PipeChat Digest #1403 - Thursday, May 18, 2000
 
Re: I have no clue what this subject line should be.
  by "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu>
Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs...
  by "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu>
Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs...
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: I have no clue what this subject line should be.
  by "Luther Melby" <lmelby@prtel.com>
Bach and Equal Temperament
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: LARGE Turner console
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs...
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
RE: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs...
  by "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu>
Swell Pedal Still Wanted
  by <MickBerg@aol.com>
Not too dry, please...WITH the olive!
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
bringing another perspective to the debate
  by <Quilisma@socal.rr.com>
temperaments
  by <Quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Wedding Woes
  by "STRAIGHT" <STRAIGHT@infoblvd.net>
the Brombaugh organ in Fairchild Seminary Chapel (not the Fisk going  int
  by <Quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: tuning system truth and myths.
  by "Dave G." <dave_hat@hotmail.com>
Re: Musical taste vs. copying past 'masters'
  by "Dave G." <dave_hat@hotmail.com>
Re: bringing another perspective to the debate
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
 


(back) Subject: Re: I have no clue what this subject line should be. From: "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 12:29:24 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: <Cremona502@cs.com> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 11:47 AM Subject: Re: I have no clue what this subject line should be.   > > I kinda feel like you're condemning > > anything that isn't a reproduction. > > > Nope! You're missing my point... that being that there IS room for > different styles of organs, rather than having them all be play-all > ecumenical eclectic equal temperament electropneumatic compromises. I > didn't condemn any style; I simply stated a preference for diversity.   What?! No you didn't! Diversity would be the ability to play more than one school of music on the same organ!!   > This really is the end of this thread for me!   Yeah, right. ;)   I love you guys, but you're confusing the heck out of me!!!   -Rebekah    
(back) Subject: Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs... From: "Rebekah Ingram" <rringram@syr.edu> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 12:35:31 -0400     ----- Original Message ----- From: Rebekah Ingram <rringram@syr.edu> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 12:27 PM Subject: Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs...   > But why am -I- close-minded because I haven't heard Sweelinck on an = organ > from the Netherlands???!!! Why am I close-minded for not preferring Unequal > temperments to Equal Temperment????   I have a CD of the Ebert organ from Innsbruck, Austria. I've played that litlte whatever-it-is in the chapel at Oberlin. Yeah, unequal temperment = is fun for a while, but if you have perfect pitch it gets to be a real b**** really quickely. There's a reason Bach advocated the well-tempered = klavier. He probably had perfect pitch too!   Oh well, let's just face that the math doesn't work out and move on.   -Rebekah      
(back) Subject: Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs... From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 09:36:24   At 11:55 AM 5/18/2000 EDT, you wrote: >As a string player, I know that stringed instruments to not play in equal =   >temperament. There is a DIFFERENCE between a D-flat and a C-sharp. = This >is one of the things that gives chamber music its charm.<snip>   Bad comparison. Members of the viol family, as well as the slide trombone in the brass family, are "free intonation" instruments, and can be played in ANY intonation the player desires, dependant, of course, on the = player's skill and quality of ear. > >I think Franck, Reger, and Howells all >sound better on Valotti temperament, a very mild, but still unequal >temperament.<snip>   Ah...I'm reminded about a discussion on #pipechat about temperments, and how the Hammond is "unequally tempered". I had set about a project to discover exactly which temperment the Hammond tonewheel organ is closest to. A listmember on HamTech ran some math and found that the scale on a Hammond is "dented" by .7 semitone, worst case, and I've been double checking that. However, which tones go which way from ET is what = "flavors" the Hammond enough to make it yelp a bit in off-the-wall keys, and I'm still looking into that. Thus, I propose a new "Hammond Temperment" be officially recognized! One could tune their "box of whistles" to this, unify all the bourdons, and sound like the original poseur of 1935!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: I have no clue what this subject line should be. From: "Luther Melby" <lmelby@prtel.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 11:58:20 -0500   If you are confused, how about greenhorns like me????? Should I tune the organ I am working on to unequal temperment and then when the organist has a bad sounding key she can just turn the transposer to a nicer sound????? ha But I love a lively discussion. > >I love you guys, but you're confusing the heck out of me!!! > >-Rebekah > > >    
