The selection of different pitches and tone-colours available on an instrument. The two instruments that offer the player a choice of registration are the organ and the harpsichord.
FENNER DOUGLASS/BARBARA OWEN (I, 1–5, 7), BARBARA OWEN (I, 6, 8), DAVID FULLER (II)
The musical forces of the organ are available selectively by means of separate stops, or registers, which together provide the entire tonal capacity of the instrument. Each of the stops controls the ‘on’ or ‘off’ position for a series of pipes, grouped so that one or more pipes will respond to each key on a manual or pedal keyboard. The term ‘organ registration’ takes in the large body of advice about what is appropriate when combining organ stops, as well as the aggregate tonal effect of any combination drawn for a particular musical need. There is a rich store of information about registration for the organ that can be classified generally into two categories: practical advice, often supplied by organ builders, which consists of lists of combinations capable of being turned to good use; and instruction from composers or theoreticians about combinations appropriate for performing a particular musical composition.
1. Registration and the organ.
The history of organ registration is inextricably bound up with changing styles in organ building. Its origins lie in the transition between the stopless organ (Blockwerk) and instruments equipped with selective registers. In the indivisible Blockwerk of the early 15th century, the plenum, a mighty mixture of pipes sounding fundamentals and harmonics, was the only registration. The introduction of the fluitwerk-sterkwerk option (foundations alone, or with the large ‘mixture’ of upperwork), the second manual division (Positif-de-dos, or Rückpositiv) and Trompes (Bordunen) made some variety in registration possible; but still there was no selectivity in the modern sense within the sections of the instrument. In Italy towards the end of the 15th century there were one-manual organs whose plena had been entirely divided into separate stops, each controlling a single rank of pipes. As this new fashion spread northwards through France and Germany, organists were confronted for the first time with the necessity of choosing and blending their registrations, and builders often supplied them with advice about the most attractive combinations available. The earliest known organ music and the earliest instructions for registration date from the late 15th century. But until the early decades of the 17th century there was no apparent attempt to identify any registration with a certain musical texture or style.
Mersenne, in his Harmonie universelle (1636–7), opened his section on organ registration by summing up possible combinations of stops for an instrument of 22 registers. Taken in pairs, he said, the individual sounds of the instrument may be varied in 231 ways; taken in threes, 1540 ways; and taken in fives, 26,334 ways. But ‘among the many possible combinations there are several which are disagreeable’. This statement suggests that a player of good taste should refer to Mersenne’s advice to find the most agreeable registrations, and eventually learn enough about the tonal resources of the organ ‘to invent several others by experimenting at the keyboard’.
Mersenne’s lists of ‘agreeable’ registrations summed up more than a century of innovatory development for the French organ, a period from which considerable information about habits of registration has survived. A typical organ contract of the 16th century, or a list of registrations made out to assist the player, first described the make-up of the plenum (called fournitureor plein jeu). The plenum was the ancient Blockwerk split into three or more registers controlling doubled or tripled ranks of 16', 8' and 4', with two mixtures, called Fourniture and Cymbale. These mixtures held diverse ranks of many pitches contributing to the plenum; they were not useful by themselves, but neither was the plenum complete without them. Alongside the plenum, additional registrations developed for newly invented stops – flutes, reeds, bells, birdcalls, drums – bearing the names of their most distinctive components, such as Nasard, Doublette or Cromorne. Names of familiar sounds were applied to certain registrations, such as petit carillon, ‘parrot’, ‘canaries’ or the ‘voice of pilgrims of St Jacques’.
Major developments in organ building during the 16th century and the early 17th led to sharp stylistic delineations along national lines. Mersenne’s ‘agreeable’ registrations would not necessarily have been applicable to Italian or German musicians of his time, whose instruments were designed according to different tonal concepts, although some basic combinations had international acceptance. Yet organ builders and theorists supplied the broadest range of advice available for playing early organ music. Schlick, in his Spiegel der Orgelmacher und Organisten (1511), mentioned that preludes should be played on the plenum, and the cantus firmus could be brought into prominence on the Hauptwerk. Numerous characteristic sonorities were discovered and recorded, such as Krumhorn and Zimbel, which appeared in the Netherlands as early as 1505.
Two post-Cabezón documents deal fully with possibilities for one- or two-manual organs contemporary with Francisco Correa de Arauxo. They are the Documents per a la historia, which relate to the organ in S Joan de les Abadesses, Catalonia (1613), and Archivo musical (document 1404 at Lérida Cathedral) for a 25-stop, two-manual organ built in 1624–5. The latter is most remarkable for its systematic coverage of 117 registrations. One-manual combinations were classified under the following headings: plenum, Flautados, Nasardos and Misturas; two-manual registrations, usually using the cadira (Rückpositiv) for melodic purposes, were grouped as: unisonus; ‘other combinations’ to be used with or without Tremulant; Flageolets; Gaytillas; Cornetillas; Regalies; and ways of using the medio registro partido (half-registers split between bass and treble). Although Correa’s tientos seem to have been written mostly for a one-manual organ with split stops (divided at c'), the Lérida manuscript shows richer possibilities for contemporary adaptation to an instrument provided with a cadira.
The introduction in the late 17th century of the famous horizontal trumpets of Spanish organs (Clarines, or Trompettes en chamade) further heightened the contrasts between those instruments and organs in other European countries. As early as 1706 directions for using horizontal trumpets were given in the titles of pieces in the Flores de música … por Fray Antonio Martín y Coll, organista de San Diego de Alcalá: ‘Cancion de clarín, con eco, a discreción’, ‘Entrada de clarines’ and ‘Registro de clarines, mano derecha’.
A late 18th-century Spanish source shows the influence of Bédos de Celles, the third volume of whose L’art du facteur d’orgues (1770) gave valuable advice on registration. A series of letters to a friend by Don Fernando Antonio of Madrid, dealing with the construction and maintenance of organs, was published in 1790. Despite his feeling that organists should know how to find suitable registrations for their own playing, Don Fernando was persuaded to add a section on registration. It is, in effect, a Spanish adaptation of Bédos’ instructions, and probably not truly representative of common practice.
The
Italians, who were probably the first to use spring- and slider-chests that
made the separation of stops possible on the organ, called attention to the
correlation between certain registrations and suitable musical textures.
Diruta, in his Seconda parte del transilvano (1609), assigned moods to
the 12 modes, and recommended a registration for each. Banchieri, in L’organo
suonarino (1605), not only noted registrations but even included changes
between sections of two compositions, the Battaglia and the Dialogo.
But the most significant contribution came from the builder Costanzo Antegnati,
in L’arte organica (1608), written in the form of a dialogue between
father and son. Antegnati explained his 12-stop organ at Brescia Cathedral, and
gave instructions on how to play it during the Mass. The stops all spoke from a
single manual, typical for Italian organs of the period, with a coupled pedal
which controlled the bass section of a Principal stop (see no.2 below): 1. The complete Principale (24')
2. The split Principale (24'), divided at d,
the bass played by the pedals
3. Ottava (12')
4. Quintadecima
5. Decimanona
6. Vigesimaseconda
7. Vigesimasesta
8. Vigesimanona
9. Trigesimaterza
10. Another Vigesimaseconda, to play in concert
with the Ottava, and Flauto in ottava and Decimanona, which gives the effect of
cornets.
11. Flauto in quintadecima
12. Flauto in ottava
Registrations
and important comments were as follows: 1. Ripieno,
for intonations, introits or preludes: 1.3.4.5.6.7.8.9
2. Mezzo ripieno: 1.3.8.9.12
3. 1.3.12
4. 1.12
5. 3.5.6.12 for the concerto style. These
four stops resemble a consort of cornets.
6. 3.12. These two are excellent for playing
diminutions and for canzonas alla francese.
7. 3.12 + Tremolo; for the same sorts of
pieces, but not for diminutions
8. 1 alone. ‘I usually play this at the
Elevation of the Mass’.
9. 1.2 in unison may be played together.
10. 12 alone
11. 12 + 2. When played in the treble, this makes a
kind of accompanied harmony of two stops; then going down to the bass one hears
the flute alone … thus one comes to make a dialogue with the help of the
Contrabasse of the Pedal.
12. 11.1 should be played in diminutions; 3 may be
added.
Antegnati
continued with stop-lists and comments about registration for the nine-stop
organ at the church of S Faustino and the Braces, Brescia; S Grata, Bergamo; S
Maria del Carmine, Brescia; and S Marco, Milan. Additional advice about registration
is summarized as follows: (a) The ripieno
should be used at the Deo gratias, with toccatas, using pedals.
(b) For accompanying motets in
concertato style: the Principale and Flauto in ottava. For motets with few
singers: Principale alone, also with Tremolo, but in that event without
diminutions.
(c) The Tremolo can be used with the
Ottava and Flauto in ottava, or Flauto in ottava alone, but then slowly and
without diminutions.
(d) The Fiffaro should be played only
with the Principale, slowly and legato.
(e) For canzonas alla francese,
a good effect for flourishes is achieved with the Principale, Flauto in
duodecima, Ottava and Flauto in ottava, without Tremolo.
(f) Finally Antegnati discussed the
advantages of split stops for dialogues between the bass and treble ranges,
although it should be noted that split stops were never as common in Italy as
in the Iberian countries.
Italian organ music was seldom annotated with the composer’s instructions for registration. Rare examples are found in the organ part for Monteverdi’s Vespro della Beata Vergine (see the Magnificat settings for six and seven voices); in the titles of organ sonatas by Padre Martini; in Zipoli’s Pastorale; and in the organ sonatas of Gaetano Valeri, which gives registrations for an organ by Callido. A number of organ builders’ registration lists appeared from the mid-17th century until the end of the 19th. These often introduced the innovations of foreign builders, such as Willem Hermans (Como, 1650; Rome, 1666) and Eugen Casparini (Trent, 1687). Although the classic Italian ripieno usually survived intact, these builders often introduced registers and devices unfamiliar to most Italian organists, such as 8' Flutes, the Tierce, the mounted Cornetto, the Sesquialtera or the Tromboni, and ‘toy’ stops such as the Rusignoli, Timpano, Zampogna and Cuccù. The second manual division was meant to function as an echo (organo piccolo). In the late 18th century the Swell was introduced as an enclosed organo piccolo, without powerful reed stops at first. New mechanical devices included the tiratutti (which drew the stops of the plenum) and the terza mano (octave coupler).
