History and Overview of the Unique Architecture of Pipe Organs in St. Mary Magdalene’s Church in Wrocław (Poland) from the Middle Ages to the Present Day

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Your topic is compelling. It is rare to find a history of organs in a church over this long a period of time. One note: as you will see from my comments, there are a number of issues in regard to English in the first part of the paper, and almost no issues in the second half of the paper. I have included suggested wordings to help address this problem. I hope they are helpful. Be careful about Luther's theology. Word and Sacrament are equal partners for Luther. You need to define "Evangelical" as it has several meanings. Best wishes.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English improves significantly in the second half of the paper. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

we received your review of our manuscript “The Role of Pipe Organs in Shaping the Architecture and Acoustic Interiors – The Case of St. Mary Magdalene Church in Wroclaw (Poland)” - ID: arts-3715178. Thank you for your time and for accepting the article.

In the attached text (our proposed new title “History and Overview of the Unique Architecture of Pipe Organs in St. Mary Magdalene's Church in Wroclaw (Poland) from the Middle Ages to the Present Day”), we have corrected errors (marked in green in the text). Additional explanations are provided below.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Ad. Review 1.

1. “In the initial sections of this analysis, from the beginning through # 445, there are numerous instances, where either a grammatical, technical, or musical issue is addressed in a less technically proficient manner as opposed the stylistic quality of the writing in the remainder article”.

All linguistic corrections suggested by the Reviewer have been incorporated into the first part of the article.

2. “itwould be helpful to add a footnote”.

Footnotes supplementing the main text have been added in the places indicated by the Reviewer.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic of this paper is of excellent interest. More information about the organs and architecture of Poland are welcome additions to literature for the study of global organ history, organ building, and case design. This paper is well-researched and presents a significant amount of historical and current information. However, the organization of this information fails to support the working title and would benefit greatly from a significant reorganization of the presented material (with additional citations) that will provide a better focus and strong narrative. This paper, though focused on one church in particular, does address a gap in the literature regarding the history of organs in Poland and how they and their churches were variously affected and adapted during the last 500+ years of history.

I suggest that the title of the paper be changed to reflect the actual content. For example, the title could be, “A History and Survey of the Unique Organs and Architecture of St. Mary Magdalene Church in Wrocław (Poland) from 1342-2025.”

The use of figures and photographs throughout the paper is excellent, and I commend the authors for this. However I recommend strongly that the organ stoplists contained in the appendix (beginning at line 1202) be likewise incorporated into the text, when applicable. For example, the stoplist and information from Table 1. (lines 1203-1205) should be theoretically inserted into the paper at an appropriate time (lines 269-273?) yet it is unclear to the reader whether this table represents a specific organ from the history of St. Mary Magdalene. Please clarify for the reader.

A second example would be the stoplist and information from Table 2. (lines 1207-1209), regarding the Hirschfelts 1593 organ – is this specific to St. Mary Magdalene? If so, it should be referenced and inserted into the body of the paper between lines 285-289 in support of that paragraph. Likewise the stoplist and information from Table 2 (lines 1213-1217) should be inserted into the text appropriately if this is an organ from the church, as it is unclear from the text or from the table if it is or is only an example.

All subsequent stoplists should also be listed within the body of the paper at appropriate times rather than excerpted into the unnecessary appendix, contains important information but is difficult to read in a separted format.

The paper overall presents a significant amount of information that appears unsupported as footnotes and citations are few and increasingly fewer as the paper progresses. The density of the writing merits significantly more scholarly citations throughout in support of the statements and conclusions.

There are occasional inclusions of information which is extraneous to the topic (such as lines 121-129, or 189-195). Focus is imperative in a paper of this density. 

I strongly urge that the paper be reorganized into a stronger narrative by condensing and coalescing the information better into appropriate sections. For example, the “conclusions” section of the current article does not present conclusions but rather presents entirely new information and proposals for the church, information which can be incorporated into the article if rearranged.

Paragraph length is often excessive and all paragraphs should have a clear topic sentence for a paper of this complexity.

I propose , loosely, the following new sections, based upon the information contained in this draft of this article and reordered appropriately into cogent narratives, and that the focus of the paper be taken into account at all times:

 

Suggested Edited Abstract: The historical pipe organ, an instrument of vast scale and complex construction, has a significant connection to liturgical celebration and to the history of related European church architecture. The evolution of organ building, especially in the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, required deep knowledge of musical culture and technology. The significance of this relationship is illustrated by the example of the former and present organs of the church of St. Mary Magdalene in Wrocław (Breslau). The first church organs appreat here in the Middle Ages, and as will be shown, in subsequent eras their location, form, and décor were changed according to evolving cultural and liturgical mandates as well as changes to the structure of the church architecture. The history of the specific organs of the church of St. Mary Magdalene is the product of a rich history of monumental construction, reconstruction, conservation, and restoration, and is poised to offer a continuation of this tradition to the present and future of the parish and of music history with proposed restorations and renovations of their historic space and instruments.