(back) Subject: Bach and Equal Temperament From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 09:50:00   At 10:17 AM 5/18/2000 EDT, you wrote: >J.S. Bach was one of the first and stauchest promoters of EQUAL TEMPERAMENT <snip>   Thank you!   >- being a baroque composer and having dealt with unequal temperaments all =   >his life - just why do you think HE was promoting Equal Temp. ??? DO we >presume to be more musically knowledgeable than he?<snip>   Not having time for in-depth research due to impending travel, I did come up with this, which I had inadvertantly quoted last night:   "Is is easy to see how, with the rapid expansion of musical art during the 17th and 18th centuries, the demand for something more widely useful than = a Mean-Tone Temperament soon became irresistible. Sebastian Bach began to tune his clavichords in EQUAL TEMPERAMENT so that his pupils might be able to play in all tonalities without frequent retunings. The celebrated Well Tempered Clavier, 48 Preludes and Fugues in each of the twelve major and minor tonalities, was the first fruit of this famous experiment in Intonation."   ---William Braid White, Mus.D., "Piano Tuning and Allied Arts", 5th Ed., 15th printing, Tuners Supply, Boston, 1972, pg. 243   Dr. White, of course, was the founder of the celebrated White School of Pianoforte Technology in Chicago, which turned out many of the world's foremost tuners and technicians. There's more in more musicological tomes on the shelves, but this will have to wait!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: LARGE Turner console From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:00:00   At 12:26 PM 5/18/2000 EDT, you wrote: >Another example of a large Turner console can be seen at Royce Hall UCLA. =   >It's a beauty!<snip>   The recently rededicated E.M. Skinner, which this console controls, is = just about a new organ now, and sounds wonderful! Fortunately, the specification was added to, alleviating the typical Skinner "goof", = typical of the era, of deletion of badly-need upperwork, thus making the organ = more useful in all schools of music. Isn't it at 104 ranks now, with the inclusion of mixtures and upperwork?   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: Re: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs... From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:04:09   At 12:27 PM 5/18/2000 -0400, you wrote: >Somebody, pull me outta the water here, I'm -really- >confused....<snip>   :::DeserTBoB hands Rebekah a traffic cone for a dunce hat and invites her to join us over in Confused Corner, where we're all gathering now, resplendent in our shiny orange traffic cones::::    
(back) Subject: RE: direct electric vs. electro-pneumatic vs... From: "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 12:12:25 -0500   Brombaugh.   I've played that litlte whatever-it-is in the chapel at Oberlin.   "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org  
(back) Subject: Swell Pedal Still Wanted From: <MickBerg@aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 13:21:34 EDT   I had no success in getting a Klann Swell Pedal with a rack and pinion = drive for an audio pot. Just one offer of a pair which wasn't to be broken up, = and was too expensive. So I am now asking if anyone has any kind of pedal with = a rack and pinion on it, so I can modify the regular Klann pedal on my = console.   As an advertisement for the versatility of my MIDI program "Building = Blocks", I would like to mention that I could perfectly easily use the pedal as it = is, with the progressive contacts, and use fifteen of my MIDI note inputs to control the volume, just as if I were opening swell shutters one after the =   other. But it would occupy fifteen inputs, which is a bit excessive!   My PC Organ project is nearly complete, and I will be writing up a full description soon.   Mick Berg.  
(back) Subject: Not too dry, please...WITH the olive! From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:26:01   At 12:12 PM 5/18/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Brombaugh. > > I've played that >litlte whatever-it-is in the chapel at Oberlin.<snip>   Michael Barone, to his credit, did a show quite awhile back comprised completely of the organs at Oberlin, including the Brombaugh chapel thingie, as well as the "Martini" organs.   Walter Holtkamp may have been able to design nifty little practice organs on cocktail napkins, but I've yet to be able to partake of a couple of = good Martinis and been able to play any better!   DeserTBoB  
(back) Subject: bringing another perspective to the debate From: <Quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:38:10 -0700   Here's something that I haven't seen discussed: stylistic = self-consciousness was a product of the Romantic movement in the arts in the 19th century. As applied to music, that meant that for the first time in music history, composers and performers began to look at earlier compositions, and to = perform them.   True, there was always a conservative bent to church music ... Bach = regularly performed the Masses and motets of the earlier German polyphonists at St. Thomas.   Despite dedicated efforts to smush it into 17th, 18th, or 19th century performance practice, Gregorian Chant never QUITE died out in the RC = church. But its revival by Solesmes and the confirmation of Solesmes' scholarship = by pope Pius X was basically motivated by the Romantic spirit, i.e., that old = is somehow better.   In architecture, the Romantic spirit gave us the Gothic Revival, etc. etc. = etc.   