Forum Top Banner Ad

Collapse

Ebay Classic organs

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

schober recital organ

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

  • schober recital organ



    Does anybody know about digital Schober Recital Organ? What year is it from? Is it good? I have already been to<font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><span style=""></span></span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~pastark/sorecita.htm<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

    </p>

  • #2
    Re: schober recital organ



    I doubt that this is a digital organ. My guess is that it is at least 30 years old, probably closer to 40.</P>


    [*-)]</P>

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: schober recital organ



      According to the website below it is a transistor model from the 70's. </P>


      http://recital.mugwo.com/</P>


      I saw one of those for sale on my local craigslist. Doesn't name a price, though.</P>


      http://rochester.craigslist.org/msg/359459815.html</P>

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: schober recital organ

        [quote user="organmaster100z"]


        Does anybody know about digital Schober Recital Organ? What year is it from? Is it good? I have already been to<FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~pastark/sorecita.htm<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
        <P mce_keep="true"></P>


        [/quote]</P>


        Schober never made digital organs. They were analog and available as kits. The company went under long before digital technology was a gleam in Jerome Markowitz's eye.</P>


        Bill</P>

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: schober recital organ



          Reading that old Schober ad, you'd think this was the only organ anyone would ever need or want! -- "Pipelike sound," changeable stops, unlimited audiopossibilities, etc.Of course there is a lot of hyperbole in there, but the company was actually onto some good ideas. It would have been nice if other organ companies had provided "just the basics" at an affordable price, instead of wandering off into fantasyland with automatic playing doodads and all kinds of junk that ran up the cost without providng any realmusical benefits.</P>


          So, good for them. Too bad they went away.The organ market is vastly different today, so I don't think anyone could come in and do that again. I suppose Hauptwerk, in a sense, fills a similar market niche today, appealing to the do-it-yourself organist who can build an organ that sounds like a million dollarson a shoestringbudget, if he can do the hard work himself.</P>


          A church tried to give mea Schober Recital modelseveral years ago, and I just never got back to them. It may still be sitting there. Anyway, it was not working for some reason, but all the schematics and stuff were with it, so I could have made it work.</P>


          My impression of it was that the console was quite decent. It would make a good MIDI-fied console for someone to hook up to a computer, and would probably be sturdier than a lot of other consoles that old, such as old Baldwin, Conn, Thomas, etc. (I don't mean that it was already MIDI-equipped, only that it wouldn't be too hard to strip out the existing electronics and put in some MIDI kits.)</P>


          The one I saw had a bushel basket full of "extra stops" -- little circuit boards that could be plugged in to change any stop into any other in just a few seconds. It looked like a pretty cool idea, though I'm sure the primitive analog voicing wouldn't have really sounded all that much like the pipe voices that were printed on the little boards.</P>


          But if you can pick one up for little or nothing, it would make a decent practice organ. If it has the tripper-type combination action, that might still be working, or easily repaired if it isn't. That was a remarkable device for its time. You could try playing it through a modern-day amp and speaker system, and running it through an Alesis MidiVerb. It just might sound better that it ought to.</P>


          You'll need to tune it, for sure. But that can be done by simply zero-beating with a modern digital keyboard, using a voice with no vibrato in it such as an oboe or english horn.</P>


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


          • #6
            Re: schober recital organ



            Does anyone else read and reread Richard H. Dorf 's (the founder of the Schober Organ Company) "Electronic Musical Instruments" like I do? It predates digital organs (and good taste) by a decade or so. I really enjoy looking at the old diagrams of the analog circuits that used to have to make up the sound. </p>

            Also very funny, though disturbing, are his opinions of how organs should be voiced. Perhaps that is the reason that so many of the present day digital organs sound so awful, they are basing their voicing on English/ Early 20th century organs. I get sick when I read his idea that 'chiffing' is a defect and organs with chiff tire the ear.." and quotes to that effect. I really think people with ears like that would have been better served listening to a glass harmonium. </p>

            </p>

            Anywhoo... I really love the book and might even purchase the 1st edition as it would be really old and have old tube organ diagrams in it. What the HELL would those sound like anyway?</p>

            </p>

            the buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuzzzzzzzz</p>


            </p>

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: schober recital organ

              Organmaster and forum members - As someone else mentioned the Schober is a rather elderly organ. It was a kit organ dating back to the mid 60s and followed a lot of the Baldwin tone generator design ideas, i.e. a Divider circuit tone generator. I have only run across one that I recall and it was no great shakes. I was surprised in reading the link on Organmasters posting to learn that Schober ever even made it to transistorized circuitry. They were produced at the same time another kit organ company Artisan was producing organs and accessories. IMHO Artisan was the far better company as it used a lot of Conn design ideas with ITO. I think both companies went out of business in the early 70s although a new company using the Artisan name resurfaced in recent years using modern technology. Don S.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: schober recital organ