 

Introduction (numbered lines re-ordered from current paper, in these orders):

Lines 95-102, 54-94, 1017-1042, 1048-1069,

 

A Brief History of St. Mary Magdalene Church in Wrocław (Poland)

Lines 54-68, 74-113, 116-123, 130-137 (omit 124-129), 154-155

 

The Recorded Organists of St. Mary Magdalene Church

Lines 806-845, 1111-1118, etc. where applicable, reference all listed organists if they are truly useful to the title/topic.

 

IF NEEDED: A Brief History of the Reformation and its Impact Upon Liturgical Spaces, Music

Lines 139-260

 

The History of the Architecture of St. Mary Magdalene Church

Lines 68-73, 416-528, 543-568, 576-610, 717-738, 775-794, 835-887, 948-978, 985-1016, 1070-1077

 

The History of the Organs of St. Mary Magdalene Church

Lines 981-984, 25-57, 1018-1023, lines 261-320, 352-414, 529-542, 611-617, 645-709, 739-774, 908-947, 891-904, 912-947,

 

The Present Condition of, and Future Suggested Plans, for the Organs and Life of St. Mary Magdalene Church

Lines 1124-1201

 

Conclusions – this section needs to be rewritten to present a brief summary of the presented information in support of the abstract and title, rather than move into new territory. It should be succinct.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are occasional double spaces and slight uses of odd words, or fragment sentences. For example, lines 45-47, "..."is the tradition of designing their form in a well-planned way." Or lines 121, "The simply terminated presbytery was differentiated from the main nave only by changing the rhythm of the cross-vaulted bays." Perhaps this could be clarified with an illustration. Occasionally it is unclear which instrument is being referred to (line 274).  Overall the English is quite good. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

we received your review of our manuscript “The Role of Pipe Organs in Shaping the Architecture and Acoustic Interiors – The Case of St. Mary Magdalene Church in Wroclaw (Poland)” - ID: arts-3715178.  Thank you for your time and acceptance of the article.

We have taken your comments into account in the attached text (our proposed new title: (our proposed new title “History and Overview of the Unique Architecture of Pipe Organs in St. Mary Magdalene's Church in Wroclaw (Poland) from the Middle Ages to the Present Day”). Additional explanations are provided below.

                                                                                  We send our best regards

Ad. Review2.

Note 1. “I suggest that the title of the paper be changed to reflect the actual content. For example, the title could be, “A History and Survey of the Unique Organs and Architecture of St. Mary Magdalene Church in Wrocław (Poland) from 1342-2025”.

Answer 1. As suggested, the title of the article has been changed to:“History and Overview of the Unique Architecture of Pipe Organs in St. Mary Magdalene's Church in Wroclaw (Poland) from the Middle Ages to the Present Day.”

Note 2. “However I recommend strongly that the organ stoplists contained in the appendix (beginning at line 1202) be likewise incorporated into the text, when applicable. For example, the stoplist and information from Table 1. (lines 1203-1205) should be theoretically inserted into the paper at an appropriate time (lines 269-273?) yet it is unclear to the reader whether this table represents a specific organ from the history of St. Mary Magdalene. Pleaseclarify for the reader.

Answer 2. The Appendices have been removed and their content has been incorporated into the tables referred to in the text.

Note 3. „The paper overall presents a significant amount of information that appears unsupported as footnotes and citations are few and increasingly fewer as the paper progresses. The density of the writing merits significantly more scholarly citations throughout in support of the statements and conclusions.”

Answer 3.Added footnotes and references to them.

Note 4. „There are occasional inclusions of information which is extraneous to the topic (such as lines 121-129, or 189-195). Focus is imperative in a paper of this density.”

Answer4. Some information not directly related to the topic of the article has been removed or moved to a footnote.

Note 5.“I strongly urge that the paper be reorganized into a stronger narrative by condensing and coalescing the information better into appropriate sections. For example, the “conclusions” section of the current article does not present conclusions but rather presents entirely new information and proposals for the church, information which can be incorporated into the article if rearranged.”

“I propose, loosely, the following new sections, based upon the information contained in this draft of this article and reordered appropriately into cogent narratives, and that the focus of the paper be taken into account at all times:”

and

Sugestion of new chapter: “The Present Condition of, and Future Suggested Plans, for the Organs and Life of St. Mary Magdalene Church”

Answers 5.As suggested, the authors wanted to change the layout of the text by rearranging the paragraphs, but this led to inconsistencies that were not in line with the authors' intentions. Furthermore, at this point, the text had already been fully accepted by the second reviewer. Therefore, only partial changes were made, including the proposed abstract and shortened conclusion. A chapter entitled “Current status and suggested plans for the future of the organs of St. Mary Magdalene Church” was added. Chapters and subchapters were reorganized, renamed, and renumbered to better reflect the narrative.

Note 6. „Comments on the Quality of English Language”.

Answer6. The language side of the text has been improved.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It was a pleasure to read this excellent article in both its first submitted form and in the revised version. Wonderful work, and I would enjoy seeing future similar articles on related topics.