The impetus for the development of what are now known as the classical French, the Dutch and the north-west European styles of organ building came from the internationally active group of 16th-century Flemish builders. Virtually all the sources dealing with registration in northern countries before the publication of the second volume of Praetorius’s Syntagma musicum (1618) apply to the basic Flemish style before sharply defined characteristics of national development had been manifested. Sweelinck played on an organ of this type built by Heinrich Niehoff, of ’s-Hertogenbosch. No comparable advice for registration exists for the magnificent organs built by the Scherer family, of Hamburg, and their successors in north-west Germany, but contractual documents and the surviving instruments may serve to complement the music composed for them. In the Lüneburg tablatures, for instance (see Sources of keyboard music to 1660, §2(iii)), there are references to manual changes, to the Rückpositiv for florid melodic passages (a standard application throughout the Baroque period), or to the Hauptwerk as an echo. Some doubt arises about the authenticity of certain hints found in the organ works of Buxtehude, but Georg Friedrich Kauffmann, in his Harmonische Seelenlust (1733–6), left careful recommendations for specific stops for each piece, and registrations occasionally appear in the works of J.G. Walther. There is, unfortunately, no record of the vast possibilities for registration on the greatest instruments built in the 17th century, such as those in St Katharina, Hamburg, where Heinrich Scheidemann was organist from 1625 to 1663, or the Jacobikirche, where his pupil Matthias Weckmann played from 1655 to 1674.
A valuable indication of registration in a related tradition comes from Samuel Scheidt, who played a Compenius organ in Halle, and published the following instructions in his Tabulatura nova (1624):
To Organists
Every
organist who has an organ with two manuals and pedal can play these Magnificat
settings and hymns, as well as some of the psalms found in parts i and ii; the
chorale melody might be played with a penetrating stop on the Rückpositiv
(in order to bring it more clearly into relief), particularly when it appears
in the soprano or tenor. When it is a bicinium, and the chorale is in the
soprano, the chorale is played on the upper manual or Werck with the
right hand, and the second part with the left hand on the Rückpositiv.
If the chorale is in the soprano of a four-part verse, it is then played on the
Rückpositiv with the right hand, the alto and tenor with the left hand
on the upper manual or Werck, and the bass on the pedal. If the chorale
is in the tenor, the chorale is played with the left hand on the Rückpositiv
and the other parts with the right hand on the upper manual or Werck,
the bass on the pedal.
In a four-part verse the alto may also be played specifically on the Rückpositiv,
but the soprano must be played with the right hand on the upper keyboard, with
both the tenor and bass voices together on the pedal; it must be specially
composed, however, so that the tenor is no higher than C [c'], since one
seldom finds D [d'] in the pedals, and also so that these parts are not
spaced too widely apart, only an octave, 5th or 3rd, since one cannot span a
larger distance well with the feet.
But … [it is] most beautiful and far more comfortable to play the alto on the
pedal. But the advantage of this way depends upon the stops and particular
voices in the organ, which must have been disposed knowledgeably in terms of 4'
and 8' pitch levels. The Positiv must always be based on 8' pitch; and
the Pedal on 4' pitch. Soprano, alto and tenor should be played on the Rückpositiv
on an 8' stop. The alto will be played on the pedal with a 4' stop. Voices of a
sharp 4' tone in the Pedal: 4' Oktave and Zimmel, 4' Gedackt and Zimmel,
Cornett (bass) 4', and so on. When such 4' stops are drawn the alto sounds in
the correct pitch relationship ….
Certain registers or stop divisions to draw when one will play a chorale on two
manuals and hear it clearly:Table 1
Sharp stops on the Rückpositiv to hear the chorale clearly: Quintadena
or Gedackt 8' and the Klein Gedackt or Prinzipal 4', with the Mixtur or Zimmel
or Superoktave; these stops together or others according to preference.
To hear the chorale clearly on the Pedal: Untersatz 16', Posaune 8' or 16',
Dulzian 8' or 16', Schalmei, Trompete, Bauerflöte, Cornett, and others which
are found often enough in small and large organs.
The foregoing I would nevertheless prescribe only to those who do not yet know
the style and who would like to do it properly. Other distinguished persons and
sensible organists, however, will be left to direct such things after their own
inclination.
|
On the Hauptwerk |
|
|
|
Gross Gedackt 8' |
|
drawn together |
|
Klein Gedackt 4' |
||
|
|
|
|
|
or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prinzipal 8' alone and other stops according to preference |
|
|
A theoretical work by Mattheus Hertel (1666) refers to and enlarges on Scheidt’s registrations. Hertel wrote that the Tremulant, which was to be used for doleful melodies, ‘can be used for preludes, and even for fugues too’ – a practice also encountered in France in this period.
In later theoretical works (Werckmeister, 2/1698: Niedt, ed. Mattheson, 1717; Adlung, 1758; Marpurg, 1760) it can be seen that strict rules about the combination of stops of the same pitch were gradually being relaxed. The most important of these limitations to registration had been the exclusion of flute stops from the plenum. Adlung made the point that ‘good’ wind systems would not cause fluttering when two 8' stops were drawn together. Registration lists by M. Heinrich Rothe for the Silbermann organ in Fraureuth (1739–42) and by J.G. Schenke (instructions dated 1780) for Silbermann’s organ at Gross Hartmannsdorf (1738–41) reveal the growing taste for combinations of fundamental-sounding stops, such as Principals, Flutes and Gambas, as do some of Marpurg’s and Adlung’s registrations.
Towards the end of the century additional information was supplied by Daniel Türk (Von den wichtigsten Pflichten eines Organisten, 1787) and J.H. Knecht (Vollständige Orgelschule, 1795), in which early attempts at crescendo registration are documented. The ‘tutti’ concept, employing virtually all the stops and couplers, was firmly entrenched by this time, and eventually replaced the traditional orientation of the organ’s tonal design around the principal-toned plenum.
The purity of national styles of organ building was beginning to break down by the early 18th century, as is shown by the work of several builders who moved from their home countries: Casparini (German) and Hermans (Flemish), who worked in Italy; Riepp (French), working in southern Germany; and the brothers Andreas and Gottfried Silbermann, who moved from Saxony to Alsace (Gottfried Silbermann later returned to Germany with first-hand practical experience of the classical French tradition). Registration lists survive for organs made by these builders: for Casparini’s organ at S Maria Maggiore, Trent (1687); Hermans’s organ at S Apollinare, Rome (1666); and for Silbermann’s instruments at Fraureuth (1739–42) and Gross Hartmannsdorf (1738–41). Riepp himself wrote four lists for organs in Salem, including a ‘gourmet’ rendition of the classical French tradition, and hints (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) for registrations for particular audiences, such as ‘a king’, ‘an officer’, ‘a child’ or ‘an ignoramus’ (see Meyer, 1938, pp.167ff). Certain excessive treatments in the construction of organs must have had their effect at least on local habits of registration. For example, Riepp’s Trinity organ at Ottobeuren (1757–66) had eight Tremulants – one fort and one doux, in the French tradition, for each of four manual divisions.
Bach’s directions for registration of his organ compositions are comparatively sparse. Names of stops are given in the Concerto in D minor after Vivaldi (bwv596) and the chorale preludes on Gott, durch deine Güte (bwv600) and Ein feste Burg (bwv720). Pitch levels relating to solo lines are indicated in four of the six ‘Schübler’ chorale preludes (bwv645–7, 650). Forte and piano, Rückpositiv and Oberwerk, and organo pleno are indicated in several large chorale works and preludes and fugues. It is said that Walther recorded the names of certain stops Bach had used for playing sections of his chorale prelude on Ein feste Burg – Fagotto and Sesquialtera; however, it is obvious that the latter was used with its appropriate foundations, and the Fagotto was probably accompanied by flue stops as well, as is usual in Kauffmann’s chorale preludes. More interesting speculation arises from the notes in the first movement of the Concerto in D minor. Here the instructions call for separate Oktave 4' on Oberwerk and Brustpositiv with Prinzipal 8' for the Pedal, changing in the course of the movement to Sub-Bass 32' in the Pedal and Prinzipal 8' and Oktave 4' for the Oberwerk. The 4' opening pitches reflect Vivaldi’s original score, but did Bach mean to add 16' and 32' in the Pedal? To this sparse information from Bach’s hand, as indicated above, may be added C.P.E. Bach’s somewhat cryptic statement to Forkel:
No-one understood registration as well as he [J.S. Bach]. Organ builders were terrified when he sat down to play their organs and drew the stops in his own manner, for they thought that the effect would not be as good as he was planning; then they heard an effect that astounded them.
The ultimate refinement in registration for composed music is an achievement of the French, who since the mid-17th century have maintained a precise relationship between the indigenous character of specific registrations and the musical textures to which they best respond. While the Germans have left performers more or less free to choose their own registrations, subject basically to the instrument’s natural restrictions, the French have wedded timbre and articulation with the musical score to an exemplary degree. Lebègue (Premier livre d’orgue, 1676) enjoined his contemporaries to play according to the exact directions for registration: ‘There are several pieces in this book that are not useful to organists whose instruments lack the stops necessary for their execution’. Even the more flexible approach of André Raison (Livre d’orgue, 1688) provided free choice in registration only within the limitations of the design of organs generally in favour in his own time: ‘As I vary the choice of stops and manuals a great deal, it is not necessary to play all my pieces exactly as marked’. The classical French repertory was neglected during the 19th century because French organs no longer contained the tonal material necessary to articulate that repertory properly.
