style, and this will be tuned by the liturgists and pastors according to the needs and tastes of their faithful. Many pastors find it advantageous to mix Latin, classical, a cappella, and modern CCM all in the same liturgy, or some will segregate it out so that Traditionalists can enjoy a liturgy dedicated to traditional music, singing, and instrumentation.
What are the implications of constructing brand-new traditional pipe organs in our two "flagship" churches? What does it mean that our previous bishop wrote down a series of four documents on the form and function of sacred music? Regionally, they have set the tone and established a legacy for decades to come. Pastors may do what they like, but Cathedral worship is often the "Gold Standard" for a diocese to imitate and promote.
At the very least, constructing a permanent pipe organ in a church is a capital investment that can't be easily shoved aside. The pastors and parish councils will indeed be very reluctant to sideline something that cost 5-6 figures in favor of "easier" music.
Interesting, thanks. I guess I didn't realize there was that much variance and mostly associated modern instrumentation with american protestants. The only catholic churches I've been to have been eastern rite which is outwardly mostly the same as what I'm familiar with.
I still don't really intuit the distinction between instruments and styles you're making but I believe you that it's there. I can't see how any instrument is inherently profane, but that is simplified by the tradition that all of them are inappropriate for liturgy. Once you've permitted any you need a criteria to exclude the rest. It seems like the catholic church is very much in the process of working out the contours of that.
I still don't really intuit the distinction between instruments and styles you're making but I believe you that it's there. I can't see how any instrument is inherently profane, but that is simplified by the tradition that all of them are inappropriate for liturgy. Once you've permitted any you need a criteria to exclude the rest. It seems like the catholic church is very much in the process of working out the contours of that.
I don't think a pipe organ is a particularly close approximation of a human voice, because there's no musically controlled dynamic expression within the note. By this I mean each pipe can only produce the sound of the note turning on, the sound of the note sustaining, and the sound of the note decaying, and these are substantially the same every time. (There are subtle differences, because the air flow depends on the state of other pipes playing at the same time, but this is not something musicians actively control, and is traditionally considered a defect to be minimized in high quality organs). It's possible to modify the sound with a tremulant or a swell box, but these are crude compared to what a skilled singer can do.
Compare the expression you can get out of a saxophone by varying embouchure and breathing. A saxophone can produce a range of timbres, and the player can dynamically vary the timbre over time. It's mechanically similar to a reed pipe, but the player has far more control over it. And a flute is similar to a flue pipe, again with the player having more control over the sound.
But a real pipe organ has some measurable advantages. First, the great multitude of independent sound sources. A real pipe organ has a spatial quality that's impossible to reproduce with stereo speakers. People say that the building is a part of the pipe organ, and that's IMO justified because all these sound sources interact with it produce an incredibly complex reverberation field. The sound you hear when you move your head sounds "big" in a way that would require a very complex speaker setup to reproduce. (Maybe high-order Ambisonics could do it.)
Second, the non-existent distortion. Big pipe organs have pedal sections that produce very deep and loud bass. On a real pipe organ, this is a pure harmonic sound (like all wind instruments, bowed strings, and voice). But deep and loud bass is difficult to reproduce with speakers, so there will be substantial non-linearity. If you're reproducing only a single harmonic note, this will only result in harmonic distortion. Harmonic distortion is no big deal, because it's effectively the same thing as changing the voicing of the pipe. You can filter the recorded/synthesized sound to compensate. But if you're trying to play multiple notes at once with the same speaker, you'll get intermodulation distortion, which adds a "muddy" inharmonic sound you never get from real pipes. The only solution here is adding more speakers, especially for bass notes, but again you're increasing cost and complexity.
I don't know how complex a sound system would need to be to reproduce a pipe organ such that a skilled listener couldn't distinguish it in an ABX test from the real thing. It would be very difficult to test, because the two would interact with each other acoustically if they were in the same building, and an ABX test requires rapid switching. But in any case, I think most people simulating pipe organs aren't even trying to pass this theoretical test.
