Talk:Aristide Cavaillé-Coll

Add topic
Active discussions


I have added the Innovations section because Cavaillé-Coll's innovations in organ building are the reason he is remembered and absolutely must not be overlooked. Most of the text is a revision from organ repertoire, but I wrote that text anyway, so I don't see why I can't bring it over here. —Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 03:59, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

St. Denis?Edit

I edited the reference to the organ of Ste. Clothilde from "the first" to "one of the first" in the understanding that his earlier instrument in the abbey of St. Denis (in a northern suburb of Paris) was the ground-breaker for many of these innovations. (Interestingly, the building itself was a pace-setter in early Gothic architecture, c.f. references under Abbot Suger.) What is its present condition? Is it still sufficiently a Cavaille-Coll to be included in the list of his organs? --Paul Emmons

Thanks, I totally forgot about that instrument. Indeed, the instrument at St. Denis was, I believe, his very first (large) organ, and is well-preserved, from what I have heard. It draws heavily on the French classical tradition of Cliquot etc., but it does contain some groundbreaking elements. I believe it was the first Cavaillé-Coll with the Grand orgue as the lowest manual, for example, but I'm not totally sure. The current titulaire is Pierre Pincemaille, who (Mr. Boe tells me) puts out his cigarettes on the case!!! At any rate, it is a very significant organ and I'm glad you put it in.—Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 03:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
If we're talking about C-C's landmark instruments, surely we should mention (1) the one in Lyons that C-C proclaimed was his greatest creation (to date); (2) the one in Toulouse that Michael Murray recorded -- such a stupendously beautiful and authentic C-C sound; and (3) the one in Ouen (Rouen? Ouen? I don't remember now). Sorry for my sketchy details, but I know you guys and gals will be able to fill in the gaps pretty quickly. Cheers, LorenzoPerosi1898 09:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

"The Greatest"Edit

Friends, there is positively no doubt that Cavaillé-Coll was to 19th-century French organists what Steinway was to 20th-century pianists. Thus, on the one hand, there is no reason not to say "the greatest" instead of "one of the greatest" or "possibly the greatest." However -- and this is a big however -- one could not possibly compare C-C to contemporaneous builders in Germany, America, et al. How can we alter the first paragraph so that people know that every single Parisian organist of note -- yes, every single one -- preferred a C-C like modern pianists prefer a Steinway -- but without a comparison to all the other foreign organbuilders? My second thought is that the business about the organ reform movement hits the reader too soon and seems out of place, almost irrelevant. However, it certainly could and should be said that, since said reform movement has taken hold, original unchanged C-C instruments are all the most precious, etc. etc. etc. Which is absolutely true -- that is a verifiable part of organ history. Anyhow, my thoughts only. LorenzoPerosi1898 09:21, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Nearly a decade sentiments exactly on reading this article for the first time. Guess I ought to get back into Wiki editing. :) Barnabypage (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Grandes-Orgues, Notre-Dame de Paris.jpg Nominated for speedy DeletionEdit

  An image used in this article, File:Grandes-Orgues, Notre-Dame de Paris.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Grandes-Orgues, Notre-Dame de Paris.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:12, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


I recommend replacing 'Baroque' by 'classical' in the introduction. The latter word is preferred nowadays for the organs of Bach's era, because their tonal design (as contrasted sometimes with their appearance) was not characterized by excessive ornamentation, which 'Baroque' suggests.HuPi (talk) 20:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Organs in France - incompleteEdit

While the list of Cavaillé-Coll organs installed within France remains, no doubt, incomplete, I have removed the inline note "incomplete" from the section title "In France" as comments of these nature belong only in the article's talk page. Waldhorn (talk) 19:10, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aristide Cavaillé-Coll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 17 October 2016 (UTC)