32' Flute

[Kelvin]

I am installing a 32' flute in my residence organ. The pipes are a 16' Wood Diapason that I am am extending and stoppering. They came from a 1923 Austin organ from Seattle, which I removed over ten years ago. I started with B, and now I have 3 pipes, A, A# and B installed and playing. G# and G are partially done.

I thought maybe I could post pictures of them, but don't see an option for this.

My drawknob says 32 Contra Bourdon, but Quintaton would be more appropriate. They are softer than I would like, and are bright in tone. I've extended them off of the 16' Subbass, which is also bright in tone, but has lots of fundamental. They are a few notes smaller in scale.

They are made of sugar pine, and I have a bunch of scraps from pipes that I didn't need, including two 16' flute bottom octaves, and the 8' octave of the wood diapason. I cut them in half and then thin the last few inches down with a router. Then I glue in pieces in two layers to fill in the gap. It takes eight pieces per pipe and I can only do one at a time, so I spend days in that part of it. Then I have to make a pipe foot and a stopper.

It's a lot of work, but sure is a rush to hear them when they're finally working.

[myorgan]

I thought maybe I could post pictures of them, but don't see an option for this.

Kelvin,

Since you are new, I suspect you may not be able to post photos until you've made a handful of posts. To be sure, you can click on "Go Advanced" at the bottom of the Quick Reply box, and you will see a menu below the editing box that says "Manage Attachments." That is where you would upload the photos of your project, but they will probably be moderated, again, until you've made a handful of posts.

Your project sounds quite interesting. I would also surmise that when you're entering the 32' Flue range in a residence organ, the fundamental will be more and more difficult to hear the lower you go--unless your space is large enough for the sound to develop.

Please keep us posted on your progress.

Michael

[davidecasteel]

I am having difficulty reconciling the idea that pipes originally part of a 16' Wood Diapason would be at all flute-like when stoppered to play an octave lower. For one thing, Diapasons have a lot more harmonic development than flutes do, and for another, the pipes from an upper octave will have a smaller scale than would be the case for the same stop an octave lower, and this will increase the content of higher harmonics. Eliminating the odd harmonics will to some degree mitigate this, but not entirely. My guess is that it will sound like a Quintadena or Quintaton, not a flute. (I'd make a more reasoned guess, but can't access the Encyclopedia of Organ Stops to investigate.)

David

[michaelhoddy]

Well, a former big old 1923 Open Wood is not likely to have that much harmonic development in the bottom octave, even if it is called "Diapason." Quite a few of that type were actually extended up to 8' in Romantic Pedal divisions and given flute names. The level of harmonic development in these types of pipes is comparatively low relative to the mid-century and later Principal tones we're now accustomed to, and much of it is either air and transient sounds, or the natural even-order harmonic series development inherent in open pipes.

Converting large-scale Romantic Open Wood Diapason pipes, which are relatively common and available due to changing tonal tastes, to 32' stopped wood flutes is actually a pretty frequent practice.

Interesting aside, the 32' "Diapason" in the original 1913 E.M. Skinner at St. Thomas NYC was actually stoppered and half-length in the bottom octave!

[Havoc]

Must be quite some residence to get a 32' note to devolp its sound.

[Terpodion]

I did a job like that many years ago for a large auditorium organ with a very large scale 16' open flute. But a diapason is going to have a lower cut-up than a flute such as a bourdon. The upper lip of a bourdon is frequently arched and very rounded as well. You might consider cutting the upper lip higher.

In the case of the aforementioned auditorium organ, three pipes needed to be made for the lowest three notes because (as you have discovered) fitting a stopper does not lower the pitch a full octave.

Getting the stoppers well sealed is another factor for success. The stoppers I made were heavily felted, covered with thick leather and coated with soft wax. The wax used for toilet gaskets works well for this purpose.

It can be difficult to tune the things. I well remember the curator poking the primary while I sat on top of the pipe with a sledge hammer saying; "I don't think it's generating". I was shaking like a hardware store paint shaker. Out in the very large room it generated very well.

- - - Updated - - -

Higher cut-up, arched upper lip.

[toodles]

It really does not require an enormous space to develop 32' sound, it can happen in headphones (as an extreme example) quite easily. It often does require careful positioning of the source to avoid standing waves. The low C wave is 64 ft long, so even in large spaces it often can cause standing waves, but in small spaces, less so.

Of concern in homes is the typical 8 ft high ceiling in a home where that is an integral fraction of the wavelength. Vaulted ceilings of tapering height helps and room proportions that are not a multiple of 8 ft.