Among
many excellent sources of information on the classical French tradition of
organ registration, Gaspard Corrette’s preface to his Messe du 8e ton
(1703) provides the best available clarification of the important relationships
between registration, musical texture, and style of performance. The
registrations he specified for particular pieces are as follows: For the Plein Jeu, couple the manuals. On the Grand jeu [i.e.
the Grand Orgue], the Bourdon 16', Bourdon, Montre, Prestant, Doublette,
Fourniture and Cymballe. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Montre, Prestant,
Doublette, Fourniture and Cymballe.
For the Fugue, couple the manuals. On the Grand jeu,
the Bourdon, Prestant and Trompette. On the Positif, the Bourdon,
Prestant or Montre and the Cromhorne.
For the Trio à deux dessus, the manuals are uncoupled; the
right hand playing on the Positif, and the left on the Grand jeu.
On the Grand jeu, the Bourdon, Prestant, Montre, Tierce, Grosse Tierce,
Nazar and Quarte de nazar. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Prestant or
Montre, Cromhorne and Tremblant doux.
The Duo is played with the manuals uncoupled, the right hand
on the Positif, and the left on the Grand jeu. On the Grand
jeu, the Bourdon 16', Bourdon, Prestant, Tierce, Grosse Tierce, Nazar and
Quarte de nazar. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Prestant or Montre, Tierce
and Nazar.
The Recit de Nazar is played on the Positif, with the
accompaniment on the Grand jeu. On the Grand jeu, the Bourdon and
Montre 4'. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Prestant or Montre and the
Nazar.
The Dessus de Petite Tierce is played on the Positif,
with the accompaniment on the Grand jeu. On the Grand jeu, the
Bourdon and Prestant. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Prestant or Montre,
Tierce and Nazar.
For the Basse de Trompette, the manuals are uncoupled. On the Grand
jeu, the Bourdon, Prestant and Trompette. On the Positif, the
Bourdon and Prestant or Montre.
For the Basse de Cromhorne, the manuals are uncoupled. On the Grand
jeu, the Montre and Bourdon. On the Positif, the Prestant or Montre,
Nazar, Tierce, Doublette, Larigot and the Cromhorne – not the Bourdon.
For the Cromhorne en Taille, on the Grand jeu, the
Montre, Bourdon, and the Pedalle de flûte. On the Positif, the Bourdon,
Prestant or Montre and the Cromhorne.
For the Tierce en Taille, on the Grand jeu, the Bourdon
16', Montre, Prestant and the Pedalle de flûte. On the Positif the
Bourdon, Prestant or Montre, Nazar, Tierce, Doublette and Larigot.
For the Fond d’orgue, the manuals are coupled. On the Grand
jeu, the Bourdon 16', Bourdon, Prestant and Montre. On the Positif,
the Bourdon and the Prestant or Montre.
For the Concert de Flûte, the manuals are coupled. On the Grand
jeu, the Bourdon and Flûte. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Flûte and
the Tremblant doux.
For the Dialogue de Voix Humaine, the manuals are not coupled.
On the Grand jeu, the Bourdon and Flûte. On the Positif, the
Bourdon, Flûte, the Voix humaine and the Tremblant doux.
For the Dialogue à deux Choeurs, the manuals are coupled. On
the Grand jeu, the Bourdon, Prestant, Trompette, Clairon and Cornet. On
the Positif, the Bourdon, Prestant or Montre and the Cromhorne.
For the Dialogue à trois Choeurs, the manuals are coupled. On
the Grand jeu, the Bourdon, Prestant, Trompette, Clairon, Cornet, Nazar,
Quarte de nazar and Tierce. On the Positif, the Bourdon, Prestant or
Montre, Cromhorne, Tierce and Nazar. The third choeur is played on the Clavier
d’echo, and the Tremblant à vent perdu is used.
See also Fonds d’orgue.
Among the few indications of registration practice before the Restoration (1660) are those suggested by the double voluntaries of Orlando Gibbons and John Lugge. The texture of the music indicates contrasting full Great and Chair divisions, and manual changes are clearly marked. The choruses of such organs contained principals of pitches up to 1' and 11/3' but no mixtures or reeds. After the Restoration, French (and, to some extent, Dutch) registration practices strongly influenced English organ building and playing. Among the earliest registration indications are those of Christopher Gibbons, some of whose double voluntaries call for solos on the Cornet, Trumpet and Sesquialtera. John Blow’s early 18th-century manuscripts also contain some registrations, including ‘Cornett’ solos, ‘the two diapasons’ (i.e. open and stopped at 8' together) and solo 4' Flute. Thomas Mace (Musick’s Monument, 1676) commented on the use of reeds in a chamber organ, noting that the ‘Hooboy stop … (together with the Regal) makes the Voice Humane’.
In
the 18th century English registration practices became as rigidly codified as
the French; these usages continued into the 19th century and are documented as
late as 1855 in Hopkins and Rimbault’s The Organ. They are also found in
numerous early 19th-century North American sources. By the mid-18th century
such composers as John Stanley routinely gave registration indications in their
published voluntaries, and by the late 18th century there were rules for
registration in the prefaces to voluntary collections and treatises. Jonas
Blewitt (Complete Treatise on the Organ, 1795) gave registration hints
for particular types of music: the Open Diapason may be used alone for ‘slow
fugues’, but the Stopped Diapason must be added for livelier movements; the
Diapasons may be alternated with the Swell; the Flute or Flageolet ‘requires
airy music’; Trumpet music is ‘martial and grand’; the Cremona or Vox humana
are suited to Adagio movements; and the Twelfth and Fifteenth are never to be
used without the 8' and 4' foundations. John Marsh (preface to his 18
Voluntaries, 1791) warned that the Cornet should be used only for solos,
never with full organ, and prescribed five different kinds of full organ: 1. Great up to sesquialtera
2. The furniture added to the sesquialtera
3. The trumpet added instead of the furniture
4. The trumpet and furniture both added
5. The clarion added to the whole
As English organs usually did not contain manual 16' stops until the second quarter of the 19th century, it follows that all the above combinations are based on the 8' Open Diapason. Solo and echo effects are frequently found in 18th-century English music, and are in fact so much part of this literature that most chamber organs of the period contain divided stops or half-stops as well as a machine stop, in order to facilitate the playing of such music on a single manual.
During the 19th century, technological advances and the introduction of machine tools tended to transform organ building from a hand craft into an industrial pursuit. To assure their commercial success and artistic recognition organ builders competed for prominence by displaying their latest mechanical innovations in the great industrial exhibitions in London or Paris, and by courting favourable comment from the press. The ancient concepts that had previously limited the musical resources of the organ were gradually abandoned. Vastly expanded registrational capability resulted from the application of pneumatic, and later electrical, devices to relieve the stop- and key-action; stable and practically limitless wind supplies were provided by more and more men at the bellows, by steam engines and eventually by electrical blowers which fed into large reservoirs. Because of these ‘advances’ and the musical demands of the new Romantic aesthetic, organists began to relinquish the architectural ‘block dynamic’ concepts that had previously governed registration. The plein jeu was forsaken in favour of the reed-dominated tutti. Mutations were replaced by more ranks at fundamental pitches: open flutes, harmonic stops and broad strings. Wind pressures rose gradually, but no-one dreamt that in the America of the 1920s organs would be built demanding wind more than ten times as strong as the 19th-century maximum.
To respond to the call for a smooth crescendo from the whisper of soft stops speaking behind closed Venetian shutters to the immense roar of the tutti, pneumatic motors were installed to provide the player with pre-set combinations (St Sulpice, Paris, 1863). A single player could move skilfully about, using all the sounds of a mammoth organ with great ease and speed. Registration, by ventil pedals in France, Rollschweller in Germany or electrically operated combinations in England and the USA, was gradually reduced from an art to a formula and composers called for an increasing number of stop changes within a piece.
The essential ingredients for the registration of 19th- or early 20th-century organ music were the building-blocks of the tutti, beginning with enclosed 8' stops, which were then combined with unenclosed 8' flue stops in the manuals and 16' and 8' stops of the pedal always coupled together. Steps along the way provided for the addition of foundation stops (16', 8' and 4' on all keyboards), followed by reeds and mixtures. The Swell shades were fully opened before the final introduction of the most powerful unenclosed sounds. The Rollschweller, or crescendo pedal, did this job efficiently by the gradual ‘blind’ addition or subtraction of registers in a predetermined order. Solo stops, often imitative, were also an important element in Romantic registration; among those most frequently found were imitative reeds (oboe, clarinet/cromorne, horn) and strong, foundational flutes (harmonic flute, claribel, doppelflöte).
The music of Mendelssohn and Rheinberger was written with post-Classical registration in mind; Mendelssohn, in the introduction to his six sonatas, defined his registrations in terms of dynamic levels. Later, Reger demanded the continuous dynamic alterations inherent in the system described above. Franck, Widor and their successors wrote specifically for Cavaillé-Coll’s system of stop-controls, which consisted mainly of mechanical devices for the introduction or blocking-off of wind from sections of the chests (fonds and anches), and use of the jeux de combinaison. Sub-octave coupling was important for the grand choeur. In England and America, mechanical and, later, electrical combination actions played a prominent role by facilitating quick stop changes.
See also Organ and Organ stop.
The technological and tonal developments of the late 19th century in organ construction became more advanced in the early 20th century as electrically controlled actions became less experimental and more reliable, and the electric fan blower superseded earlier attempts at mechanical wind supply involving water, gas and steam. Consequently there was less restriction on size and power, and ‘monster’ organs rapidly became status symbols of affluence and musical commitment in churches, colleges, theatres and public halls. Larger organs led to more registration aids, the number of which increased accordingly as electricity became more widely used. Registration practice was, in the early decades of the 20th century, strongly driven by the popularity of transcriptions and the ‘symphonic’ style of organ composition, in which the ideal was to emulate the colour interplay and dynamic shifts of the symphony orchestra; this demanded fast and frequent stop changes and seamlessly smooth crescendos and decrescendos effected by the adroit use of expression-boxes and combination actions. A plethora of pistons, couplers, reversibles and cut-offs appeared on the consoles of even modestly sized organs to facilitate these functions.
