Forum Top Banner Ad

Collapse

Ebay Classic organs

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Infnity x Masterpiece (Rodgers)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Infnity x Masterpiece (Rodgers)

    I would like to know everyone's opinion.
    Listening to some recordings of the infinity and masterpiece organs.
    I have the impression that the Masterpiece sounds better.

    Anyone have an opinion?

  • #2
    Hi,

    A few things here. When it comes to sound, there is the objective side of things, and there is the subjective. The objective is more about how things measure, how accurate or clinically correct are. The subjective is more how you perceive what you hear, or how you like what you hear.

    Listening to recordings rather than the real thing adds another variable how you react to what you listen to.

    That said, the Masterpiece line may be more what you like in an organ. The Masterpiece line was tone genersted in stereo. The Infinity is not. The Infinity line is supposed to have pipes sampled in 6 or more positions. This difference can have a big difference.

    Also, the Infinity line was said to have had major input from Hector Olivera. He changed the tonality substantially.

    Another area that makes a huge difference is the audio. Rodgers changed their speakers, and maybe not for the better. They also dropped Roland designed amplifiers and went for a Class D multichannel sourced from Crown.

    Also, how recordings were done can result in audible differences.

    That said, apparently a number of Rodgers dealers wanted the company to go back to the Trillium and Masterpiece kind of sound. I don't know if they ever did.

    I had someone tell me a week or two ago, that Rodgers is discontinuing the Infinity line, when they run out of parts to build them. The line is to be replaced by a Johannus based technological platform, modelled after their American Classic organ.

    You are not the first to draw attention to the thinking that a newer line of organs don't always sound better or even as good as an older line. I have thought this sometimes after servicing a new organ and being disappointed in hearing it, and then servicing an older one, and being surprised.

    I would suggest you go and try real organs, preferrably beside each other, and then come to a conclusion which is more to your liking.

    AV

    Comment


    • #3
      AV,

      Why do you always seem to be the first in line to know these things before they are announced to the dealers?

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi,

        Don't worry. I am just the "fake" news channel.

        AV

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by arie v View Post
          Hi,

          Don't worry. I am just the "fake" news channel.

          AV
          Arie,

          You beat me to it! At least you are using "anonymous sources."

          Throughout the whole sale/acquisition process rumors appeared here on the forum. Dealers repeatedly denied them--and the rumors were inevitably proved correct. Were the dealers lying? Nope. Just uninformed.

          Companies need to take control of their "narrative" or someone else will. At least that is the lecture we got from the accreditation team visiting our university! :(

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by MarkS View Post
            Throughout the whole sale/acquisition process rumors appeared here on the forum. Dealers repeatedly denied them--and the rumors were inevitably proved correct. Were the dealers lying? Nope. Just uninformed.
            Depends who you talk to as well. If you have a dealer that has no problem divulging information to you, you nearly get "first hand knowledge" of the situation.
            Allen MOS 1105 (1982)
            Allen ADC 5000 (1985) w/ MDS Expander II (drawer unit)
            Henry Reinich Pipe 2m/29ranks (1908)

            Comment


            • #7
              I'm going to say something that I hope will inspire some folks who have the power to do something to act. I don't want to offend, though this may seem rather harsh. But the truth needs to be told, and I'm so old now that I don't really care if somebody calls me down or tries to silence me.

              The best organ, whether it's an Infinity or Masterpiece or Renaissance or Quantum or Physis or whatever, if it's undersized, if the room is an awful place for an organ, and if the installer/voicer was not competent, it's going to be unimpressive and probably going to be a disgrace to the organ industry.

              As a 40+ year veteran of this business, I'd like to say that the biggest change and most important upgrade that ANY organ company could make would be to get hugely involved in the end use of their products. The organ industry is going down the tubes, and something needs to happen to reverse the course, or we will have not organ industry very soon. A couple of ideas:

              1. Actively counsel churches who are about to build new buildings to make their spaces LIVELY. Do something, anything, to discourage churches from building big cinema-like rooms that absorb every echo so that genuine acoustic music has no chance of sounding good. With no natural reflections, no natural dispersion of the sound, congregational singing is hopeless. A fine piano will have to be run through the sound system to be heard past the front row. And NOBODY's organ is going to sound like an organ in there.

