I’ve decided to treat these three performances as separate recitals. If for no other reason than it will be a little easier to digest in instalments rather than one very long and cumbersome review. Moreover, I felt that each performance should be judged on its own merits rather than as an integrated whole, since there were some distinctive differences among the players.

The second recital to which I attended consisted of three young winners of Regions 1 – 3 of the 2013 AGO Quimby Regional Competitions for Young Organists (or AGOQuRCYO for short ). At first I thought it was “ …Young Artists;” but (fortunately), saw that I was in error. It’s not Artists but Organists. We certainly don’t want to confuse the two now do we. Fortunately, I could not find any biographical information on these three young organists, search as I might through all the convention booklets. I say fortunately, I had nothing to interfere with my evaluation of their playing. What I saw and heard was what I got.

In any event this 3-in-1 recital was also presented at Old South Church. Region I was represented by Jennifer McPherson. Ms. McPherson gave us two very large scale works: the J. S. Bach (1685-1750) Prelude & Fugue in c, BWV 546. Not unlike its other c minor partners the Passacaglia & Fugue, BWV 582 and the Fantasia & Fugue, BWV 562, this is a powerful and dramatic work with full dominant and tonic appoggiaturæ and parallel diminished seventh chords, switching back and forth between triplet and duple rhythms in the Prelude and then a five-voiced fugue which stays almost unrelentingly in minor mode and builds to a monumental conclusion on a blazing C Major triad. At least that’s how I envision the piece. Such was not to be the case. She opened dramatically enough with solid organ pleno (essentially full ensemble without reeds) registration; but, then that was it. The entire Prelude was played with no colour changes, ignoring what texture changes in the score would indicate or imply. Then came the Fugue. Ms. McPherson started off with just a few stops less than the Prelude and played through the notes as if it were a practise session focusing merely on note accuracy and nothing else: no phrase shaping or articulation, no dynamic variety, no colour. In short what we heard was, unfortunately, what has become the standard performance of a Bach prelude and fugue. There is little that is more monotonous than hearing the same loud combination of stops for an entire piece. A person listening wonders why does that all the expressivity of Bach which occurs in every other medium for which he wrote simply disappear on the organ? The frustration level bis enhanced when one thinks of the tonal possibilities the organ offers up to the organist, who in turn either refuses or simply disdains to exploit those possibilities.

I don’t blame Ms. McPherson completely. She is obviously a product of conventional academia where the obsession for so-called historical accuracy at the expense of expressive music making continues to this day, and will, regrettably, continue for some time to come.*

The second offering Ms. McPherson offered was only slightly better and that was the Prelude & Fugue on the Name B-A-C-H by Franz Liszt (1811-1886). This can be a pretty exciting work, as is the case of much of Liszt’s music. It’s not great music by any means; but, in typical Liszt fashion it’s a lot of fun — that is when a little imagination is used and a willingness to let the organ (especially a glorious instrument such as Old South Church, Boston) really rip it can create a lot of excitement.  Unfortunately, one got the feeling that Ms. McPherson was holding back, as if she was afraid to venture beyond what she was told do with this piece. She was in essence “playing to the test.” All in all it was an adequate performance: technically proficient and followed all the dynamics to a tee, but totally lacking in soul. I know Ms. McPherson is young, but, as we shall see next, that doesn’t preclude being a dynamic performer.

* Again, allow me to reference my series of blogs on “So, What’s Wrong with the Organ Anyway?” And,more importantly, Stephen Best’s exquisite essay “On Passionate Music Making”† in which he so succinctly illustrates the transition of the eager, imaginative, passionate young student entering college and coming out as the dry, unimaginative, robot.