                [quote user="buzzyreed"]


                Does anyone else read and reread Richard H. Dorf 's (the founder of the Schober Organ Company) "Electronic Musical Instruments" like I do? It predates digital organs (and good taste) by a decade or so. I really enjoy looking at the old diagrams of the analog circuits that used to have to make up the sound. </P>


                Also very funny, though disturbing, are his opinions of how organs should be voiced. Perhaps that is the reason that so many of the present day digital organs sound so awful, they are basing their voicing on English/ Early 20th century organs. I get sick when I read his idea that 'chiffing' is a defect and organs with chiff tire the ear.." and quotes to that effect. I really think people with ears like that would have been better served listening to a glass harmonium. </P>
                <P mce_keep="true"></P>


                Anywhoo... I really love the book and might even purchase the 1st edition as it would be really old and have old tube organ diagrams in it. What the HELL would those sound like anyway?</P>
                <P mce_keep="true"></P>


                the buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuzzzzzzzz</P>



                </P>


                [/quote]</P>


                I read that book back in the 1960's. IIRC, he put down other companies that had features his organ didn't have (like chiff). Didn't he also put down Allen for using multiple ranks of oscillators in their analog organs?</P>


                Bill</P>

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: schober recital organ



                  yea, he claims on one hand to be a musician and not really interested in 'bells and whistles' but then goes about saying that Allen and Rodgers put too much time and money into getting authentic pipe sounds at the expense of tonal variety. Um, yea, cause we all use Thomas, Lowery, and Conn organs today... er.... He also seemed to think that you could make a pretty good organ using frequency dividers so everything was phase locked but then complains that there is 'nothing added' to a Rodgers unified flute rank if you couple it. err.. duh.</p>

                  I was also confused when he said that an organ like the Rodgers and Allen would work fine for playing Bach but not for liturgical services??!! Um, I guess he must have some very odd ideas of liturgical music I guess. Anywhoo...</p>

                  </p>

                  </p>

                  Oh, OH, I forgot! He drove me mad when he insisted that drawknobs were just to make the organist feel important, saying that those little plastic tab things work just fine. He has, apparently, never played a service where he has no time to go 'flick, flick, um.. er.. flick.. no.. flick yea.. flick' instead of pulling the right registration. You can't save every possible registration in the pistons and the only way to get it is to pull without looking. You can't really do that with these stupid flick tabs that almost everyone uses now. Of course now it's worse becuase they dont' move, you just look for the little light... and when that burns out (and they always do).. your screwed. </p>

                  </p>

                  </p>

                  </p>


                  </p>

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: schober recital organ

                    [quote user="buzzyreed"]


                    yea, he claims on one hand to be a musician and not really interested in 'bells and whistles' but then goes about saying that Allen and Rodgers put too much time and money into getting authentic pipe sounds at the expense of tonal variety. Um, yea, cause we all use Thomas, Lowery, and Conn organs today... er.... He also seemed to think that you could make a pretty good organ using frequency dividers so everything was phase locked but then complains that there is 'nothing added' to a Rodgers unified flute rank if you couple it. err.. duh.</P>


                    I was also confused when he said that an organ like the Rodgers and Allen would work fine for playing Bach but not for liturgical services??!! Um, I guess he must have some very odd ideas of liturgical music I guess. Anywhoo...</P>
                    <P mce_keep="true">Oh, OH, I forgot! He drove me mad when he insisted that drawknobs were just to make the organist feel important, saying that those little plastic tab things work just fine. [/quote]</P>


                    Yes, it's coming back to me now. Even at my younger age, I could recognize that the book was to put down his competition and make the case for his organs. Tonal variety? How does frequency dividers give MORE tonal variety? Having more ranks of oscillators OBVIOUSLY gives more tonal variety than using frequency dividers. On top of that, organs like his used one oscillator for several different types of stops, using different filtering amounts to get the different timbre. Tonal variety? Right.</P>


                    All his book did was pique my interest in his competition. I heard examples of his organs. No thanks.</P>

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: schober recital organ



                      Hi,</p>

                      The Schober organ for me revives a bad dream. You see, when I was young and eternally optimistic, I ordered a kit of the recital model. I thought it was going to sound like pipes. Well, I did get the basic organ going and while it didn't sound terrible, it did not remind me of pipes. The combo action never did work. The bucket brigade reverb was so bouncy it didn't sound like reverb. Anyways, what can I say. Noisy audio keying, a single TOS divider pitch generator, very basic filtering, 2 channels - sounded electronic.</p>