In the tonal area, imitative stops such as the Viole d’orchestre, Orchestral Oboe, French Horn, Waldflöte and Orchestral Flute were highly desirable, as were undulating string stops (Voix céleste, Vox angelica, Unda maris); these were often specified by symphonically orientated composers such as Edwin Lemare. Everett Truette, in his treatise Organ Registration (1919), provided stop-lists of ‘modern’ three- and four-manual organs, along with detailed directions for setting up registrations for a variety of compositions (mostly contemporary) on such organs. There was a heavy reliance on the Doppelflöte, Grossflöte, Cornopean and Vox humana for solos (in the same period the British indulged a penchant for writing solos for the high-pressure Tuba stop), while massed string stops, sometimes with softer flutes, were indicated for softer passages and accompaniments. The ‘Grand Crescendo’ pedal was routinely specified for climaxes. Although little music dating from before the late 19th century appeared on early 20th-century recital programmes, inevitably the ‘symphonic’ style of registration, well suited to contemporary music, was also applied to the organ works of Bach and Mendelssohn, as well as to occasional transcriptions of Baroque music, such as were popularized by W. Lynwood Farnam. Truette noted that in Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D minor bwv565 ‘some performers change the registration of this Toccata every two or three measures’. Even Albert Schweitzer, often regarded as the founder of the Organ Reform Movement, gave as his opinion that Bach would have appreciated an expressive division, while his teacher, Charles-Marie Widor, confidently asserted that the Romantic organs of Cavaillé-Coll were the ideal vehicle for Bach’s music. Such opinions continued well into the 20th century, even as organists began to rediscover the works of composers before Bach and became more concerned about authenticity.
In the 1930s the German Orgelbewegung precipitated an anti-Romantic backlash in organ design, composition and registration. Composers such as Hugo Distler, Helmut Walcha, Ernst Pepping and Hermann Schroeder wrote music that was often angular and spare, as befitted the expressionless ‘neo-Baroque’ organs with their dearth of foundation, overbalance of upperwork, and paucity of registrational aids. In their registrations colour was often achieved by the use of ‘gapped’ combinations such as a solo of Krummhorn 8' and Nasard 22/3' against an accompaniment of Quintadena 8' and Blockflöte 2' (e.g. Walcha: Nun komm, der Heiden Heiland). By the middle of the century, however, organ music – and its attendant registrational practices – comprised a strange mixture of features held over from the pre-war ‘character-piece’ school (especially in English-speaking countries), Germanic and Scandinavian neo-Baroque elements, and the conservative French post-Romantic style (as advocated by Dupré); there was also a growing eclectic movement which was particularly prominent in Britain and the USA. In terms of organ design and registration, this meant that a good organ had to have the resources to fulfil the requirements of a wide variety of contemporary music ranging from Heiller to Howells to Messiaen, as well as works of the 18th and 19th centuries. Terms such as ‘clarified ensemble’ and ‘American classic’ were introduced to describe such eclectic instruments, and their inclusive tonal palette began to influence the registrational choices of composers such as Seth Bingham, who had no qualms about pitting a gapped 8' and 22/3' solo against an accompaniment of string and flute stops in a movement of his Baroques suite (1943). Many composers simply specified ‘generic’ registrations such as ‘soft strings’ or ‘solo reed’, even in major works, yet when Schoenberg’s Variations on a Recitative was first published in the USA in 1947 the organist Carl Weinrich felt it necessary to provide a preface of two pages of detailed registrations, complete with piston settings. As for earlier music, most organists still chose their own registrations and played in a manner according to personal taste, resulting in a wide variation in interpretations. During the last three decades of the 20th century, however, attitudes towards earlier music changed, and fine points of performing practice such as fingering, phrasing, ornamentation and, for organists, registration, became of concern to players, first with regard to music of the 17th and 18th centuries, and later to 19th- and eventually even early 20th-century music. Many of those who had studied this earlier music on historic organs began to be dissatisfied with the ‘all-purpose’ concept of registration. As a result, a number of organs patterned after a single historical tradition – whether Renaissance, Baroque or Romantic – have been built, which allow music of a particular era to be played and registered authentically. Furthermore, since organists wished to play more than one type of repertory, a new type of ‘selective’ eclectic organ evolved at the end of the 20th century, incorporating more than one historic element and thereby allowing authentic registrational interpretation of a greater variety of earlier music. However, the ‘generic’ concept was still employed in many cases by contemporary composers such as Daniel Pinkham, who suggested ‘colourful flute ensemble or solo reed 8'’ and ‘flutes and strings to accompany’ for one of the movements of The Four Winds (1998). The effect of this new eclecticism in organ design on 21st-century music and its registration remains to be seen.
H. Anglès, ed.: J. Cabanilles: Musici organici … opera omnia, PBC, iv, viii, xiii, xvii (1927–56)
F. Baldelló: ‘Organos y organeros en Barcelona’, AnM, i (1946), 195–237, esp. 225
M.A. Vente and W. Kok: ‘Organs in Spain and Portugal’, The Organ, xxxiv (1954–5), 193–9; xxxv (1955–6), 57–65, 136–42; xxxvi (1956–7), 155–64, 203 only; xxxvii (1957–8), 37–43
M.A. Vente: ‘Mitteilungen über iberische Registrierkunst unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Orgelkompositionen des Juan Cabanilles’, AnM, xvii (1962), 41–62
M.A. Vente and F. Chapelet: ‘Connaissance de l’orgue espagnol’, Orgues historiques, no.10 (1965) [incl. sound disc]
M.J. Corry: ‘Spanish Baroque: the Organ and the Music’, Music: the A.G.O. & R.C.C.O Magazine, iii/4 (1969), 44–6
J. Wyly: ‘La registrazione della musica organistica di Francisco Correa de Arauxo’, L’organo, viii (1970), 3–17; Eng. trans. in Art of the Organ, i/4 (1971), 9–23
R. Walter: ‘A Spanish Registration List of c1770’, Organ Yearbook, iv (1973), 40–51
G.A.C. de Graaf: ‘A Spanish Registration List of 1789’, Organ Yearbook, vii (1976), 76–89
J. Wyly: ‘Historical Notes on Spanish Façade Trumpets’, Organ Yearbook, viii (1977), 41–55
L. Ausseil: L’orgue espagnol du XVIe au XIXe siècle: réflexions sur l’évolution de sa facture (Paris, 1980)
A. Banchieri: L’organo suonarino (Venice, 1605, 3/1622)
C. Antegnati: L’arte organica (Brescia, 1608/R); ed. R. Lunelli (Mainz, 1938, 2/1958)
G. Diruta: Seconda parte del Transilvano (Venice, 1609/R)
C. Gervasoni: La scuola della musica (Piacenza, 1800)
P. Gianelli: Dizionario della musica sacra e profana (Venice, 1801, 3/1830)
P. Gianelli: Grammatica ragionata della musica (Venice, 1801)
G. Serassi: Descrizione ed osservazioni del nuovo organo nella chiesa posto del SS. Crocifisso dell’Annunziata di Como (Como, 1808)
C. Gervasoni: Nuova teoria di musica (Parma, 1812/R)
G.P. Calvi: Istruzioni teorico-prattiche per l’organo e singolarmente sul modo di registrarlo (Milan, 1833/R)
R. Lunelli: Scritti di storia organaria (Trent, 1925)
Cenni cronistorici intorno agli organi e organisti della Cattedrale de Feltre (Feltre, 1943)
W. Shewring: ‘Notes on the Organ in Italy’, The Organ, xxx (1950–51), 42–56, 131–8
R. Lunelli: ‘Un trattatello di Antonio Barcotto colma le lacune dell’Arte organica’, CHM, i (1953), 153–6
W. Shewring: ‘Organs in Italy: Brescia and Verona’, The Organ, xxxv (1955–6), 161–73
W. Shewring: ‘Organs in Italy: Venice, Treviso, Trent’, The Organ, xxxvi (1956–7), 18–31
R. Lunelli: ‘Descrizione dell’organo del duomo di Como e l’attività italiana di Guglielmo Hermans’, CHM, ii (1957), 255–76
L.F. Tagliavini: ‘Il ripieno’, L’organo, i (1960), 197–201
S. dalla Libera: L’arte degli organi a Venezia (Venice, 1962)
V. Giacobbi and O. Mischiati: ‘Gli antichi organi del Cadore’,L’organo, iii (1962), 3–58
T. Vennum: ‘The Registration of Frescobaldi’s Organ Music’, Organ Institute Quarterly, xi (1964), no.1, pp.14–18; no.2, pp.1–11
T. Culley: ‘Documenti d’archivio: organari fiamminghi a S. Apollinare a Roma’, L’organo, v (1964–7), 213–24
G. Radole: ‘Note sulla registrazione degli organi nel Sei e Settecento’, Musica sacra [Milan], 2nd ser., xii (1967), 92, 159
L.F. Tagliavini: ‘Registrazione organistiche nel Magnificat dei “Vespri” monteverdiani’, RIM, ii (1967), 365–71
G. Radole: ‘L’arte organaria in Istria’, L’organo, vi (1968), 41–108
G. Radole: L’arte organaria in Istria (Bologna, 1969)
G. Radole: ‘L’arte organaria in Trieste’, L’organo, viii (1970), 21–63
U. Pineschi: ‘L’uso dei registri dell’organo pistoiese nei secoli XVIII e XIX’, L’organo, xii (1974), 3–24
G. Radole: L’arte organaria a Trieste (Bologna, 1975)
U. Pineschi: ‘Una tabella settecenta toscana di registrazioni organistiche’, Informazione organistica, no.3 (1994), 6–13
FrotscherG
PraetoriusSM, ii
A. Schlick: Spiegel der Orgelmacher und Organisten (Speyer, 1511/R); ed. E. Flade (Mainz, 1932); Eng. trans. in Bibliotheca organologica, cxiii (Buren, 1980)
S. Scheidt: Tabulatura nova (Hamburg, 1624/R)