†On Passionate Music Making

This and the following recital reviews were slow in coming and aren’t the kind of detailed analytical reviews I usually write (when I do write a concert review). Rather, they are more or less reflective impressions. I’m only offering these at this point, not so much because I want to, but, to keep a promise. As the outsider organist who tries to observe organ concerts in a light that is more indicative of standard classical concerts I realise the things I say won’t change anything, but will still grate against a lot of organists’ sensibilities. They’re just my own observations and opinions. I thought I’d start with not only the first, but also the one I enjoyed the most (with one exception). Interestingly enough, the chronology actually followed in a descending progression.
During the week of 22 June 2014 Boston, the American Guild of Organists had their national convention. I had the opportunity to attend a few recitals. Two by what may be considered in the organ world as major artists and one consisting of three of the winners of the nine 2013 AGO Quimby Regional Competitions for Young Organists (one from Region I and two from Region II) . As I noted earlier in my general impressions, even though it was a small sample, I’ve attended more than my fair share of organ recitals by “major” artists and some not so major that my conclusions from the recitals heard here convinced me that little has changed; i. e., the odds of hearing a great performance out of the of recitals presented, notwithstanding their quantity, were few and far between

Craig Cramer on Tuesday (23rd) proved to be one of those lucky exceptions. Dr. Cramer gave a very fine recital that was played with technical mastery and interesting programming on the kind of organ that potentially can be absolutely breathtaking. Dr. Cramer gave us a programme obviously tailor made for his audience. Of the four composers listed only one had even a remotely recognisable name, the other three were most likely unknown to most of even this audience of almost exclusively organists. Nevertheless, that fortunately did not preclude their worth, mostly, as recital pieces or of the large instrument of South Church upon which they were played.
Dr. Cramer began with a lovely work by a composer, who because he was distinctively and almost exclusively and organ composer: Auguste Fauchard (1881-1975 http://www.musimem.com/Fauchard.htm) His Le Mystere de Noël Shows all the trappings of his composition teachers, d’Indy and Vierne, and by osmosis, Franck. It is a set of variations on the chant “Jesu Redemptor omnium,” a Christmas hymn. Also in keeping with the Franck School it requires large hand stretches which can be especially daunting for someone with small hands. This special technical demand didn’t seem to phase Dr. Cramer who executed the work with aplomb, making good use of the colouristic capabilities of the organ including the use of the Zimbelstern in the 4th, or “Star” variation.

The two consequential pieces were at best curiosities. Toni Zahnbrecher (b. 1959) composed the Introduction, Scherzo and Fugue on B-E-A-T-E in 1993, but sounds more like 1893. Actually, it was quite refreshing to hear a work that was well written with adequate contrapuntal skill and a well chosen resulting harmonic language. Dr. Cramer has become a champion of this composer, and of this work in particular. He could certainly do a lot worse in light of the tripe that passes for serious music currently being written for the organ and that the AGO pays for.

The Ethel Smyth (1858-1944) Prelude and Fugue on “O Traurigkeit, O Herzeleid” (“O Sadness, O Suffering Heart) is from a set of six chorale prelude written in the late 1880’s. It was interesting mainly because Smyth was one of that rare breed — a woman composer of the 19th Century who was also highly respected (she was made DBE in 1922); sort of the Clara Schumann of England, except she was much more politically active. The piece served as a pleasant enough a diversion from what had preceded and what was to come, namely the Sonata #2 in d, Op. 60 by Max Reger (1873-1916), the only composer on the programme with any familiarity to a general public.

Reger is relatively popular among organists; he was one of that select group of major composers (Bach, Franck and later Messiaen) for whom the organ was their primary instrument. The Second Sonata is typically Reger in so much as it is big, harmonically chromatic, and contrapuntally very complex. Dr. Cramer took this monster and wrestled it to the ground; but, not without a fight, or so it should receive as proper justification. From the piles of sound in the first movement to the sublime intimacy of the second to the overwhelming complexity and monumental conclusion of the final movement Dr. Cramer was not afraid to overpower us with the majesty of that resplendent instrument. It was a very nicely played recital. Whatever quibbles I may have about not playing from memory and console positioning are moot since Dr. Cramer was playing for other organists, who often don’t get to see the performer at all.