                      Oh, well, you live and you learn.</p>

                      BTW, I later rebuilt the console into a moderately large Classic analog organ. Sounded very good in it's day, and was in a church for 15 or so years until the church closed. What happened to the organ - I don't know.</p>

                      AV

                      </p>

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: schober recital organ



                        arie v, you must have built one of the last versions of the Recital; the earlier versions actually had 12 oscillators, one for each of the 12 sets of octave-related pitches, instead of a single TOS. While this does not give the variety of the individual tone oscillators that the original Allens had, I believe it is somewhat better that basing everything on a single oscillator (although I am in the process of modifying my own Recital Model to have a single TOS chip driver--I hate tuning!). The bucket-brigade reverb was also a later item, as the original method was the Reverbatape (used tape loop recording)--I have no doubt it was not very good, as it was probably one of the first attempts at making such an item.</P>


                        The Schober Recital Model was tonally very similar to upper-level Baldwins of its day (1960s-mid 1970s) and superior to most of the other inexpensive full-sized organs available then. Although I would not say that they were truly "pipe-like", one had to go to an Allen (there were no other major electronic organs back then) to get better sound. The total expense, including a pre-built console and pedal assembly (32-note, concave, radiating AGO specification), was about $1500--for that, one got a serviceable 32-stop 2-manual instrument that had a very pleasant sound. The Recital is essentially a remake of the original Concert Model (the one in the Dorf book) using discrete transistors instead of vacuum tubes. The "Library of Stops" (TM) feature, whereby additional stop cards (circuit boards) could be built to produce different sounds, did provide a lot of versatility to the instrument: the organist could have at any timea set of 32 voices selected for the job at hand--these could be at any of the 5 pitch registers provided for in the manuals (16', 8', 4', 2 2/3', and 2'); the pedals did not have the mutation. An interesting method was also provided for re-mixing the basic pitches to provide both 8' and 4' (in the manuals) or 16' and 8' (in the pedals) stopped voices (converted basic sawtooth waveforms to corresponding square waveforms before filtering).</P>


                        It is all too easy to judge these instruments by today's standards, or even those of the 1980s, when the concepts involved in those later years were only in experimental stages if being considered at all. Judged by the standards of their day, the Recital Model instruments were tonally the equal or superior to those of most "home" instruments and quite a few low-level "church" models, and could be obtained for about half the cost or less--this was a significant element for a lot of prospective organ buyers.</P>


                        At the time the SchoberOrgan Corporationwent bankrupt (late 1970s), they were even then developing a 3-manual kitinstrument with greatly expanded capabilities, and had already produced the first IC-based circuits for their earlier line (the aforementioned TOS tone generator board). The electronic keyboard was just becoming popular and the home organ market essentially collapsed; the company's demise was probably more due to the drop in the market than by any deficiencies in their product, which was remarkably robust. Anyone wanting to see more about the Schober instruments can go to the web site of the Schober Organ Orphans http://www.users.cloud9.net/~pastark/schober.html. This site has a wealth of information about the company, its instruments, and the ongoing efforts of Schober owners to keep their organs working 40 years later.</P>


                        David</P>

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: schober recital organ



                          My next door neighbor had a Schober Recital organ. Compared to most in the stores at that time, the sound was much more like a pipe organ. Schober had a circulating magnetic tape reverb unit that added a lot of ambience and motion to the sound. I liked my neighbor's organ enough to build a Schober Theatre organ. I started music lessons using that instrument. The organ worked well and had a nice sound and was used for several years until I obtained a Style D Wurlitzer (pipe organ). The pipe organ sound was obviously superior so that the Schober was passed on. Note that a Rogers organ would have cost $15,000 to $30,000 at the time, far beyond my price range.
                          </p>

                          I have Richard Dorf's book and enjoyed reading it. The electronics described are now dated. Much better electronics are now available. </p>

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: schober recital organ

                            I still have and use the Schober Recital organ I built in 1971-2. In it's day, it was one of the more realistic-sounding electronic organs. I am considering replacing the electronics with one of the digital systems now available or getting a new organ, which ever seems more feasible after I study the situation more. In any event, there wasn't anything close to it anywhere near the price it went for back then and the Schober company was pleasant to deal with. The last I heard from them was January 1980 after I had replaced the Reverbatape with their replacement Rezounder reverberation unit. The organ used all discrete components at the time I built mine but the Rezounder has several IC's in it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: schober recital organ

                              Ahhh! Thanks John! I had never thought about tuning my old Allen TC-3 this way (using an electronic keyboard as a pitch source) before. I wish I would have thought about that before. I'll never forget tuning the damn thing a day before a concert never knowing if I'd get it done or not. There were a lot of study halls I had to give some classes just so I could get it done in time for the concerts. Live and learn I guess. Ugh..

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X