OK, OK, I'm GETTING to my point (grin):   Prior to the 20th century, there wasn't much concern about stylistic = integrity. What little earlier music that was played and sung was played and sung in = the style of the times. Consider that for the first performance of the St. = Matthew Passion since Bach's death, Mendelssohn rewrote the recitatives, = presumably in "Mendelssohn" style. Other examples abound ... romantic editions of Bach's organ works, complete with markings for the swell box(es), Guilmant's = otherwise excellent editions of early music with their registrations for the Cavaille-Coll organ, 100-piece modern symphony orchestras playing Bach = (AND Mozart) with the full band on stage playing modern instruments ... the = list is endless.   So ... we are really on relatively new ground here ... at about the = beginning of the 20th century, organ music began to expand in BOTH directions ... backwards toward the period BEFORE Bach, and forwards toward the = contemporary sounds of Messiaen, etc. And the concerns about authentic performances on period organs didn't REALLY take off in this country until after WWII.   THEREFORE (reaching his conclusion, sorta) we have yet to develop a = workable aesthetic. It is obvious that serious music students should be exposed to period instruments (or good copies) in conservatories; it is EQUALLY = obvious that most churches can't afford to have different organs of different = styles in the four corners of the nave.   I would suggest that there ARE a limited number of constants in = organ-building of ALL countries and ALL periods prior to the 20th century that, if = applied, COULD produce organs that could do a REASONABLE job of encompassing MOST = of the literature from MOST of the periods of music, i.e.   (1) the free-standing encased organ   (2) the slider wind-chest   (3) moderate wind-pressure   (4) a key action that allows the player to control the speed of the motion = of the pallets   Perhaps someday (4) WON'T be limited to tracker-mechanical key action ... = I have read some fascinating articles about experiments in fluidic (sp?) technology going on in Europe. And the rebuild at Notre Dame, however problematical, has produced a body of knowledge about the possible applications (and limitations) of computer technology as applied to the = organ's key-action.   Within the above framework, and an equally limited number of broad tonal constants (i.e. English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Scandinavian = and Italian organs all possessed principal choruses and mixtures, however dissimilar national schools of voicing and mixture composition might have been), it SHOULD be possible to construct a somewhat eclectic organ that doesn't depart WILDLY from sound historical organ-building parameters.   It should be remembered that the vast majority of organ literature, right through the Romantic period, was written for and played on instruments = that were still constructed in the historic manner ... yes, Cavaille-Coll = raised his wind-pressures, and the Barker lever allowed him to do so, but his = instruments were still planted on slider wind-chests. And Barker lever action still = allowed the organist some control over the speed of motion of the pallets.   The electric-action organ (often enchambered, rather than encased), with = its pitman windchests, higher wind-pressures and sophisticated stop-controls, really IS a new thing, and there's a relatively limited literature that = has been composed specifically for it ... Sowerby and his school, etc.   Obviously I DON'T accept the premise that organ-building has improved the instrument in a straight time-line up to the present.   We have FINALLY figured out that the harpsichord ISN'T a primitive piano, = but an instrument in its own right. I submit that to equate organs prior to = the advent of electricity with organs AFTER the advent of electricity is to = make the same mistake. They share some characteristics, to be sure, but they = ain't the same animal (grin).   In closing: we are asking the organ to do more than it has ever been asked = to do before, and the jury's still out as to whether or not we'll succeed in making an all-purpose organ that is still true to the historic essentials = of organ-building.   Cheers,   Bud            
(back) Subject: temperaments From: <Quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 11:12:45 -0700   For good or for ill, we probably CAN'T retreat from A=3D440 and equal temperament, except in academic situations and/or churches that practice a very pure historical version of their liturgy and music (some LCMS congregations that don't play or sing anything after Bach, maybe), but those situations are a TINY minority.   One thing that CAN be said for digital organs is that they DO allow one to switch back and forth among temperaments. But I think there are OTHER considerations (sound, for instance) that outweigh that particular advantage (grin).   Cheers,   Bud   Luther Melby wrote:   > If you are confused, how about greenhorns like me????? > Should I tune the organ I am working on to unequal temperment > and then when the organist has a bad sounding key she can > just turn the transposer to a nicer sound????? ha > But I love a lively discussion.   > > > > >I love you guys, but you're confusing the heck out of me!!! > > > >-Rebekah > > > > > > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Wedding Woes From: "STRAIGHT" <STRAIGHT@infoblvd.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 14:08:35 -0400   <<<<<These here Yankees er jist as bad>>>>>   You bet they are! One I did last summer it got to be quarter after and I was starting through my list for the second time, the pastor came over, smiled, quietly said ----"the wedding party is all at the bride's house = and haven't left yet, enjoy yourself". I knew they were going to get dressed at the church, so I looked at my pile of music and was real glad I had brought the whole tote bag full. = But then they turned up in a limo, all together and already dressed and ready = to go. Only started half an hour late.   Diane S.    