The American Guild of Organist’s (AGO) biennial national convention has come and gone from Boston. And from it my impressions of this specialised sub-species of humanoids has remained pretty much unchanged. The three recitals I attended continued to quantify those conclusions: two by major artists (at least as far as the organ world is concerned) and one which had three young “rising stars” in the organ world as part of some national competition. This is stuff that only the hardcore organ enthusiast can appreciate. I think at one time I was hardcore; but, to paraphrase Paul, when I musically grew up I put aside those organ things. Don’t get me wrong; I love the organ. It truly is the “King of Instruments.” It’s just that it is so very frustrating to hear the organ constantly played with such abundant banality. And the convention, with a few exceptions, corroborated this enduring frustration. In my series What’s Wrong with the Organ Anyway? I’ve pointed out how cloistered, self-indulgent and wholly without imagination the organ world as continued to be. Granted, there are a few who understand the limitless potential of the organ and what’s needed to bring it to the general public so that they too can witness the phenomenal beauty and magnificence of the organ: its illimitable tonal palate, its majesty and sometimes overwhelming power, yet also its asomatous, even intimate delicacy — a quality frequently overlooked; but, those people are very few indeed.

What the public does not need is the continued monochromatic, expressivity barren playing that (again with a very few exceptions) still pervades organ performance. Other soloists in live performance, in general practise, play or sing from memory and the exception is to use a score; whereas, organists do just the opposite. I get a lot of resistance whenever I bring this subject up; and again, it testifies to how condescendingly organists view the concert going public, despite their protestations to the contrary. Organists seem to think that looking at somebody glued to a printed page and doing little else will perfectly entertain their audiences.

I must say, the list of workshops and scholarly paper presentations impressed me. There seemed to be a bit more emphasis on the scholarship and teaching aspects than in the past. Not much, but a bit more. However, there were only one or two workshops that I could see that actually dealt with public performance; i. e., recitals. The church and the vagaries that organists continue to have regarding work in the church (particularly dealing with clergy and lay leaders) still dominates the discussion — understandably so, since most organs are still in churches. The problem is the organ is only used as the principal musical instrument in what are referred to as mainstream churches, and that even less so as time goes on.

The AGO has been struggling with the issue of declining membership in the church for years, and has been at odds with church leaderships as to what works best. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of churches have adopted the attitude that traditional hymn singing and and traditional choral and organ music — both new and old — aren’t hip enough to attract new parishioners. As a result, the organ and the organist have more and more been sidelined in favour of “pop” entertainment.. Now, in many churches the organ is only brought out for special occasions such as Christmas Eve and Easter where traditional hymns are actually sung (along with the cheesy pop music). In short, the clergy in their usual coruscating ignorance, have opted for the shortsighted American business model of the quick fix in an ephemeral attempt to fill the collection plates through the medium of pop culture — or at least what passes as popular culture to them.
I

n any event, the continued focus on the church poses a bit of a dilemma for many organists. Mind you, it’s not as if the church is going to disappear tomorrow (unless you’re a Rapture wackoid); nevertheless, the future of serious music in the church is at best problematic. There have been numerous workshops, not just at the Boston convention, but around the country, as well as articles in The American Organist (TAO, the principal trade publication for organists) on how to deal with the current trend toward “praise bands,” prerecorded music, and small to medium sized churches who can’t (or more likely won’t) pay to have an organist. I find it not a little curious that when reading the TAO and seeing the featured new or newly restored big instrument, the little summaries of each chapter and the “Who’s Who” section, one could easily be led to believe that things were just peachy in the organ world. Churches are managing to find or raise these hundreds of thousands — even millions — of dollars for new or restored instruments; that young people all over the country are signing up left and right to learn about and study the organ; that people are flocking to organ recitals .— and paying money. I must say, the paper of the magazine does look very nice with a rosy tint to it.
The Boston AGO convention did very little to help dispel those myths. Although I can understand the that much of the focus would still be on “how to be a better church musician,” attention needs to be directed to the organ as a concert instrument in both solo and ensemble settings. As recitalists organists need to learn from their counterparts in other disciplines on programming and how to present themselves before an audience: what they need to do in order to make going to an organ recital a viscerally compelling experience. That means more recitals in concert halls and churches where the organ console can be seen. There are more facets to this sphere of organ playing covered in more detail in my above referenced series.

