PipeChat Digest #2073 - Monday, April 30, 2001
 
Re: Pneumatic
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: organ-building
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: Alternative Organs Past and Present
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: organ-building
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: Pneumatic
  by "douglas morgan" <dkmorgan76209@yahoo.com>
Re: organ-building
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: Pneumatic
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: organ-building
  by "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net>
The Pink Church
  by <Innkawgneeto@cs.com>
Re: Pneumatic
  by "douglas morgan" <dkmorgan76209@yahoo.com>
Re: organ-building
  by <OrganMD@aol.com>
Re: Janice Soprano
  by "Wayne Grauel" <wgvideo@attglobal.net>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Pneumatic From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:47:53 EDT     --part1_31.14150f7b.281f53a9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 4/30/01 3:51:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, desertbob@rglobal.net writes:     > Many installation of the > original Perflex formulation are still working just fine and will = probably > outlast any leather. > >   More information please!!! Spefics? What churches, what organs, = where?   Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/   --part1_31.14150f7b.281f53a9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>In a message dated = 4/30/01 3:51:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>desertbob@rglobal.net writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Many installation = of the <BR>original Perflex formulation are still working just fine and will = probably <BR>outlast any leather. <BR> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>More information please!!! &nbsp;&nbsp;Spefics? &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;What = churches, what organs, where? <BR> <BR>Bruce Cornely &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;~ &nbsp;Cremona502@cs.com &nbsp; <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi <BR>Visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</FONT></HTML>   --part1_31.14150f7b.281f53a9_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:48:49 EDT   Hi Bud:   I think what everybody is forgetting about the economy, energy use, and Fossil fuels is that these prices have out run personal income. Taxes in 1950 were 2% to feds, most states none. Housing 1911 $500.00 1950 $3,000. Car 1903 Ford $600. 1950 Ford $1,600 Gas 1910 3=A2 1950 15=A2 2001 Home $299,000 2001 Car Ford $24,995 Gas $2.01   Organs 1910 $500. per rank Organs 2001 $22,000 per rank   Five Manual Aeolian/Skinner Salt Lake Utah 1948 $110,000. 189 ranks original now 206 ranks $4,532,000   GDH under bid this organ at $90,000 and had to have Schreiner and Asper intervene for $20,000 to break even. Materials went up that fast after the contract was let. You were either careful or you went broke.   Average wage 1910 $760 per year 2001 $60,000   Regards,   Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re: Alternative Organs Past and Present From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:30:19 EDT   Hi Bud and list:   Reed Organs were found in most churches before 1900 and a little after. These were the small and intermediate churches, missions strapped for cash, but wanted good music or as good as they could afford. Parlor Reed Organs sold for $59.95 and up A full size Church reed organ $250 to $600. A serviceable handmedown pipe organ $750 to $1,200.00 The Big well healed Churches bought pipe organs in the $8,000 to $12,000 range. Some as high as $20,000. Old pipe organs were sold or given to a smaller church for a nominal sum. A lot of recycling! We are still doing it! As in your case, but as you found out a $5,000. organ rebuilt right can run over $200,000. There's no free lunch, pipes are desireable and expensive. They always have been.   A fantastic alternative could run $60,000 to a Million in the case of the Walker Giant in So. Orange County, or more for the Allen Giants here and there. Good stuff isn't cheap. On average a 100 rank Organ in pipes 2.2 million similar result in digital 100K of the same size and capacity. We need to see this for it all to sink in. Smart churches also put away in load bearing accounts almost an equal amount of cash to perpetuate their pipe organ indefinately. Most don't consider doing that, but should. You don't intend to rebuild an Alternative, you go out and get a new one! They are expendable, and for small to medium churches, this has been the norm right along through the centuries.   Anyone care to expand on this with better numbers, and more concrete facts? I'm just roughing this all in for the sake of discussion and have = used approximates. They are close! But not perfect!   