(back) Subject: the Brombaugh organ in Fairchild Seminary Chapel (not the Fisk going into FINNEY Chapel) at Oberlin From: <Quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 11:21:43 -0700   Yes, and it replaced a much-cobbled ESTEY (which I played in my student days), so don't knock it (grin).   When the Fisk in Finney Chapel is completed, Oberlin will have a large romantic instrument, a three-manual more-or-less Dutch baroque instrument (the Flentrop in Warner Concert Hall) and the Brombaugh ... I don't recall offhand what the style of the Brombaugh is supposed to represent (Sweelinck?), but it's obviously something earlier than the Flentrop. Now all they need is a French baroque organ and an Italian instrument (grin).   In any case, I don't think that's inappropriate for an academic setting. If somebody wants to play Sowerby's "Fast and Sinister", all they have to do is walk across the Quad to Finney. Or down to Warner to play Bach.   Cheers,   Bud       "Storandt, Peter" wrote:   > Brombaugh. > > I've played that > litlte whatever-it-is in the chapel at Oberlin. > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org    
(back) Subject: Re: tuning system truth and myths. From: "Dave G." <dave_hat@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 11:43:54 PDT     >Well, I dunno....JSB seemed to think ET was a pretty keen idea...   BEEP BEEP BEEP DISINFORMAITON ALERT PROPAGANDA ALERT   That the WTC was written by Bach as a showpiece for equal temperament is a =   myth (probably started by the equal temperament fanatics when they were = just taking over the music world) that first appeared in music theory textbooks =   in the 19th century and has been repeated as gospel ever since.   What Bach was trying to do was try out the tonal possibilities of one of = the other new tunings (Werckmeister n I think.) as an alternative to meantone.   For my theater organ... the Vilotti tuning is the way to go.   DG   ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Musical taste vs. copying past 'masters' From: "Dave G." <dave_hat@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 11:57:39 PDT   Hi all,   >J.S. Bach was one of the first and stauchest promoters of EQUAL = TEMPERAMENT >- being a baroque composer and having dealt with unequal temperaments all >his life -   And having enjoyed hearing more purely tuned intervals all his life. See previous post.   >DO we presume to be more musically knowledgeable than he?   Enough with the JSB idolatry already! We have experience with the musics from many more time periods, cultures, and styles than he did. Bach = didn't know about jazz, he didn't know about afro-cuban rhythms, he didn't know about indian or indonesian classical music. Some of us do. And happen to =   like those styles. And would like to see more good organ music written = that incorporates those nuances. Could Bach have composed better ragtime than Scott Joplin did had he lived in early 20th century USA?   Now I'll be the first to proclaim that (e.g.) the Art of Fugue, WTC, etc = are the greatest works of counterpoint ever written. But you can't listen to that all day.   >A real artist makes thier own fresh creation.   Amen. See my description of my small theater organ posted here a month or =   so ago. It's neither a copy of a Wurlitzer, nor a copy of a Silbermann.   DG ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com    
(back) Subject: Re: bringing another perspective to the debate From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 12:01:44   At 10:38 AM 5/18/2000 -0700, Bud-by-the-Beach wrote: >And the concerns about authentic performances on >period organs didn't REALLY take off in this country until after WWII. <snip>   A most astute set of observations, not meaning to "schnip" to just the above statement. One must remember the hoopla Biggs created with his HaHvaHd Flentrop advocacy on Columbia Records. He led an entire movement, inasfar as the non-playing listener was concerned, renouncing all of his earlier advocacy, it seemed, of GDH's tonal ideas, and going right for the sounds of antiquity. One sometimes forgets that Biggs, prior to the Flentrop recordings, was basically a Romantic player in terms of repertoire.   >Perhaps someday (4) WON'T be limited to tracker-mechanical key action ....<snip>   It doesn't have to be even now. Another thought that my mind (that chronically seems to have too much time on its hands) is that MIDI technology now allows for key acceleration to be quantified and then processed for instruments such as the piano. It would take, perhaps, a very fast stepper motor, digitally driven, to approximate the same kind of action in a windchest, but the basis of technology is most definately there.   I've always held, however, that "tracker intonation" is highly overblown in most cases. Once the force required to break the seal between pallet and the board is reached, the pallet has a tendency to snap open, no matter how hard the player tries to control it. It isn't at all like some, who have yet to play a tracker instrument surmise, a continuously variable action, as would be in a piano action, or even a Bawld-One Model 10! I hold that the so-called "tracker intonation" changes made by a player are mostly the difference between "quick" sounding and "late" sounding...the initial partials or speech of the pipes are still fairly much the same, with subtle differences. However, I do know that some instruments are better than others in this regard, giving the player more control than do other installations.   >have read some fascinating articles about experiments in fluidic (sp?) >technology going on in Europe.<snip>   I've read about similar experiements...to me, it seems highly problem-ridden over time and expensive.   >And the rebuild at Notre Dame, however >problematical, has produced a body of knowledge about the possible >applications (and limitations) of computer technology as applied to the organ's >key-action.<snip>   There are remote playing actions out here now that use the key accelation data from MIDI to control pianos remotely. I'm quite sure such technology could be used to operate pallets. However, when one considers the limited amount of control a player really has over pallet movement with conventional tracker/roller mechanisms, one wonders what's going to happen if all that "flexibility" of these mechanics are removed, and a stepper motor controls the pallet >>exactly<< as the key moves, which I don't believe for a second that current "tracker" action does.   >it SHOULD be possible to construct a somewhat eclectic organ that >doesn't depart WILDLY from sound historical organ-building= parameters.<snip>   This was Harrison's original idea when he took over at =C6olian-Skinner, although heavily laden with the English ideals. We mostly see a melding of the German and English ideas of principle chorus in his work, with a definate trend towards English and French chorus reeds. I sometimes think his ideas were governed by the preponderance of literature for the instrument from these various schools as a reason that the other nationalistic schools were ignored.   >The electric-action organ (often enchambered, rather than encased), with= its >pitman windchests, higher wind-pressures and sophisticated stop-controls, >really IS a new thing, and there's a relatively limited literature that has >been composed specifically for it ... Sowerby and his school, etc.   I tend to agree that Sowerby and other modern American composers is best rendered on an Austin or =C6olian-Skinner. However, the premise that these organs cannot acceptably do anything else is, in my estimation, not true. Certainly the Organ Reform Movement did start to move things out of Hope-Jones-ish concrete tombs and back into the acoustic environment, although incrementally.   >Obviously I DON'T accept the premise that organ-building has improved the >instrument in a straight time-line up to the present.<snip>   "Improved", in this case, might apply to the tonal and artistic merits of the instrument. In terms of registrational appliances, winding stability and quantity, and overall ergonomic flexibility and control, there's no doubt at all that many modern instruments are the finest ever produced. Walking over a few feet to change registrations is hardly an acceptable premise nowadays, when one can simply punch a piston. One star made an entire career out of "piston punching"...Virgil Fox, of course!   >I submit that to equate organs prior to the >advent of electricity with organs AFTER the advent of electricity is to= make >the same mistake. They share some characteristics, to be sure, but they= ain't >the same animal (grin).<snip>   Wrong, technically. The sound producing element is still the same...an air column inclosed by a wood or metal structure which resonates at various given frequencies, or a brass reed, tension tuned and speaking into various types of resonators. Yup, it's the same instrument, much as a Model T Ford is an automobile, as is also a Cadillac Eldorado. Just because the Caddy has speed-sensitive power steering, a state of the art powerplant and electronic control of everything doesn't make it not an automobile!   >In closing: we are asking the organ to do more than it has ever been asked= to >do before, and the jury's still out as to whether or not we'll succeed in >making an all-purpose organ that is still true to the historic essentials= of >organ-building.<snip>   Well, the jury is going to be out for awhile; this is new musical ground we've covered in this century. I do think, however, that the Organ Reform Movement in this country was a "resetting of bearings" for the instrument, as the "SludgeMaster Deluxes=99" being produced after the interference of Hope-Jones and others did, eventually, wind up taking the instrument to the extremes of orchestral imitation, which spawned a whole new type of instrument for popular music. However, the wholesale abandonment of what's come to fore in the last 100 years in terms of organ technology isn't wise, either. My opinion is that a balance must be struck tonally, a compromise, if one wills, taking the best of all schools of the past to give an instrument of true flexibility. Harrison's attempts at this were about the most successful to date. However, inasfar as the various equipments of the instrument are concerned, research and development towards new, reliable and cost-containing technologies must be explored in order to keep the instrument viable! I don't hear anyone complaining about solid-state combination action and relays...such were major improvements. A wholesale return to slider chests, while eliminating the use of enough leather to luxurously appoint a fleet of Cadillacs, presents its own nagging problems, as does complex, expensive tracker action.   Continuation of development in the field of actions and other appliances of the instrument must continue if we're going to keep the instrument viable, and have it in hopefully more venues than we have it now.   DeserTBoB