The organ has entered into a whole new era. No longer is access to the glorious sounds of the great cathedral or concert hall instruments restricted to just those venues. Nowadays with the continued development and improvements of current and future technology, electronic organ companies such as Roland/Rodgers, Johannus, Allen, Hauptwerk (software) and a host of others are making the sounds of great pipe organs more and more convincing along with the affordability and equivalent space of a grand piano. Less and less will some one who wants to learn to play the organ be subject to the rancorous mercies of the church. That means more and more organists can and will be able to concentrate on actually making the organ a respected concert instrument — again. All that is needed now are some organists who are willing to leap across the moat of organ politesse and start thinking about their audiences; viz. people other than organists. The organ has the capability to dazzle as no other instrument can. All it takes is imagination, mastery of the console beyond the keys and pedal board, good taste in stage presence (sorry Cameron), and a willingness to take risks; subjects that were left wanting at the 2014 AGO Convention, Boston. Hey, there’s always 2016.

After some consideration I’ve decided to just post any thoughts about the Franck Choral #3 strictly for my own edification.  My attempt to provoke some thought on how to approach the piece has… well, let’s say… not worked.  I shouldn’t expect anyone to seriously consider my ideas (no matter how well thought), since I’m not “famous” or “established.”  So be it.  If anyone IS interested in my thoughts you know to come here.

Not much other than to say it’s become more involved than I thought.  If I was giving a masterclass on this I could demonstrate what I’m trying say.  As it stands, since I don’t have an organ at my disposal at the moment I force to use excessively detailed verbal language with piksters.  Therefore, Part II will only go up to the cadence to the “chorale.”

Schönberg’s orchestration of Brahms’ “Piano Quartet in g” is so convincing, for me it equals the original version.  I love the whole piece; but, for the the first two movement are preludes to the “march” in the Andante con Moto; only to be followed by that rip-roarin’ Rondo.  It a testament to Schönberg’s insight that he should pick this one chamber work of Brahms and see how it almost cries out to be orchestrated.  And such a brilliant orchestration it is.  It’s virtually Brahms’ 5th symphony.

Just a quick note here.  I don’t know if he was deliberate referencing or just ripping off Stravinsky’s Le Sacre du Printemps, but from what I’ve heard Richard Danielpour has almost literally lifted entire passages from it and tossed them into his Symphony #3 “Journey without Distance.”   In the quieter passages he sounds like he’s trying too hard to copy Bernstein’s song style, without much success, I might add.

So, as you can see, the organ has some serious image problems.  And, as something that has developed over an extended period of time, it will take some time to reverse this decline in esteem within the musical community.  Although every situation has its mitigating circumstances, for the most part organists and organ builders have been largely responsible for their plight through their self induced isolation and intransigence.  Now, it’s granted that in past the organ’s principal function has been liturgical; and it should continue to furnish this vital commission for the church in the future.  Nevertheless, as the world becomes more secular, and with the church relying more and more on pandering through lowest common denominator pop music in its desperate quest for increased numbers, the organ has become progressively marginalised. A definite imperative is required here in order to make the organ and organ music vital to the church again. Needless to say, that won’t happen if we continue to produce organists who are themselves marginalised by means of this continued refusal to apply an imaginative, extroverted approach to liturgical music.  Like it or not, people nowadays want to be entertained. With that in mind organists, if they are capable, have the opportunity to accomplish what no guitar player, drummer, electronic keyboardist, miked singer, any cheesy combination thereof, or even a classically trained pianist can do:  and that is, both viscerally excite (entertain) and legitimately move the spirit through the power, dynamic and colouristic versatility of the instrument at their disposal, even if it’s only a seven rank Estey.  But organists have to — they must — come out of that shell if the organ is to return to its rightful place as the primary non-vocal musical instrument of worship.

