Forum >> Topic

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

Hello
I listened to Poblet's organ in the Playlist and 90% of the works performed are of German, French and Spanish baroque. I find it limited for the French romantic, with few stops of 8', an Unda Maris as "celleste" and without expression pedal. It seems to me an organ with a Baroque personality, and maybe I prefer St. Omer. Also it is not available in 4ch surround, only wet 2ch.
Well, it is a cheaper option, the Göerlitz and Laurenskerk are very expensive and I can not use all its possibilities.

Thanks and best regards.
Jose Luis

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

Hello
I have only tried the 10 stops of the organ demo of Görlitz and, indeed, I have found some notes inside a stop with different timbre, rather pipe tunning than sampling problem.
But the sound of the Görlitz organ is rounder and with less scratchy baroque sound than the Laurenskerk and, for my taste, better to play the French romantics. Without detracting playing the flutes and mixturs with Bach. In addition, the Dutch organ has fewer stops in 8'and absence of "celleste" stops. Certainly it costs half that Görlitz and hardly I can use all its possibilities with the 6 surround channels.
I thik than St. Omer could be other cheaper option.

Thanks and best regards.

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

Of course, you don't have to load all six channels. I use diffuse+rear in my recordings and love the spacious sound. Many people, including Carson Cooman, use just diffuse (the room is very wet, so there is plenty of acoustic even without rear samples).

That said, if you follow the advice Jiri gives on his website and truncate the direct sample releases, it will fit in 64GB at 20-bit lossless compression. I did this for demo purposes before deciding that I could get a nice effect with just the four channels, saving disk space and loading time. For a more direct sound, you might like the direct+rear configuration, too.

Perhaps listen to some of my Goerlitz recordings in contrast with Carson's and see if you hear the difference between diffuse only and diffuse+rear. And, if you go back to the time the model was launched (or visit Jiri's site), you can hear demos of the six-channel model using the truncated direct samples.

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

RE: Goerlitz , Laurenskerk or Armley

I am deciding on the Laurenskerk, although I have some doubts in its use;
Since it does not have Gedakt or Bourdon 8 on the main keyboards, it would be necessary to couple it from the 4th keyboard. Sonus Paradisi also comments on some problem with the coupling of the 5th keyboard (Chamade). It also does not have "Celleste" records, although I have read that the "multi-rank" registers of Principal have Chorus, and it is also possible to make a detuning of some stop.
I tried the DEMO with Surround 4ch and I have arranged to imitate the reverb of the rear channels with the reverb of my MOTU 828 module, and it is difficult to perceive the difference; this would save me half of the memory by not loading the "rear" samples. Too bad SP does not have only the "wet" version for sale.
I have seen that the organ set "Dudelange" from VOXUS would not have any of these problems, although it is more with romantic-symphonic accent. But its price in "wet" version 2 ch is as high as the "Surround" of SP Laurenskerk set.