Regards,   Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:33:23 EDT     --part1_dd.13d08f86.281f5e53_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit     MY question is: HOW did the 19th century builders manage to turn out affordable > small organs? A lot of them are still playing today. > (snip) > A lot of churches that COULD afford pipe organs in 1900 CAN'T afford = pipe > organs > in 2001 ... why? >   When I was doing some research several years ago, I was amused and = surprised by how many instruments were given to churches by the women's societies. = It would be very interesting to see a comparison of prices from several = periods of time, which included pipe organs, automobiles, homes, wages, and groceries. For instance, in around 1967 organ prices were around = $1500/stop and a Pontiac Catalina convertible was $3800. Today organ prices are = around $15,000/stop and a Pontiac Bonneville (almost equivalent) is now about $35,000. The price increases are similar.     > OK, there ARE some outside factors ... there was no personal income tax = in > 1900, > for instance. > > If there are records, has anybody ever compared the charitable > contributions of > 1900 with 2000? > I personally don't think this has made a big difference. Most people who =   are really generous with charities would be so even without the tax = advantage.       > I'm not a builder, just a tinkerer ... but I wonder how much of = space-age > technology CAN be applied to the pipe organ. >   It would be interesting to know where the real costs are in the production = of a pipe organ. Is it in the making of chests, action and non-pipe = aspects, or in the manual labor necessary in pipe-making and voicing/finishing.   I think one of the problems with incorporating space-age technology into = pipe organs is the research aspect. Who is going to pay for the research. Pipe organs are too expensive and too large to have to worry about retrofitting failed experiments. Perhaps if forward thinking builders = could make small, experimental pipe organs to sell as experiments to small = churches and individuals, the technology could be incorporated and tested for later =   use.   > One doesn't see anything comparable going on in the building of = orchestral > instruments, at least not to my knowledge. And I don't think any major > orchestra > is contemplating replacing their grand piano with an electronic = keyboard, > except > with a composer calls for it (grin). > It does seem amazing to me that some individuals are able to pay = excruciating prices for their instruments. However, the difference in price between = an electronic keyboard and a grand piano is signifcantly less than between a pipe organ and an electronic.       Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/   --part1_dd.13d08f86.281f5e53_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2> &nbsp;MY question is: HOW did the 19th century = builders manage to turn out <BR>affordable</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 = FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: = #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: = 5px">small organs? A lot of them are still playing today. <BR>(snip) <BR>A lot of churches that COULD afford pipe organs in 1900 CAN'T afford = pipe <BR>organs <BR>in 2001 ... why? <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">When I was doing some research several years = ago, I was amused and surprised <BR>by how many instruments were given to churches by the women's = societies. &nbsp;&nbsp;It <BR>would be very interesting to see a comparison of prices from several periods <BR>of time, which included &nbsp;pipe organs, automobiles, homes, wages, = and <BR>groceries. &nbsp;&nbsp;For instance, in around 1967 organ prices were = around $1500/stop <BR>and a Pontiac Catalina convertible was $3800. &nbsp;&nbsp;Today organ = prices are around <BR>$15,000/stop and a Pontiac Bonneville (almost equivalent) is now about =   <BR>$35,000. &nbsp;&nbsp;The price increases are similar. <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">OK, there ARE some = outside factors ... there was no personal income tax in <BR>1900, <BR>for instance. <BR> <BR>If there are records, has anybody ever compared the charitable <BR>contributions of <BR>1900 with 2000? <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>I personally don't think this has made a big difference. = &nbsp;&nbsp;Most people who <BR>are really generous with charities would be so even without the tax = advantage. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: = #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: = 5px">I'm not a builder, just a tinkerer ... but I wonder how much of = space-age <BR>technology CAN be applied to the pipe organ. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <BR>It would be interesting to know where the real costs are in the = production of <BR>a pipe organ. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Is it in the making of chests, action = and non-pipe aspects, <BR>or in the manual labor necessary in pipe-making and voicing/finishing. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>I think one of the problems with incorporating space-age technology = into pipe <BR>organs is the research aspect. &nbsp;&nbsp;Who is going to pay for the = research. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>Pipe organs are too expensive and too large to have to worry about <BR>retrofitting failed experiments. &nbsp;&nbsp;Perhaps if forward = thinking builders could <BR>make small, experimental pipe organs to sell as experiments to small = churches <BR>and individuals, the technology could be incorporated and tested for = later <BR>use. <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">One doesn't see = anything comparable going on in the building of orchestral <BR>instruments, at least not to my knowledge. And I don't think any major =   <BR>orchestra <BR>is contemplating replacing their grand piano with an electronic = keyboard, <BR>except <BR>with a composer calls for it (grin). <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>It does seem amazing to me that some individuals are able to pay = excruciating <BR>prices for their instruments. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;However, the = difference in price between an <BR>electronic keyboard and a grand piano is signifcantly less than = between a <BR>pipe organ and an electronic. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>Bruce Cornely &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;~ &nbsp;Cremona502@cs.com &nbsp; <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi <BR>Visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</FONT></HTML>   --part1_dd.13d08f86.281f5e53_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Pneumatic From: "douglas morgan" <dkmorgan76209@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:44:05 -0700 (PDT)   DearBruce:   I certainly would like to know where the successful applications of perflex are. I have replaced enough of that crap that nobody could GIVE me any of it.   Keith Morgan --- Cremona502@cs.com wrote: > In a message dated 4/30/01 3:51:19 PM Pacific > Daylight Time, > desertbob@rglobal.net writes: > > > > Many installation of the > > original Perflex formulation are still working > just fine and will probably > > outlast any leather. > > > > > > More information please!!! Spefics? What > churches, what organs, where? > > Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com > with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ > ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" > Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi > Visit Howling Acres at > http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/ >     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/  
(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:44:53 EDT     --part1_9.149db209.281f6105_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 4/30/01 4:54:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time, RonSeverin@aol.com writes:     > I think what everybody is forgetting about the economy   This reminds me of a meeting in which we were discussing organ repair. = One man said, "I think it's rediculous to consider spending $300,000 on a = church organ."   Another committee member said, "Right! And this coming from a man who drives a $100,000 car!"   Bruce Cornely ~ Cremona502@cs.com with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi Visit Howling Acres at http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/   --part1_9.149db209.281f6105_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>In a message dated = 4/30/01 4:54:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>RonSeverin@aol.com writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I think what = everybody is forgetting about the economy</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" = SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>This reminds me of a meeting in which we were discussing organ repair. = &nbsp;&nbsp;One <BR>man said, "I think it's rediculous to consider spending $300,000 on a = church <BR>organ." <BR> <BR>Another committee member said, "Right! &nbsp;&nbsp;And this coming = from a man who <BR>drives a $100,000 car!" &nbsp;&nbsp; <BR> <BR>Bruce Cornely &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;~ &nbsp;Cremona502@cs.com &nbsp; <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly, and Dewi <BR>Visit Howling Acres at = &nbsp;&nbsp;http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502/</FONT></HTML>   --part1_9.149db209.281f6105_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Pneumatic From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:43:27 -0500   ---- Original Message ----- From: "Panning" <jpanning@cal-net.net> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 10:25 PM Subject: Re: Pneumatic     > > I can think of no builder who was more in sync with Bob's vision than David > Cogswell, who pursued all sorts of space-age "solutions" to organ > "problems" (see his article in ISO Information on Fluidic Valves, if you > require verification).   