Notwithstanding, the organ world needs to come to terms with reality and look beyond the church.  For the larger classical music audience greater focus on the organ as a concert instrument needs to be done.  However, that can only be achieved with the kind of training that instils in the organist that  fearless passion and desire to communicate to an audience with which other secular concert musicians are imbued .  Nowadays modern technology has made the ability to focus on being primarily, even exclusively, a concert organist much more feasible.  A serious organist can now purchase a good two to three manual authentic sounding electronic organ for roughly the equivalent of a quality upright or baby grand piano.  Even the speakers are less problematic since technology has greatly reduced the size needed to effectively produce the low notes for the pedal.  More and more an aspiring concert organist will become less and less dependent upon the kindness of clergy and ignorant, petty church committees or administrators and territorial organists to be able to practise regularly.  As serious music in the church dies, the organ does not have to die with it.

As much fun as I’ve had chiding Academia, they really aren’t to blame — at least not fully.  Musicology, like any history based discipline, has profoundly influenced us, expanding our knowledge of the world from which we have evolved, and has given us considerable insight into how things were done in the past.  This knowledge however, is only useful if it is applied in a manner to which modern society can relate. The danger is when this historical knowledge changes from perspective to dogma.  In recent years musicologists have learned, in their hit-or-miss fashion, that a lot of the dogma to which they had subscribed wasn’t quite so black and white.  For example, string players have learned that vibrato was actually a part of 18th possibly 17th Century performance; maybe not as broadly or consistently used as the late 19th Century and later, but, there nonetheless. So, playing Bach and Co. with little extra colour does not have to be eschewed as had been thought.  Again historical insight makes for a good jumping off point; but alas, we live in the 21st, not the 18th Century.

The glory of it all is that the organ by the shear magnificence of its presence can’t help but impress.  Visually as compelling as the architectural wonders, both secular and sacred, in which the organ is often housed, tonally and sonically as great as or even greater than a symphony orchestra, it really should be a no brainer to make a performance of the music emanating from those pipes one of the most moving experiences in a person’s life. And occasionally that happens — just not enough.  The various attempts to attract new people, such as Pipe Organ Encounters simply attract kids who are already predisposed to the organ.  Events like Pedals, Pipes and Pizza may have had a certain novelty when initially conceived; but not unlike nuns with guitars singing “Folk Mass” they were never terribly successful largely because they always seemed a little insincere, and now just seem hokey and contrived.  Again, people (especially nowadays with our celebrity conscious society) want to be entertained. That in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing.  Most of us who were initially attracted to that which we love (a person, work of art, movie, piece of music, etc.) were almost always drawn in by something visceral about the source of that attraction.  It doesn’t necessarily have to be visual; but, again in our highly visually oriented society, it “can’t hoit” to appeal to the ear through the eye.  Virgil Fox understood, and his audiences (made up of mostly of non-organists, whether he was doing his “Heavy Organ” programme or a “straight” recital) obviously appreciated that fact; And that’s the point. As successful as Mr. Fox was one can only imagine how much more effective he might have been if the organ “establishment” had embraced his dynamism instead vilified it.  But, the organ world remains obdurate. Hence the case of Cameron Carpenter.  The acting and dressing like a rock musician and essentially biting the hand that has fed him with his berating the organ world, pipe organs and most organ music, smacks of more than a little disingenuousness; but, it makes for great press.  A little controversy goes a long way to keeping some one or some thing in the public’s consciousness; and for the organ, that can only help.  As his one time manager, the late Richard Torrence (who was Virgil Fox’s manager) reminded me once, Mr. Carpenter is the first organist since Fox died — that is, in 30 years! — to generate so much exictment about the organ in the concert hall.

Because, ultimately as I stated at the beginning of this series, it’s not the instrument that the problem — quite the contrary, in fact — as it is the performer.  If or when the organ world eventually crawls out from behind its  agoraphobic, self-effacing, virtually moribund state and recognises that there is bright shining dynamic concert world out there:  that their wondrous instrument in the hands of serious yet dynamic, extroverted personalities such as Fox was and currently Paul Jacobs, Isabelle Demers, Cameron Carpenter, and a handful of others can, shall, will reclaim its rightful place on the throne of the musical kingdom.