              The church will be forced to run everything through a mega-watt sound system, and some teenager running the mixer while playing with his phone is going to have full control over the worship experience of the entire congregation. We should be teaching churches that they don't NEED a sound system except something rudimentary to enable the spoken word to be clearly understood throughout the room. Once they put in a mixing board that rivals a movie production studio's, they will use it, and they insist on piping everything, including the organ, through it.

              If we are going to promote (and save!) the organ, we need to teach churches how to build worship spaces in which an organ can actually be played! This will be a massive effort, and somebody has to lead it. Why not one of the major organ companies? Or a consortium of organ builders, as the same thing that will benefit the digital builders will also benefit the pipe builders.

              2. Teach the dealers how to install organs, even when it costs more money. Teach them not to skimp on speakers or speaker wire in order to put speakers where they need to go. Lower the prices on your speakers, or else encourage the dealers to buy third-party speakers so they won't feel the need to keep the speaker count as low as possible to save money. Tell them not to skimp on audio channels or amplifier power. Teach them to get out and listen to some superb pipe organs in their communities and to emulate the sonic and palpable effects of the pipes. Not just create little silly tin-pan caricatures of organs, but massive instruments that actually stir the air and the souls of worshipers the way pipes do!

              3. Teach every installer the basics of good voicing and balance. Some of your dealers don't have a clue about how loud a principal stop ought to be, or how much difference there is between a principal and a gemshorn. Teach them! And follow up to make sure the dealers do it right, every single time! Don't let your dealers put in crappy-sounding organs that will only hurt your reputation and drive more people to say "organs just don't appeal to me." Bad organs don't appeal to anybody. Good organs do.

              Bottom line -- nobody is really going to care what technology is inside the console, and changing that technology is not going to solve the problems that cause many organ installations to come across as dismal failures these days. Teach, teach, teach. Follow up and follow up again.

              Ok, off the soap box now.
              John
              ----------
              *** Please post your questions about technical service or repair matters ON THE FORUM. Do not send your questions to me or another member by private message. Information shared is for the benefit of the entire organ community, but other folks will not be helped by information we exchange in private messages!

              https://www.facebook.com/pages/Birds...97551893588434

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jbird604 View Post
                some teenager running the mixer while playing with his phone
                Now, that is funny!

                The decline of our profession/business, not so much funny.

                - - - Updated - - -

                Maybe some digital organ companies will adopt the old pipe organ model where a local rep made the sale but the installation and voicing were executed by a crew from the factory.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Honestly, Mark, even though I used to be the local Allen installer, and thought I did some great work, and would hate to see the local guys cut out of the loop entirely, the industry as a whole probably needs to shed the "dealer model" that has been the basis for organ marketing for decades now. If Rodgers and Allen want to save their reputations, they need to be sure that sound engineer Woody Tonedeaf and his buddy Tinear Wirepuller are not doing the installs and voicing for their dealers. Every time a new organ goes in that sounds like crap, it puts another nail in the coffin for the industry.

                  But there's enough blame to go around. Architects, contractors, clergy, ministers of music, building committees, sound system "experts" and acoustical "engineers" -- all have been complicit or at least silent as the art of church-building has gone from creating magnificent soaring spaces where sound travels and sustains and blooms in all its glory, to throwing up barns and arenas and TV studio sets where everything is muffled except what is picked up by a microphone and blasted through a speaker system pointed right at the ears of the audience. This is a generational and cultural tragedy that will take a century to undo.

                  And it sounds funny, but in the typical church these days, the sound board is indeed run by a teenager who thinks he knows all about the whiz-bang gadgets up there, and wants to run it because it gets him out of having to sit with his parents or the youth group, and he spends more of his time checking facebook or snapchat than listening to the sermon or anything else going on. So when the organ-grinder is playing his once-a-month-allotted offertory, and wants to use a soft and subtle celeste, Zack Attack is going to say "people can't hear that" and give the "organ" slider on the mixer board a quick push up the scale. Totally ruining whatever the player had in mind to do. And doing that sort of thing All.The.Time -- creating feedback, blasting people's ears when someone leans into a mic, making the service generally miserable for everybody.

                  When are we going to learn?