[Guest]

Some might find this of interest:

Ernest M. Skinner Writes on Thirty-two-Foot Tones

Boston, Mass., july 25, 1919.

Editor The Diapason: I feel rather under obligation to make reply to Senator Richards in view of the trouble he has taken to draw attention to my remarks on sound waves in recent issues of The Diapason.
With reference to their having been written in haste, I may make a further contribution to this statement, in which the senator and l are in agree ment, by saying that when in haste we neglect the obvious. If written in less haste, I might have said What I now say—that is, every well-voiced organ pipe produces sound waves that neutralize each other and produce silence. We call this silent point the node. In large pedal pipes nodal points are perceptible outside the pipes. Hold low C of a pedal open and by walking the length of the building there will be recurrent points where there is practical silence and plenty of tone elsewhere. I invite Mr. Richards' consideration of this perfectly well-known point of silence within an organ pipe and would ask him to suggest a possible other explanation of the node.
If Mr. Richards will remember that a sound wave is not destroyed at the point of silence, but continues its progress as though there were no in terference, he will see that the third paragraph of his article is not apropos.
My diagram was in exposition of a theory and concerned two simple and equalwaves. If identical waves could be produced and spaced properly for neutralization, we must also isolate them from all reflecting surfaces, as otherwise tone reflected from walls and ceilings will arrive at the critical point and mess up the experiment. So much labor must be undertaken to deaden walls, floor and ceilings to prove something the node and tuning fork already tell us.
The discussion concerns a theory and is a fair parallel and about as useful as the following:
A man cannot move where he is A man cannot move where he is not Therefore a man cannot move.

The neutralization of two tones has not the remotest connection with a resultant 32—foot tone or any other.
Any 16-foot C and 16-foot G will make a 32-foot C regardless of the strength or quality of the tones em ployed. A 16-foot C and 16-foot G on the piano will also do this. It is simply a matter of tuning and a con dition in which everything is favor able and nothing against it. All the elements are easy to combine to produce the result. N o particular nicety of arrangement is necessary.
In producing silence by the combin ation of two sound waves it is abso lutely necessary to make two sounds exactly alike, same strength, same timbre, same pitch. They must be placed at a very exact distance apart and isolated in every direction but one to kill reflection. Rather difficult problem, and one wholly unrelated to that of resultant tones. Questions of annihilation and combination have little in common in this case.
Mr. Richards is the only person I have heard of who cannot hear a 32 foot tone. How about a bombarde? No tuner finds difficulty in tuning any stop of 32-foot pitch, whether an open, bourdon, violone or bombarde.
The difiiculty with the upper part of the scale in 32-foot resultant stops is a real one. I find it a good expedient to run the 16-foot open and bourdon at a fifth above to low B and then place 16-foot C open on middle C pedal and so on up the scale and so get a straight 32-foot open except in the lower octave, and in the lower octave we then have the resultant at its best.
I a m inclined to think Mr. Richards' statement that the lower notes of 32 foot stops cannot be heard was not so intended. If he finds himself unable to hear tones of 32-foot vibrations per second, it must be a personal matter.
May I say a word about the terms
“dual” and "absolute" as applied to the combination action? I suggest the term "dual" be
changed to "semi" and for the following reason: With this type of combination, if a register is drawn,it is not subject to the combinations; also if it is drawn by a combination it is no longer subject to the register. I think the term “semi” is decidedly more truthful and appropriate.

Very truly yours, ERNEST M. SKINNER.

[myorgan]

Some might find this of interest:

Ernest M. Skinner Writes on Thirty-two-Foot Tones

Boston, Mass., july 25, 1919.

Sculptor2,

First of all, welcome to the Forum. I look forward to your future contributions.

Assuming the quote is accurate (in spite of spelling, grammar, and other errors), I believe the Skinner article is addressing the interaction of 32' Resultant tones produced by playing 2 notes from the 16' rank at the same time, vs. one pipe producing a true 32' fundamental. I'd be interested in viewing the original article, to which Mr. Skinner is responding.

In the case of the Resultant, no pitch (that I'm aware of) is produced below the 16' range. In the case of the single tone 32', the fundamental frequency is a full octave lower.

This thread is quite interesting to me because it is the first time I have ever heard of converting a 16' open pipe to a 32' stopped pipe. While I may never do it, the information will come in useful when understanding how to use a converted stop.

Michael

[Guest]

Sculptor2,

First of all, welcome to the Forum. I look forward to your future contributions.