All this means there is still a place for traditional pipe organs, and if you've never heard one in person I recommend trying it.
Compare the expression you can get out of a saxophone by varying embouchure and breathing. A saxophone can produce a range of timbres, and the player can dynamically vary the timbre over time. It's mechanically similar to a reed pipe, but the player has far more control over it. And a flute is similar to a flue pipe, again with the player having more control over the sound.
But a real pipe organ has some measurable advantages. First, the great multitude of independent sound sources. A real pipe organ has a spatial quality that's impossible to reproduce with stereo speakers. People say that the building is a part of the pipe organ, and that's IMO justified because all these sound sources interact with it produce an incredibly complex reverberation field. The sound you hear when you move your head sounds "big" in a way that would require a very complex speaker setup to reproduce. (Maybe high-order Ambisonics could do it.)
Second, the non-existent distortion. Big pipe organs have pedal sections that produce very deep and loud bass. On a real pipe organ, this is a pure harmonic sound (like all wind instruments, bowed strings, and voice). But deep and loud bass is difficult to reproduce with speakers, so there will be substantial non-linearity. If you're reproducing only a single harmonic note, this will only result in harmonic distortion. Harmonic distortion is no big deal, because it's effectively the same thing as changing the voicing of the pipe. You can filter the recorded/synthesized sound to compensate. But if you're trying to play multiple notes at once with the same speaker, you'll get intermodulation distortion, which adds a "muddy" inharmonic sound you never get from real pipes. The only solution here is adding more speakers, especially for bass notes, but again you're increasing cost and complexity.
I don't know how complex a sound system would need to be to reproduce a pipe organ such that a skilled listener couldn't distinguish it in an ABX test from the real thing. It would be very difficult to test, because the two would interact with each other acoustically if they were in the same building, and an ABX test requires rapid switching. But in any case, I think most people simulating pipe organs aren't even trying to pass this theoretical test.
All this means there is still a place for traditional pipe organs, and if you've never heard one in person I recommend trying it.
Most of the attempts to do digital pipe organs that are roughly equal to their purely analog cousins end up using substantial chunks of the physical infrastructure of the analog versions - the building, and sometimes even the pipes themselves, generally per-pipe transducers ("speakers").
You can reproduce the 3D soundfield of a big organ using wavefield synthesis. I heard a phenomenal recording/reproduction of a performance of a Messaien piece recorded in the Koeln cathedral and played back at the TU Berlin with their 4k+ speaker wavefield synthesis system. You can walk around in the room and experience the actual "space" of the cathedral.
You can reproduce the 3D soundfield of a big organ using wavefield synthesis. I heard a phenomenal recording/reproduction of a performance of a Messaien piece recorded in the Koeln cathedral and played back at the TU Berlin with their 4k+ speaker wavefield synthesis system. You can walk around in the room and experience the actual "space" of the cathedral.
If you're interested in this, Colin Pykett has a web site containing many detailed articles about the physics and history of pipe organs:
https://www.colinpykett.org.uk/completed_work.htm
https://www.colinpykett.org.uk/completed_work.htm
Wow. This site is stunning in both the variety and the number of articles.
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for sharing!
It’s not mentioned, but the bourdon pipe (used for the lowest pitch pipes) is a stopped pipe, which means it overblows at the twelfth rather than the octave, which is why you don’t see the second harmonic in the frequency analysis like you do with the two shorter pipes.
Would love to play around with this and hear the differences in sound. Something like what this guy did with the engine simulator https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKT-sKtR970
Interesting. I can totally see a similar software used to add combustion engines sounds to electric cars through hidden external speakers, possibly also as a service by manufacturers.
edit: it appears to work well on Linux through WINE.
edit: it appears to work well on Linux through WINE.
BMW already does this in their i8. It's complete crap.
> * Organ pipes are DC/AC converters!*
Mind = blown. Somehow this made it click for me how electrical DC/AC converters work.