                  My little congregation solved the problem by locking up the sound system room. Over a period of a few weeks, we determined the optimum slider settings for the three mics used in the service -- pulpit, lectern, and table -- and set them permanently. Determined optimum levels for the house speaker and the choir monitors, and set them permanently. Occasionally, someone needs a hand-held or remote mic for something -- we have a lady we sometimes call on to play a dulcimer, and it is very quiet and needs miking. For that purpose, we have a fourth mic that can be turned up to a preset level. All levels are carefully set so that feedback can never happen. Nobody touches the board during the service, and we have no problems. Obviously, great big churches with great big music programs may need to do it differently. But my point is that most churches don't need elaborate systems that only give people the opportunity to make big messes and ruin services!

                  And it all goes back to building a room that is friendly to sound, friendly to music, friendly to the organ. Unless we get back to building churches like that, we are doomed.
                  John
                  ----------
                  *** Please post your questions about technical service or repair matters ON THE FORUM. Do not send your questions to me or another member by private message. Information shared is for the benefit of the entire organ community, but other folks will not be helped by information we exchange in private messages!

                  https://www.facebook.com/pages/Birds...97551893588434

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I know of these differences in recordings.
                    But so far no recordings of infinity have convinced me like those of the masterpiece.
                    About the new Johannus technology, will they use the masterpiece samples?
                    Watching this video from johannus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_4yVVOvHXU
                    It gave me the impression of hearing a masterpiece.
                    Are they already using the 'technology' of the masterpiece in Johannus?

                    Originally posted by arie v View Post
                    Hi,

                    A few things here. When it comes to sound, there is the objective side of things, and there is the subjective. The objective is more about how things measure, how accurate or clinically correct are. The subjective is more how you perceive what you hear, or how you like what you hear.

                    Listening to recordings rather than the real thing adds another variable how you react to what you listen to.

                    That said, the Masterpiece line may be more what you like in an organ. The Masterpiece line was tone genersted in stereo. The Infinity is not. The Infinity line is supposed to have pipes sampled in 6 or more positions. This difference can have a big difference.

                    Also, the Infinity line was said to have had major input from Hector Olivera. He changed the tonality substantially.

                    Another area that makes a huge difference is the audio. Rodgers changed their speakers, and maybe not for the better. They also dropped Roland designed amplifiers and went for a Class D multichannel sourced from Crown.

                    Also, how recordings were done can result in audible differences.

                    That said, apparently a number of Rodgers dealers wanted the company to go back to the Trillium and Masterpiece kind of sound. I don't know if they ever did.

                    I had someone tell me a week or two ago, that Rodgers is discontinuing the Infinity line, when they run out of parts to build them. The line is to be replaced by a Johannus based technological platform, modelled after their American Classic organ.

                    You are not the first to draw attention to the thinking that a newer line of organs don't always sound better or even as good as an older line. I have thought this sometimes after servicing a new organ and being disappointed in hearing it, and then servicing an older one, and being surprised.

                    I would suggest you go and try real organs, preferrably beside each other, and then come to a conclusion which is more to your liking.

                    AV

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi,

                      Up until now, Roland technology powered Rodgers organs. From what I have heard, when Rodgers was sold, there was not a transfer of technology. Obviously there was an agreement with the Johannus people that Roland would supply electronics, organ parts etc. as needed for a period of time.

                      I doubt that Johannus, even if they had access to Rodgers / Roland samples that they would use them. I'm sure the technical platforms are quite different, and samples would need to be re-processed if used in a different platform.

                      My guess is that a certain number of Rodgers buyers buy the organ because of the sound and the technology inside them. Johannus , I think, bought Rodgers because the company was a "brand", and it would give them an in with North American buyers, and no doubt make some money as well.

                      AV

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We know that every industry has its 'secrets'. And when Johannus bought Rodgers, he had access to Rodgers' "secrets."

                        How much will this influence the construction of the johannus organs?

                        An observation. Bob Tall posted a video showing two Dutch directors of Johannus meeting a masterpiece organ.

                        What is the purpose of two directors going to know an organ with old technology?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          JRCA,

                          Interesting to read your comment about the video that Bob Tall posted. Is there any way you can provide the link to it?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            janvds and arie v,

                            Follow link: https://www.facebook.com/gsda.organ/...1883326050854/

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X