"New" organ for my church (again!)

[jbird604]

Re: highly theoretical excursion



LOL, David. Yes, I understood "homely" in the British sense and not in the less flattering US meaning! Actually our sanctuary is a bit "homely" in the US sense, in that it is almost unadorned except for the plants and greenery.</P>


We are a Baptist church, and yes, that is the baptistry right smack in the middle up there. Wish the photo showed the details, as there is a very nice but very plainwooden cross hanging in there, showered with light from the sides of the baptistry. Actually a very attractivefocal pointfor thechancel (to use a Methodist term).</P>


John</P>
<P mce_keep="true"></P>

[nullogik]

Re: highly theoretical excursion

[quote user="davidecasteel"]

nullogik is in the UK, where "homely" does not have the same meaning that it does here in the US--over there, it is more like "homelike". </p>



David</p>

[/quote]</p>

Woops, did I say something wrong?[:$] </p>

You are correct when you say I mean "homelike". What meaning does it have in the US?
</p>

[davidecasteel]

Re: highly theoretical excursion



No, no, you didn't say anything wrong. This is just an example of the US and UK being divided by a common language. Here is one American dictionary's definition of "homely":</P>


home·ly adj. home·li·er, home·li·est</P>

1. <LI>Not attractive or good-looking: a homely child.
   <LI>Lacking elegance or refinement: homely furniture.
   <LI>Of a simple or unpretentious nature; plain: homely truths.
   <LI>Characteristic of the home or of home life: homely skills.</LI>

Although definition #4 does describe what you probably intended (the normal UK meaning), most in the US would think of meaning #1. In general, it means "plain, bordering on ugly". A lady here would NOT like to be called "homely"--it would not be a compliment.</P>


I think most on this board are probably aware of many of the differences in meanings and word usage between those in the US and the UK, but I thought perhaps it was worthy of a mention (reminding us all that you were from the UK).</P>


David</P>

[circa1949]

reeds and rohs



However, the reeds produced by the card reader are very good, if not excellent, and the Chrysoglott is outstanding. Other percussions are less successful. And as we've both mentioned, the flute cards leave something to be desired, as the fuzziness of the low-resolution waveform is really apparent in the flutes. (I suppose that's the source of that noise anyway.)</P>


Yes, funny enough of all the MADC percussion cards I tried, the chrysoglott is the best one on that system too! Reeds, as you note, work well because the noise seems to blend-in as part of the harmonic construct of the sound. I tried various MADC flute cards, one standout in terms of low noise seemed to be the Traversflote 4. A terrible one was the Military Fife 2, which absolutely screamsat any range of the keyboard with a terrible digital gurgling/scratching sound! It sounds like a synth path on a Roland alpha-juno!Add some reverb to it and you'd have "hi-frequency alien communication sounds." LOL Some math or CS grad student (masters level, probably) could write a thesis about "Predictive algorithm for noise variability in a low-resolution frequency-domain PCM sound reproduction system"...haha. Because there had to be something about certain waveforms that really "set off" the digital resonance on those particular stops. That what I noticed back when I was buying a lot of those cards, most of the flute were unusable but a couple were actually pretty nice.</P>


As to longevity of electronics today, I suggest you read up on RoHS and weep(if you don't know what that means Google it).</P>


Oh believe me, I know, I've already sounded the alarm about this in earlier posts here. It was a really bad approach to the problem, because it will just mean more major appliances and electronics being thrown away after 5-10 years, which can't be good for the environment even if they aren't lead-containing. I suspect that some manufacturers were secretly thrilled by this "environmental requirement". There should have been a tiered legislation...nobody is ever going to bother to recycle an ipod for example. (I mean on theB2B side, I'm sure consumers could be tought to throw them in their recycle bin.) So consumer electronics of say, less than 8"X8"X4" inches should have had the no-lead requirement.Anything bigger? They should have justcreated a new recycling stream for it, to recover the lead. (as it is, some communities already have appliance recycling) Of course(!), the military gets to exempt itself so that THEIR electronics can go on being ultra-reliable! Another approach would have been that certain manufacturers get to exempt themselves, but when you buy their product you receive a notice that legally, you must recycle its circuit boards at the end of its lifespan.</P>
<P mce_keep="true"></P>

[myorgan]

Re: &quot;New&quot; organ for my church (again!)



[quote user="jbird604"] What is my personal ultimate goal for a church organ? I haven't actually thought about it, though I'm sure I wouldn't reject a Trillium or Quantum or even a newMonarch or Viscount if offered! Right now I'm so pleased with the Allen, and will be even more excited about it when I get the MIDI on it next week, that I'm not thinking about a future tradeup yet.[/quote]</P>


John,</P>


Approximately how much does the Allen MIDI kit for theADC-4000 run? Send me a private message if you wish. I'm thinking of buying one for my organ, which I could use with the Symphony's organ. Thanks.</P>


Michael</P>

[circa1949]

Re: &quot;New&quot; organ for my church (again!)



private message sent</p>

with a slight correction to what I've posted on this matter before</p>

</p>