A. Werckmeister: Orgel-Probe (Frankfurt and Leipzig, 1681, enlarged 2/1698/R as Erweiterte und verbesserte Orgel-Probe, 5/1783; Eng. trans., 1976)
F.E. Niedt: Musicalischer Handleitung, iii, ed. J. Mattheson (Hamburg,1717/R)
G.F. Kauffmann: Harmonische Seelenlust (Leipzig, 1733–6); ed. P. Pidoux (Kassel, 1951)
J. Mattheson: Der vollkommene Capellmeister (Hamburg, 1739/R)
F.W. Marpurg: Historisch-kritische Beyträge zur Aufnahme der Musik (Berlin, 1754–78/R)
J. Adlung: Musica mechanica organoedi, ed. J.L. Albrecht (Berlin,1768/R); ed. C. Mahrenholz (Kassel, 1931)
J.S. Petri: Anleitung zur praktischen Musik (Leipzig, 1782)
D.G. Türk: Von den wichtigsten Pflichten eines Organisten (Halle,1787/R, rev. 2/1838 by F. Naue)
J.H. Knecht: Vollständige Orgelschule (Leipzig, 1795)
C. Locher: Erklärung der Orgelregister (Berne, 1887, rev. 2/1923/R by J. Dobler as Die Orgel-Register und ihre Klangfarben)
R. Rudolz: Die Registrierkunst des Orgelspiels in ihren grundlegenden Formen (Leipzig, 1913)
G. Schünemann: ‘Matthäus Hertel’s theoretische Schriften’, AMw, iv (1922), 336–58
E. Flade: Der Orgelbauer Gottfried Silbermann (Leipzig, 1926, 2/1953)
G. Frotscher: ‘Zur Registrierkunst des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts’, Deutsche Orgelkunst [I]: Freiburg 1926, 70–75
H. Löffler: ‘Ein unbekanntes Thüringer Orgelmanuscript von 1798’,Musik und Kirche, iii (1931), 140–43
H. Klotz: Über die Orgelkunst der Gotik, der Renaissance und des Barock (Kassel, 1934, 3/1986)
H. Meyer: Karl Joseph Riepp, der Orgelbauer von Ottobeuren (Kassel,1938)
J. Wörsching: Der Orgelbauer Karl Riepp (Mainz, 1940)
P. Smets: Die Orgelregister, ihr Klang und Gebrauch (Mainz, 1943)
U. Dähnert: Die Orgeln Gottfried Silbermanns in Mitteldeutschland (Leipzig,1953/R)
M.A. Vente: Die Brabanter Orgel: zur Geschichte der Orgelkunst in Belgien und Holland im Zeitalter der Gotik und der Renaissance (Amsterdam, 1958, enlarged 2/1963)
M. Blindow: ‘Die Trierer Orgelakten: ihre Bedeutung für die deutsche Registrierkunst des 16. Jahrhunderts’, Musik und Kirche, xxxi (1961), 115–20
W.L. Sumner: Bach’s Organ-Registration (London, 1961)
M. Weyer: Die Orgelwerke Josef Rheinbergers (Vaduz, 1966)
H. Fischer: ‘Die Registrieranweisung von 1568 für die Hauger Stiftskirche in Würzburg’, Würzburger Diözesangeschichtsblätter, xxix (1967), 255–64
P. Williams: ‘The Registration of Schnitger’s Organs’, The Organ, xlvii (1967–8), 156–71
F. Peters and M.A. Vente: The Organ and its Music in the Netherlands, 1500–1800 (Antwerp, 1971)
F. Viderø: ‘Some Reflections of the Registration Practice in the Time of Bach’, Art of the Organ, ii/2 (1972), 5–17
H. Klotz: ‘The Organ Works of Max Reger: an Interpretation’, Organ Yearbook, v (1974), 66–9
J. Dalton: ‘Studies in Registration, ii: 17th Century German Music’, Organists Review, lx (1976)
T. Harmon: The Registration of J.S. Bach’s Organ Works (Buren, 1978)
H. Klotz: Pro organo pleno: Norm und Vielfalt der Registriervorschrift Joh. Seb. Bachs (Wiesbaden, 1978)
C. Krigbaum: ‘A Description of the Ochsenhausen Manuscript (1735)’, Bachstunden: Festschrift für Helmut Walcha, ed. W. Dehnhard and G. Ritter (Frankfurt, 1978), 55–74
H. Musch: ‘Eine Spiel- und Registriemöglichkeit für das mitteldeutsche Orgeltrio des 18. Jahrhunderts’, Ars organi, xxix (1981), 177–80
L. Bastiaens: ‘Registratiekunst in Zuidduitse bronnen (1500–1800)’, Orgelkunst, vii/4 (1984), 5–13
H.J. Busch: ‘Unbekannte Registrierungsanweisungen aus das Umkreis Johann Sebastian Bach’, Ars organi, xxxiii (1985), 122–5
F. Klinda: ‘Gedanken zur Bach-Registrierung’, Orgel, Orgelmusik, und Orgelspiel: Festschrift Michael Schneider zum 75. Geburtstag, ed. C. Wolff (Kassel, 1985), 44–54
H. Klotz: Studien zu Bachs Registrierkunst (Wiesbaden, 1985)
G. Stauffer: ‘Bach's Organ Registrations Reconsidered’, J.S. Bach as Organist, ed. G. Stauffer and E. May (Bloomington, IN, 1986), 193–211
H. Vogel: ‘Zum Klangstil der norddeutschen Orgelkunst: Anmerkungen zum Verhältnis von Satz und Registrierung’, 10 jaar Mededelingen van het Centraal Orgelarchief 1975–1985 (Brussels, 1987), 95–107
Q. Faulkner: ‘Jacob Adlung’s Musica mechanica organoedi and the “Bach Organ”’, Bach: the Journal of the Riemenschneider Bach Institute, xxi/1 (1990), 42–59; see also Early Keyboard Studies Newsletter, v/2 (1990), 1–9
G.F. Crowell: Friedrich Wilhelm Marpurg (1718–95) and French Registration Practices in Central Germany in the Middle of the Eighteenth Century (diss., U. of Cincinnati, 1993)
Q. Faulkner: ‘Information on Organ Registration from a Student of J.S. Bach’, American Organist, xxvii/6 (1993), 58–63; see also Early Keyboard Studies Newsletter, vii/1 (1993), 1–10
H.J. Busch: ‘Een laat 18de-eeuwse bron voor de registratie’, Het orgel, xcii/9 (1996), 6–10
M. Tsukioka: ‘Registration for the Organ Works of Buxtehude’, Organ-Kenkyu, xxiv (1996), 36–44
MersenneHU
F. Bédos de Celles: L’art du facteur d’orgues (Paris, 1766–78/R; Eng. trans., 1977); ed. C. Mahrenholz (Kassel, 1934–6, 2/1963–6)
G. Smith: Nouvel abécédaire musical (Montreal, 1861), 1–21
L. Girod: Connaissance pratique de la facture des grandes orgues (Namur,1877)
W. Goodrich: The Organ in France (Boston, 1917)
J. Huré: L’esthétique de l’orgue (Paris, 1923)
A. Pirro: ‘L’art des organistes’, EMDC, II/ii (1926), 1181–374
A. Cellier: Traité de la registration d’orgue (Paris, 1957)
C. Gay: ‘Notes pour servir à la registration de la musique française des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles’, L’organo, ii (1961/R1996), 169–80
N. Gravet: ‘L’orgue et l’art de la registration en France du XVIe au début du XIXe siècle’, L’orgue, no.100 (1961/R), 202–39
P. Hardouin: ‘Essai d’une sémantique des jeux de l’orgue’, AcM, xxxiv (1962), 29–64
F. Douglass and M.A. Vente: ‘French Organ Registration in the Early XVIth Century’, MQ, li (1965), 614–35
P. Hardouin: ‘Jeux d’orgues au XVIe siècle’, RdM, lii (1966), 163–4
E. Shay: ‘French Baroque Organ Registrations’, The Diapason, lx/12 (1968–9), 14–15
F. Douglass: The Language of the Classical French Organ: a Musical Tradition before 1800 (New Haven, CT, 1969, enlarged 2/1995)
N. Dufourcq: Le livre de l’orgue français, 1589–1789, iv (Paris, 1972)
F. Douglass: ‘Should Dom Bedos play Lebègue?’, Organ Yearbook, iv (1973), 101–11
H. Klotz: ‘Die nordfranzösische Registrierkunst im letzten Drittel des 17. Jahrhunderts und die Orgeldispositionen Gottfried Silbermanns von 1710 für die Leipziger Paulinerkirche’, Visitatio organorum: Feestbundel voor Maarten Albert Vente, ed. A. Dunning (Buren, 1980), 387–97
B. Hambraeus: ‘Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, Charles Marie Widor, the Organ and the Orchestra: some Aspects of Relations between Organ Registration and Instrumentation’, L’orgue à notre époque: Montreal 1981, 185–90
M.L. Lieberman: ‘A Scientist’s Account of the French Organ in 1704’,The Diapason, lxxiii/2 (1982), 16–17
S.M. May: ‘St.-Michel Reconsidered’, The Diapason, lxxiv/1 (1983), 10–11
R. Smith: Towards an Authentic Interpretation of the Organ Works of César Franck (New York, 1983)
E. Bächtold: ‘Zur Registrierung der Orgelwerke Cesar Francks’, Österreichisches Orgelforum (1992), nos. 2–3, pp.339–74
J.R. Near: ‘Charles-Marie Widor: the Organ Works and Saint-Sulpice’,American Organist, xxvii/2 (1993), 46–59
O. Ochse: Organists and Organ Playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium (Bloomington, IN, 1994)
L. Archbold and W.J. Peterson: French Organ Music from the Revolution to Franck and Widor (Rochester, NY, 1995) [incl. J.E. Eschbach: ‘A New Source for Franck's Registrational Practices and its Implications for the Published Registrations of his Organ Works’]
Hopkins-RimbaultO
T. Mace: Musick’s Monument (London, 1676/R)
J. Marsh: 18 Voluntaries for the Organ … to which is Prefix’d an Explanation of the Different Stops etc. (London, 1791)
J. Blewitt: A Complete Treatise on the Organ to which is Added a Set of Explanatory Voluntaries (London, c1795)
S.P. Taylor: Practical School for the Organ (New York, 1830)
J. Done: A Complete Treatise on the Organ (London, 1837)
C. Clutton and A. Niland: The British Organ (London, 1963, enlarged 2/1982)
F. Routh: Early English Organ Music from the Middle Ages to 1837 (London,1973)
J. Dalton: ‘Studies in Registration, i: 17th and 18th Century English Music’, Organists Review, lx (1975), 11–15
N. Plumley: ‘The Harris/Byfield Connection: some Recent Findings’,JBIOS, iii (1979), 108–34
R.A. Leaver: ‘Psalm Singing and Organ Regulations in a London Church c.1700’, The Hymn, xxxv (1984), 29–39
W.D. Gudger: ‘Registration in the Handel Organ Concertos’, American Organist, xix/2 (1985), 71–3
W.D. Gudger: ‘Registration in the 18th-Century British Organ Voluntary’, The Diapason, lxxvii (1986), no.11, pp.14–17; no.12, pp.14–16
P. Sawyer: ‘A Neglected Late 18th Century Organ Treatise’, JBIOS, x (1986), 76–87
C. Kent: ‘A Revolution in Registration, Marsh to Mendelssohn: a View of English Organ Music 1788–1847’, JBIOS, xiii (1989), 25–44
N. Thistlethwaite: The Making of the Victorian Organ (Cambridge, 1990)
WilliamsNH
E. Truette: Organ Registration (Boston, 1919)
G.B. Nevin: A Primer of Organ Registration (Boston, 1920)
G.A. Audsley: Organ Stops and their Artistic Registration (New York, 1921)
N.A. Bonavia-Hunt: Modern Organ Stops (London, 1923)
F. Germani: Metodo per organo, iv (Rome, 1953)
C. Koch: The Organ Student’s Gradus ad Parnassum (Glen Rock, NJ, 1955)
E.H. Geer: Organ Registration in Theory and Practice (Glen Rock, NJ, 1957)
T. Schneider: Die Namen der Orgelregister: Kompendium von Registerbezeichnungen aus alter und neuer Zeit mit Hinweisen auf die Entstehung der Namen und deren Bedeutung (Kassel, 1958)
J.C. Goode: Pipe Organ Registration (New York, 1964)