Assuming the quote is accurate (in spite of spelling, grammar, and other errors), I believe the Skinner article is addressing the interaction of 32' Resultant tones produced by playing 2 notes from the 16' rank at the same time, vs. one pipe producing a true 32' fundamental. I'd be interested in viewing the original article, to which Mr. Skinner is responding.

In the case of the Resultant, no pitch (that I'm aware of) is produced below the 16' range. In the case of the single tone 32', the fundamental frequency is a full octave lower.

This thread is quite interesting to me because it is the first time I have ever heard of converting a 16' open pipe to a 32' stopped pipe. While I may never do it, the information will come in useful when understanding how to use a converted stop.

Michael

Thanks Michael,

The errors are due to scanning/conversion errors, I skimmed over it quickly and caught I thought all of the obvious typos.
It is from the Sept 1, 1919 issue of The Diapason, it and others are available to download free from Google Books, I don't know how many are there I just found the first issue when I posted so I haven't had a chance to look for more issues.

Yes, he was speaking about 32' resultant and mentioned how to obtain it.

I don't see the direct url to it without the search term used to find it included, but here it is:

https://books.google.com/books?id=yJ...page&q&f=false

[myorgan]

The errors are due to scanning/conversion errors, I skimmed over it quickly and caught I thought all of the obvious typos.
[snip]
I don't see the direct url to it without the search term used to find it included, but here it is:

https://books.google.com/books?id=yJ...page&q&f=false

Sculptor2,

Ah, I now understand. OCR has its limitations, unfortunately.

Thank you so much for the link. It will be nice to have a copy downloaded to my computer to peruse. Great article on how the Resultant is formed. Someday, I'm going to have to research the article to which Mr. Skinner is responding, so there is a more clear background for the discussion. I suspect the original article was discussing the pros and cons of using a Resultant 32' in a space (vs. true 32'), and the appearance (& subsequently disappearance) of converging nodes and antinodes of various waveforms in a space, as a direct result (no pun intended) of a true 32' vs. Resultant 32'. Mr. Skinner's contention appears to be that no matter what form is used, the Pedal note will appear and disappear throughout a space, and that physics will prevail in the end.

Thank you for the article link.

Michael

[Guest]

Sculptor2,

Ah, I now understand. OCR has its limitations, unfortunately.

Thank you so much for the link. It will be nice to have a copy downloaded to my computer to peruse. Great article on how the Resultant is formed. Someday, I'm going to have to research the article to which Mr. Skinner is responding, so there is a more clear background for the discussion. I suspect the original article was discussing the pros and cons of using a Resultant 32' in a space (vs. true 32'), and the appearance (& subsequently disappearance) of converging nodes and antinodes of various waveforms in a space, as a direct result (no pun intended) of a true 32' vs. Resultant 32'. Mr. Skinner's contention appears to be that no matter what form is used, the Pedal note will appear and disappear throughout a space, and that physics will prevail in the end.

Thank you for the article link.

Michael

Unfortunately it does, made worse by using the copy/paste from the PDF file- tends to introduce extra spaces at line endings, which tend to wind up in the middle of some longer words.

I have not searched for what Mr Skinner was responding too, but I would imagine it's only a couple of issues back, maybe 3 at the most by the time he read it, wrote in and the comments published.
Glad I found it and it's of some use here.

[Kelvin]

I've always considered a quintadena to be of the flute family. It's odd that a wood diapason pipe, which is all woof and little harmonics, would have so much harmonic development and so little fundamental when stoppered. I've considered cutting them up higher, as someone mentioned, and I've thought about widening the windway. I wanted to get a few more installed before doing anything drastic. They aren't inaudibly soft.

I've heard the idea that 32' tone needs a big room to develop in, and maybe it's just wive's tales. We'll find out. I have had a resultant wired up on this stop for years, and it has been quite effective. The room isn't so small though. It is fifty feet long and thirty feet tall at the peak.

I should have the next two installed soon. Right now they ended up serving as a spot to set a windchest I am building.

[tbeck]

This thread reminds me of a story I heard about a contra bassoon (the instrument, not the organ stop).

Unfortunately, I don't remember the name of the conductor involved, but he was conducting an orchestra rehearsal with some badly copied parts. At one point the contrabassoonist asked the maestro, "At letter R do I have a low C or a low C#?"

The maestro said, "Let's hear the passage with both." After playing the passage with both the low C and the low C#, the maestro said, "Play either one."

[myorgan]

The maestro said, "Let's hear the passage with both." After playing the passage with both the low C and the low C#, the maestro said, "Play either one."

Good point! Personally, I'd probably have stuck with the Resultant rather than trying to convert another stop. I employ the K.I.S.S. method whenever possible. Less work--more play!:-B

Michael