Mind = blown. Somehow this made it click for me how electrical DC/AC converters work.
For anyone interested in another good source of pipe organ music, the public radio show Pipedreams makes their shows available on their website:
https://www.pipedreams.org/
Lots of wonderful music and related stories. Great for testing out PA systems! =)
https://www.pipedreams.org/
Lots of wonderful music and related stories. Great for testing out PA systems! =)
Note that American pipe organs sound rather different from (typical) French, English and the German/Dutch instruments. Usually the acoustic is also drier.
If you want to hear bass, you should look for organs with a 32' register. Those pipes are indeed 32 foot tall, and the lowest note is barely audible.
If you want to hear bass, you should look for organs with a 32' register. Those pipes are indeed 32 foot tall, and the lowest note is barely audible.
In Atlantic City and in Sidney there are organs that have 64' ranks!
Resonance, oscillation, vibration, etc is such a universal topic in engineering with a delightfully simple core and common mathematical background that anyone that is deeply familiar with it in their field should be able to find the beauty in oscillations in other fields.
Spoiler alert: everything is an oscillating field
Is there evidence that the pipe harmonic response can be neglected so the audio signature can be extracted solely from the acoustic cavity modes?
I’m tempted to run an harmonic analysis of the fluid-structure system to figure this out…
I’m tempted to run an harmonic analysis of the fluid-structure system to figure this out…
If you're prepared to model the church as well (or at least the ranks chamber) then you can probably make that work. The interesting part about a church organ is that the harmonics mix pretty much only in the air, not on a soundboard. that gives some interesting challenges in that you need to know more or less exactly how the pipes themselves are arranged in space and church organ designers used this extensively in placing pipes that sound good harmonically in close proximity.
Meshing the building volume at 20 points per wavelength at 20 kHz is going to require around 10^15 elements. Untractable with today’s hardware…
Modelling detailed individual sound sources and mixing their contributions at a particular point in space would be doable though.
My point was more oriented toward the effect of the pipe on the sound, e.g. the big square wooden ones probably bring something different than the metallic circular pipes.
Modelling detailed individual sound sources and mixing their contributions at a particular point in space would be doable though.
My point was more oriented toward the effect of the pipe on the sound, e.g. the big square wooden ones probably bring something different than the metallic circular pipes.
Has anybody modeled those singing bowls? That's a serious sine wave.
Or I guess you could just generate a sine wave.
Or I guess you could just generate a sine wave.
Nice, but someone should do accordion physics.
Someone did: "Physical-Modelling of Schwyzerörgeli and Accordions"
https://www.aramis.admin.ch/Beteiligte/?ProjectID=34490&Spra...
There is also a real accordion made by Roland that produces sound electronically. It claims to use physical modeling.
https://www.roland.com/uk/products/fr-5b/
https://www.aramis.admin.ch/Beteiligte/?ProjectID=34490&Spra...
There is also a real accordion made by Roland that produces sound electronically. It claims to use physical modeling.
https://www.roland.com/uk/products/fr-5b/
Interesting. I meant publishing how it works, though. There doesn't seem to be any paper associated with that project, that I can see? I suppose I could write to them.
The accordionists I know don't think the accordion sound of Roland digital accordions is all that good, though many still use them.
The accordionists I know don't think the accordion sound of Roland digital accordions is all that good, though many still use them.
There is nothing like being in the space during an organ concert or church service. Shock and awe.
I'd really love to have been in the Albert Hall to hear this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdyAF9M3XVw
Speaking of virtual pipe organs, for Organteq to compete with the market leader, Hauptwerk (which is sample-based) there needs to be a good choice of expansions though. With Hauptwerk, you can download hundreds of different organs from all around the world [3]. Modartt has an expansions marketplace for Pianoteq [4], why is the same thing not available for Organteq?
[1] https://www.arturia.com/phi
[2] https://www.modartt.com/pianoteq_pro
[3] https://www.hauptwerk.com/instruments/
[4] https://www.modartt.com/pianoteq_instruments