P. Williams: The European Organ 1450–1850 (London, 1966/R)
F. Klinda: Orgelregistrierung: Klanggestaltung der Orgelmusik (Wiesbaden,1987)
B. Owen: The Registration of Baroque Organ Music (Bloomington, IN, 1997)
W. van de Pol: La Registrazione Organistica dal 1500 al 1800 (Pistoia, 1997)
1. Resources of the instrument.
Registration, §II: Harpsichord
The resources for modifying the tone-colour and loudness of harpsichord sound are the following: (i) the choice of plectrum material, commonly either quill (or a plastic substitute), hard leather, or soft leather (peau de buffle); (ii) variation of the ‘plucking point’ – the closer to the nut (or keyboard end of the string), the more ‘nasal’ (brighter and thinner) will be the tone (see Lute stop); (iii) the combination of different registers at the same or different pitches; and (iv) devices for altering the sound of the vibrating strings or the whole instrument. The most common of these last is the Buff stop (or ‘harp stop’, which presses pads of felt or leather against the very end of the strings at the nut, damping out much of the resonance and giving a pizzicato quality. Other materials, like wires (Arpichordum stop) or paper (Bassoon stop), could be brought into contact with the strings to give a buzzing effect. Finally, in some large English harpsichords of the second half of the 18th century, the loudness could be varied by opening or closing a flap in the lid or a ‘Venetian swell’ by means of a pedal (see Swell, §2).
The utility of these resources depends on how they are controlled by the player. In 16th-century Venetian and 17th-century Flemish instruments the jackslides extended through the cheekpiece (the short, right-hand side of the case), a possible but awkward reach for the player. In many instruments, especially German, the stops could be changed with levers on the wrest plank, although these might be covered by a music rack. More convenient were levers or knobs projecting through the nameboard which could be operated while one was playing. The most convenient controls of all were operated by the feet or knees, sometimes through mechanisms (‘machine stops’) that changed registers in groups and permitted the gradual engagement of the plectra so as to produce a smooth crescendo (see Machine stop, (1)). The provision of two (very rarely three) keyboards with different registers assigned to each of course allows instantaneous changes as well as playing on more than one registration at the same time. The second keyboard was added originally for transposition by a 4th or 5th (see Transposing keyboard), but iconographical evidence suggests that harpsichords with two manuals at the same pitch (probably rebuilt from transposing ones) appeared in the Low Countries as early as 1618 (Ripin, 1968).
The question of resources for harpsichord registration is greatly complicated by the variety of possible dispositions. If two registers of jacks on different keyboards pluck the same strings, as sometimes happens, especially in instruments with a nasal (lute) register, then these two registers cannot both be ‘on’, since the dampers of one register will damp the notes that the other register is trying to play. If the same register plays from both manuals with dogleg jacks (as was common in English and Flemish instruments; see Dogleg jack), then it cannot be ‘on’ on one manual and ‘off’ on the other, unless one of the manuals slides out to disengage it (as in some German instruments). A Coupler (by means of which the keys of one manual move those of the other) and the absence of doglegs provides complete independence between the keyboards. Two registers of jacks plucking the same strings will always produce a slight difference in tone quality because they are necessarily at different places along the strings, but even if they are on the same manual and thus playable together, they do not make a good effect because one pluck ‘dirties’ the purity of the other.
The earliest surviving harpsichords, dated 1515–16 and 1521 (by Vincentius of Livignano and Hieronymus of Bologna) appear originally to have had only one 8' register, but as early as 1530 payment was made to William Lewes from the Privy Purse for ‘ii payre of Virginalles in one coffer with iiii stoppes’. This description has been variously interpreted, but what is unquestionable is the transfer from the organ to stringed keyboard instruments of the term ‘stop’, with its implication that registration was already, at least in England, a normal component of the technique of the harpsichord. A high-pitched instrument made in 1537 by Hans Müller of Leipzig had two sets of strings and three registers, one of them a lute stop. Claviorgans were made in most of the harpsichord-manufacturing countries from the 16th century to the 18th, and would have presented still more registrational possibilities (see Claviorgan). The harpsichord portion of a one-manual claviorgan made in England in 1579 (by Theeus) appears to have had the earliest example of the disposition 8', 8', 4'. Since it also appears to have been fitted with the means of selecting or combining the registers, the player would have had seven harpsichord colours at his disposal, plus whatever possibilities the pipework added.
The concept of registration extended even to virginals in the last two decades of the 16th century: the type known as Muselar was usually fitted with an Arpichordum stop, and ‘mother-and-child’ virginals consisted of a normal Virginal at 8' pitch and a smaller one at 4' which could be stacked on top of its ‘mother’ so as to be played either by itself or coupled to the mother keyboard. Echo effects, as in Sweelinck's echo fantasias, were obtainable (Van der Meer, 1961) and the hands could play on both keyboards simultaneously.
Ruckers transposing double harpsichords, which were made from the end of the 16th century to the 1640s, had two choirs of strings, 8' and 4', plucked (normally but not always) by four ranks of jacks, two for each manual. Since the keyboards sounded at different pitches, they could not be played together. When these instruments were rebuilt in mid-century and later as non-transposing doubles, a variety of dispositions resulted, often including the addition of a second 8' choir. Koster (1982) described an extraordinary late 16th-century Flemish transposing harpsichord whose normal-pitched manual extended down an extra octave so that the 8', 4' registration could be transposed down to give the effect of 16', 8'. Another double, not transposing, dated 1658, originally had two choirs at 8' and 4' with two registers of jacks plucking the 8' on the lower manual at different points and a third, ‘nasal’ register plucking the same strings on the upper manual. The 4' was on the lower manual (Koster, 2000). Praetorius (Syntagma musicum, ii, 2/1619) claimed to have seen a harpsichord with four choirs of strings, and Mersenne (Harmonie universelle, 1636–7) wrote of harpsichords with ‘seven or eight kinds of jeux [stops or combinations of stops] and two or three keyboards' which were varied and combined like those of the organ. Mace (Musick's Monument, 1676) described a harpsichord by John Haward which he called a ‘pedal’, and whose registers were controlled by the feet and gave, with the aid of a hand-operated ‘theorboe-stop’ or buff, 24 ‘varieties’. Hubbard (1965, p.147) showed that Mace's instrument must have had one manual and four pedal-operated registers, 8', 8', 4' and lute, as in the Müller harpsichord. Mace's description makes it clear that the purpose of this mechanism was to facilitate changes of loudness and tone-colour while one was playing. Documents of the period suggest that such instruments were not rare in late 17th-century England (Lafontaine, 1909).
The introduction of harpsichords with two manuals at the same pitch in the first half of the 17th century in the Low Countries and France (so-called ‘contrasting’ as opposed to ‘transposing’ doubles; see Harpsichord, §3(i)) further increased the registrational possibilities; how much depended on the disposition and the degree to which the two manuals were independent. A letter of 1648 claims the ‘invention’ of the manual coupler for France and touts its superiority to the Flemish dogleg. It seems likely that French 17th-century doubles were normally disposed I: 8', 4'; II: 8', but a current of opinion favours I: 8', 8'; II: 4'.
Italian harpsichords constituted a curious exception to all this richness. In the 16th century they were most often disposed 8', 4' on a single manual with some means of putting the registers on and off (though not while playing). But at some time between 1585 and 1630 a preference developed for 8', 8', often and perhaps usually without any means of controlling the registers, except, perhaps, for tuning. Older instruments were modified to conform to this new disposition, which, with a few exceptions, remained the norm until the end of the 18th century. The implication is unavoidable that the Italians lost whatever taste they may have had in the 16th century for variety in harpsichord colour and were happy to play everything on two 8's. An analogous puzzle is presented in England by the apparent abandonment of the ‘pedal’ and its remarkably convenient mechanism for achieving elaborate registration (although Mace did mention its high price).
In the Northern countries, in spite of a seemingly limitless variety in the disposition of individual instruments, a general norm for the disposition (though not the tonal character, which depended upon the measurements and construction) of large harpsichords emerged in the late 17th century and lasted for 100 years: two manuals with 8' and 4' on the lower and a second 8' on the upper. The number of different possible registrations varied according to whether a coupler or dogleg arrangement connected the upper 8' to the lower manual, as it did also according to whether a buff stop was fitted. In general, the English and Flemish makers used the dogleg, while French builders preferred the coupler, with its additional flexibility in registration. The Germans used either. Whether dogleg or coupler is fitted, the three registers played separately or in combination yield seven colours on the lower manual, one of which duplicates the upper manual 8'. The buff adds two useful effects (buffed 8' solo or with 4') and two more of limited value (buffed 8' with unbuffed 8', with or without 4'). The superiority of the coupler over the dogleg manifests itself when the hands play on different manuals. With the dogleg it is impossible to silence one of the lower 8's without silencing the upper manual as well, so without the buff only three different colours are available on the lower manual to contrast with the upper 8', whereas with the coupler there are six (the seventh would be the upper 8' coupled down – no contrast). English, Flemish and German makers frequently compensated for the limitations of the dogleg arrangement by the addition of a lute stop to the upper manual, and the Germans sometimes added a fourth choir at 16'. Although few 16' harpsichords have survived and the 16' was all but rejected by the most progressive builders of the postwar period, a number of discoveries since the early 1980s, most significantly concerning central Germany during J.S. Bach's Leipzig period (Henkel, 1990), have shown that the 16' was not uncommon on large instruments and was certainly known to Bach. The anonymous, so-called Bach harpsichord in the Berlin Musikinstrumenten-Museum, recently attributed to the Harrass family of Grossbreitenbach and originally having I: 16', 4'; II: 8'; coupler, was changed before 1714 to I: 16', 8'; II: 8', 4', which disposition was copied countless times by 20th-century German builders and later roundly discredited by scholars. A harpsichord with the latter disposition was advertised by Zacharias Hildebrandt, who built a lute-harpsichord for Bach (Henkel, 1990). German harpsichords were the least standardized and most extravagant of the mid-18th century, some having 2' stops as well as 4', 8' and 16', and some having three manuals – in one the top manual had an overhead hammer action. But although C.P.E. Bach (1762) credited Johann Hohlfeld of Berlin with a pedal-operated mechanism for bringing on all the registers of a harpsichord one by one, the Germans do not seem to have taken up such aids to registration.
Study of Spanish and Portuguese harpsichords so far suggests that the play of influences from the Spanish Netherlands and Spanish Naples upon native invention appears to have stimulated a variety of styles and dispositions comparable to that of the Germans, and it would be premature to postulate any Iberian ‘type’ from which one could infer principles of registration, even for a repertory as circumscribed as the sonatas that Scarlatti wrote for Maria Barbara. By contrast, English builders of the last three-quarters of the 18th century adhered closely to the norm of I: 8'; 4'; dogleg 8' playing on both I and II; II: lute plucking the same strings as the dogleg; buff and no coupler. Large singles had the same resources although the second 8' was not, of course, a dogleg; smaller ones omitted the lute and 4'. Having abandoned the ‘pedal’ mechanism, they used stop knobs conveniently located on the nameboard. Beginning probably in the 1760s, the machine stop and Swell were incorporated into new instruments, both singles and doubles, and fitted to old ones, so that even though the machine could be disengaged to allow hand-registration, its very convenience imposed a narrow range of colour choices – effectively, either full harpsichord on the lower with dogleg 8' on the upper (pedal up), or lower 8' with upper lute (pedal down), modifiable by the buff on a handstop. Free play with dynamics was now possible, not only abrupt contrasts but effortless crescendos and diminuendos in the style demanded by the newest compositions.
The 1760s also saw major new developments in France, first the registre de buffles, or peau de buffle, a row of jacks fitted with plectra of thick, soft buffalo hide, which could substitute for the lower quilled 8', but more often was an additional register plucking the same strings; and second, a system of genouillères (knee levers) controlling all the registers and sometimes the coupler. Credit for both of these developments was claimed by Pascal Taskin. As in England, these inventions were as often applied to existing instruments as to new ones. The sound of the buffles was gentle, and, unlike quill, they were somewhat sensitive to the stroke of the finger on the key. But under the control of a genouillère, a well-regulated registre de buffles could produce delicate dynamic shadings and even accents comparable to those of a clavichord. The genouillères were little blocks of wood faced with leather that were raised and lowered with the knees, communicating their motion to iron trapwork inside the case, and the mechanical advantage of the foot, ankle and linkage provided easy and very finely graduated control over all the registers that was, moreover, invisible to the audience, since the physical motions were subtle and the levers more or less hidden. The left-most lever, when raised, removed gradually the 4', 8' and upper 8', leaving only the buffles, which the other knee could then cause to fade out, yielding a perfectly smooth decrescendo from full harpsichord to silence if the musical texture was fairly thick and active. Releasing the lever made a corresponding crescendo. A harpsichord with a considerably more elaborate version of this mechanism, constructed by Erard in 1779, exists in the Paris Conservatoire museum.
See also Cembalo angelico.
Registration, §II: Harpsichord
An extraordinary disparity exists between the vast palette of effects offered by harpsichords and the written evidence of their use. There is no harpsichord (or piano) music before 1800 that comes anywhere near exploiting the full potential for variety and nuance of the more elaborately equipped harpsichords of the 17th and 18th centuries, and the few discussions of or directions for registration that exist are sparse and confined to the simplest matters. The use of the most telling effects, the 16' and the lute stops, is not mentioned at all in connection with specific repertory. Documents of every kind, particularly advertisements and inventors’ proposals, extol variety of colour and ease in obtaining it as desirable features of harpsichords. And yet, in an age when rules governed so many aspects of music, no conventions of harpsichord registration were written down, even in countries where the instrument was relatively standardized. In 18th-century Paris, for example, where a two-manual harpsichord nearly always had I: 8', 4'; II: 8'; coupler, composers who wrote for both organ and harpsichord and gave detailed registration instructions for the former in their prefaces and in the titles of their pieces were silent on the subject of harpsichord registration. Michel Corrette, in the preface to his Nouveau livre de noëls (1753) for harpsichord or organ, directed harpsichordists to ignore the registrations provided for the organ and to play always on the same manual, except for two pieces in which the left hand plays on the upper manual and the right on the lower. In spite of this failure, 18th-century French composers occasionally indicated how particular pieces were to be played, and when they did their directions were almost invariably worded so as to imply that the normal way to play was on the lower keyboard with all the registers on and the manuals coupled – in other words, on the full harpsichord. Registers were retired and manuals uncoupled for special effects: Les bagatelles from Couperin’s second book (1716–17) is to be played with the manuals ‘uncoupled’ and the octave ‘removed’. A passage from the preface to Dandrieu’s first book of harpsichord pieces (1724) shows this same ‘negative’ approach and at the same time seems to suggest that manipulating the registers of a harpsichord was something beyond the ordinary accomplishment of a player and required careful explanation:
It will not perhaps be unprofitable to speak here of a care which one may take in executing the pieces, which I shall point out, if one wishes to play in the style proper to them. It is this: Le concert des oiseaux should be played with both hands on the lower manual, but with the two unisons retired, leaving only the octave [by ‘two unisons’ he means lower 8' and coupler; a modern player would put the direction in a positive sense: ‘… should be played on the solo 4'’]. Le timpanon also requires one to leave only the octave, but the right hand plays on the upper manual and the left on the lower. For Les fifres, it is necessary on the contrary that the left hand should be on the upper manual and the right on the lower, again leaving only the octave. One may, however, play these pieces in the usual way, if the instrument does not permit what I have just indicated to be observed, because these different ways of disposing the stops and placing the hands are only conceived to render the imitation more perfect.
One of two conclusions imposes itself on the reader: either every other piece in the collection is to be played on full harpsichord or the composer cares only about registration as an aid to ‘imitation’ of the most obvious sort. Builders also evidently thought of full harpsichord as the norm and registration as the subtraction of stops, since with both English and French registration mechanisms the player had to work to achieve a diminuendo (i.e. to remove the registers) and relaxed for a crescendo (an exception is the harpsichord-piano of 1780 by Merlin in the Deutsches Museum, Munich, which requires one to hold a pedal down to keep the 16' engaged).
The piece by Couperin mentioned above is an example of a Pièce croisée, in which the two hands play on different manuals in the same range, crossing freely. Normally they presuppose two similar but independent 8' stops, as in Couperin, an effect usually unobtainable with dispositions using the dogleg instead of a coupler. However, a pièce croisée in John Jones's second book of Lessons for the Harpsichord (1761) – presumably for an English harpsichord with dogleg – has the left hand playing piano on the upper manual and the right playing the same thing forte a semiquaver later on the lower, producing a series of accents off the beat.
Other than registrations for pièces croisées and pieces imitating effects in nature, only a few scattered general indications can be gleaned from music of the second half of the Baroque period and other sources. Although there is no suggestion that manuals or registration were changed for the repeats in binary forms, there are enough instances of petites reprises being marked with a p or some other indication of softening to allow a modern player to do the same even where there is no mark. Echo effects can also be achieved by registration, but the characteristic repetition of short phrases so beloved of mid-18th-century Italian composers, especially Domenico Scarlatti, are not echoes and could not in any case be played as such on Italian harpsichords. When accompanying, the harpsichordist was always enjoined to subordinate himself to his soloist; accompaniment treatises sometimes suggest retiring stops or moving to the upper manual (even adding the buff stop) in concerts with weak-voiced singers. A remark in an English letter of 1712 advises, on the contrary, using all three registers of a three-stop instrument only for a ‘thoroughbass to a Consort: for Lessons [i.e. solo pieces], any two sets of the three are more proper’ (Hubbard, 1965, p.153). Finally, the ‘pedal’ described by Mace must have been known to Purcell, since one figured among the royal instruments in his charge, and it is therefore impossible to deny to his music the possibility of elaborate registration (though probably on a single manual) on grounds of instrumental limitations.
Coarse and insensitive though it may seem, nearly all the evidence derived from the music itself points to the conclusion that the usual way to begin any Baroque piece was on all the registers together, and that changes during the course of the piece were confined to changes of manual, though even these were rare. The indications were normally piano and forte or other words for soft and loud, but the French sometimes took over the organists’ sign of a double bar the length of two spaces of the staff, meaning ‘go to the other manual’. Early examples may be found in two chaconnes in the second harpsichord book by Lebègue (?1687), who was himself primarily an organist, and later ones in collections by E.-G. Damoreau (La Camille; 1754) and Gravier (Tambourin from Sonata no.1; 1759). One also finds explicit expressions like ‘upper row’ or petit clavier (or abbreviations of these). After the Baroque period, however, harpsichords continued to be built in great numbers, and the situation changed, at least in France with its genouillères and England with its machine stops – and in countries to which English harpsichords were exported. Thanks to the wide distribution of these devices, the presence of graduated dynamics in a piece of post-Baroque music does not necessarily indicate a preference for the piano; beginning in the 1770s, most music was published ‘for harpsichord or piano’ and was played on both instruments, the tendency towards one or the other depending on the country and date of the performance. One piece, a Simphonie de clavecins for two harpsichords by Armand-Louis Couperin from the early 1770s, makes such elaborate demands that it can be played on no instrument other than a French double with the usual disposition plus a fourth register in peau de buffle, and a full complement of genouillères. This work is altogether exceptional, however, in excluding the possibility of performance on the piano by its demand for two manuals and a particular harpsichord stop (the buffles). A few other works (by Tapray and Balbastre) ask for the buffles, but not always two manuals.
Another entirely exceptional work is the manuscript Sonata per cembalo a due tastature wq69 by C.P.E. Bach (1747). Dated six years after the Goldberg Variations and conceivably reflecting an approach to the instrument learnt from the composer's father, this is the only example of harpsichord music before the 20th century with comparably elaborate registration specified in every detail. The disposition required is not unusual for a large German harpsichord, except for the coupler instead of a dogleg and the lack of a 16', and the organ-stop terminology is found elsewhere in German writings: I: Flöte (8'), Octava (4') II: Cornet (8'), Spinet (lute 8'). The upper 8's evidently pluck the same strings, there is a buff stop on the upper manual and there is a true manual coupler (Coppel), not a dogleg that can be disengaged. Registration within the course of the first two movements is indicated simply by p and f, but the composition of each level is specified at the beginning. For the first movement, ‘das Forte unten mit allen Registern, das Piano oben', i.e. all stops except the buff, and the manuals coupled (both the upper 8' and the spinet are apparently engaged, in spite of the fact that they pluck the same strings). For the second, ‘das Forte mit Octav u. Cornet unten, das Piano oben, i.e. the upper 8' coupled down with the 4' on the lower. The third movement is a set of variations with a new registration for each, the theme calling for ‘das Forte unten mit Flöteu. Spinet u. Octav, das Piano oben mit Spinet’. What is significant in these three registrations is the three different forte levels. Evidently for C.P.E. Bach (or his first copyist; there are four copies of this piece, none in the composer's hand, all with registrations agreeing in substance – with one exception noted below – but with differences in wording) forte was a relative term and could encompass a variety of colourings and degrees of loudness, so that even if the inference argued above is correct, that in the absence of any indication to the contrary harpsichordists played loud, this did not necessarily imply full harpsichord. The other registrations demonstrate some of the lighter colourings available on this instrument, although they by no means exhaust them:
Variation
1: spinet alone;
2: upper 8';
3: RH on upper 8' with buff, LH, 4' with
coupler;
4: RH on upper 8' and lute together, LH on
lower 8' and 4';
5: LH on upper 8', RH on lower 8';
6: RH on lower with solo 4'; LH on upper 8'
with buff;
7: 4' with upper 8' coupled;
8: like variation 4 but with hands reversed
(one of the sources has the buff added to the upper 8' and nasal);
9: lower 8'. Except for variations 3, 4, 7
and 9, the left hand accompanies a melody in the right hand in this movement.
It should be noted especially that in this procession of 11 binary structures by the author of Sechs Sonaten … mit veränderten Reprisen, there is no hint that registration should be changed for repeats.
Registration, §II: Harpsichord
The style of registration of performances of early harpsichord music in the 20th century underwent a revolutionary change after World War II, stimulated and to a large extent imposed by the revival of historical harpsichord design and construction. Before and shortly after the war, the approach to registration was determined first of all by the quasi-standard disposition of the largest concert harpsichords of the 1930s, 40s and 50s. In England and France (however different these instruments sounded because of their construction), the most common disposition was that of C.P.E. Bach's instrument discussed above, plus a 16' on the lower manual; in America, the same minus the lute stop; and in Germany that of the Harrass ‘Bach’ harpsichord: I: 16', 8'; II: 8', 4' with buffs commonly for the 16' as well as one or both 8's. All the modern instruments were set sharply apart from the antiques, however, by their pedals controlling the individual stops and by being fitted with leather plectra instead of quills. The Americans took advantage of the flexibility of leather to provide half-positions for the pedals, giving each stop two dynamic levels. A curious omission of 20th-century builders was their almost total neglect of machine stops, whose smoothly graduated dynamics and rapid contrasts can be duplicated only with the greatest difficulty using individual stop-change pedals.
The characteristic forte of these instruments included the 16', and the 16' was also much loved as a solo register for its flutey, centre-plucked sound as well as in combination with the 4' for a colourful ‘gapped’ effect. The pedals encouraged much variety and nuance, and players took advantage of registrational flexibility to shape the music and clarify its structure as well as to colour it and make it more interesting. They remained essentially uninterested in historical registration styles. Wanda Landowska cared little ‘if, to attain the proper effect, I use means that were not exactly available to Bach’. For every piece there was a right registration, and the harpsichordist was to spare no effort to master it, no matter how complex. Her own playing was full of subtle shadings of colour and volume implied by the phraseology of the music. Ralph Kirkpatrick's career straddled the beginning of the classic revival in the 1950s and 60s, and he adapted enthusiastically to the new austerity imposed by antique dispositions and hand stops; but before that his approach to registration, like that of Landowska, was through the music, though with somewhat more rigorous attention to structure and less to colour and the expressive moulding of phrases. The chapters on registration in two postwar harpsichord methods are carefully considered accounts of the subject, the first (Schott, 1971) reflecting the transition from pre-war practice to historical reconstruction and the second (Troeger, 1987) firmly planted in the era of ‘authenticity’. Schulenberg (1992, p.14) took a position at the opposite pole to Landowska: ‘to insist on an austere approach to registration … is a way of being faithful to the music itself’.
The registration of harpsichord music composed in the 20th century was sometimes specified in detail for an instrument used in the compositional process, and if the same kind of instrument is available for performance, then of course there is no problem of registration; if not, one has a guide, at least, to the composer's wishes. In other cases the markings, if any, are simply for dynamics to be realized according to the player's judgment, and should not be taken for a hidden code other than what would be implied by the nationality and period of the instrument that the composer may be assumed to have had in mind.
H.C. de Lafontaine: The King's Musick (London, 1909/R), 173, 200, 231
E. Harich-Schneider: Die Kunst des Cembalo-Spiels (Kassel, 1939, 3/1970)
R. Kirkpatrick: Domenico Scarlatti (Princeton, NJ, 1953/R)
E. Bodky: The Interpretation of Bach’s Keyboard Works (Cambridge, MA, 1960/R)
J.H. Van der Meer: ‘Per ogni sorte di strumenti di tasti’, TVNM, xix (1960–63), 67–79
F. Hubbard: Three Centuries of Harpsichord Making (Cambridge, MA, 1965, 2/1967)
J. Barnes: ‘Two Rival Harpsichord Specifications’, GSJ, xix (1966), 49–56
E. Ripin: ‘The Two-Manual Harpsichord in Flanders before 1650’, GSJ, xxi (1968), 33–9
K. Gilbert: ‘Le clavecin français et la registration’, L’interprétation de la musique française aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles: Paris 1969, 203–12
E. Ripin: ‘Expressive Devices Applied to the Eighteenth-Century Harpsichord’, Organ Yearbook, i (1970), 65–80
E. Ripin, ed.: Keyboard Instruments: Studies in Keyboard Organology (Edinburgh, 1971, 2/1977)
H. Schott: Playing the Harpsichord (New York, 1971/R)
D. Fuller, ed.: A.L. Couperin: Selected Works for Keyboard (Madison, WI, 1975)
J. Koster: ‘A Remarkable Early Flemish Transposing Harpsichord’, GSJ, xxxv (1982), 45–53
R. Troeger: Technique and Interpretation on the Harpsichord and Clavichord (Bloomington, IN, 1987)
H. Henkel: ‘Remarks on the Use of the Sixteen-Foot in Historical Harpsichord Building’,The Harpsichord and its Repertoire: Utrecht 1990, 9–20
D. Schulenberg: The Keyboard Music of J.S. Bach (New York, 1992)
K. Mobbs and A. Mackenzie of Ord: ‘The “Machine Stop” and its Potential on Full-Specification One-Manual Harpsichords Made by Thomas Culliford in 1785’, GSJ, xlvii (1994), 33–46
J. Siemons: Het gebruik van secundaire registers in clavecimbelmuziek voor 1760 (thesis, U. of Utrecht, 1996)
J. Koster: ‘The Harpsichord Culture in Bach's Environs’, Bach Perspectives, iv (Lincoln, NE, 1999), 57–77
J. Koster: ‘A Netherlandish Harpsichord of 1658 Reexamined’, GSJ, liii (2000, forthcoming)