It's interesting your should remember poor old David. One of his = inventions was a tubular pneumatic chest with worked on the Bernouilli (Sp?) = principle. Columns of air simply deflected each other. There wer no moving parts, = and the chest was built of aluminum, so it would literally work for ever = without any restoration and could never go out of adjustment. Furthermore, it was possible to vary the speed of opening of the pallet according to the speed of opening of the pallet -- claimed to be desirable by some tracker advocates, though not me. The only problem? The cost. About a million dollars a chest.   John Speller    
(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: "Carlo Pietroniro" <organist@total.net> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:54:36 -0400   a local Montreal church, back in 1915, had a 4-manual Casavant organ = built, with 63 stops, and paid a mere 40000$. In today's money.........oh boy!   Carlo    
(back) Subject: The Pink Church From: <Innkawgneeto@cs.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:58:28 EDT     --part1_62.e42421c.281f6434_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Let's see, that would be my colleague Robin McEachern, no? Wonderful musician, who came from Toms River, New Jersey. We worked together on a couple events before he left for sunnier climes.   I also remember Ms. Parker-Smith's concert at St. Geo's NYC. Dazzling!   Neil B               --part1_62.e42421c.281f6434_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>Let's see, that would = be my colleague Robin McEachern, no? &nbsp;Wonderful <BR>musician, who came from Toms River, New Jersey. &nbsp;We worked = together on a <BR>couple events before he left for sunnier climes. <BR> <BR>I also remember Ms. Parker-Smith's concert at St. Geo's NYC. = &nbsp;Dazzling! <BR> <BR>Neil B <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR></FONT></HTML>   --part1_62.e42421c.281f6434_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Pneumatic From: "douglas morgan" <dkmorgan76209@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 18:04:54 -0700 (PDT)   Dear Mr. Scarborough:   In your E-mail of April 29, you spoke of the original formulation of perflex that is still working well and will probably outlast leather.   Where are these applications?   D. Keith Morgan --- Bob Scarborough <desertbob@rglobal.net> wrote: > At 22:25 4/29/2001 -0500, you wrote: > >Ahh, it just isn't Pipechat without an occasional > display of Bob on his > >favorite hobby horse, "Scientia vincit > omnia".<snip> > > ...or this guy's self-annointed, knee-jerking > counter-rants! > > >However, even a moment of thought should reveal > that making pipes of such > >materials either entails massive cost (who could > afford plastic extrusion > >equipment for every pipe diameter possibly needed > in an organ?)<snip> > > No one. Sheet material could/would be size from > flat stock using solvent > melt techniques and heat for stress relief. > Reliance on petrochemicals is > indeed a valid concern, but so is the toxicity of > lead and other heavy > metals...more so than many pipe people care to > believe. > > >If this were true, the market would correct the > situation: > >builders of expensive "traditional" pipe organs > would disappear.<snip> > > They are. The two big pipe organ houses in the US > have been folded for > years, and some of the mid-sized builders are in > trouble. The bulk of > production is now coming from much smaller builders, > down into the "cottage > industry" range. Reuter would have been gone > already if not for a major > infusion of cash from an investor and a strategic > alliance with Allen. > > >Can anyone demonstrate that pipe organs are now > more expensive in a real > >way (compared to median income or other standard) > than they ever were? Of > >course, the dollar cost of pipe organs has gone up, > but so has the cost of > >everything else.<snip> > > Adjustment for inflation, even benchmarked to the > 1967 dollar, isn't a > consideration here. The consideration is that pipe > organs cost a LOT more > than digitorgs, their main competition...period. > > >I wonder how all those Hope-Jones customers who > followed the spirit of > >Bob's advocacy of high tech felt after the H-J > experiments failed?<snip> > > Sure, Hope-Jones screwed a LOT of things up, > especially tonally. He also > came up with some good stuff that most builders > still use today. > > >Some years ago, a Midwestern builder attempted to > overcome wood's > >troublesome nature by building windchests of > aluminum, another idea that, > >for some reason, seems not to have won wide > acceptance.<snip> > > Well, for one, sheet aluminum present many problems, > the most obvious being > a "tubby" resonance problem. > > >And, regardless of how it came about, the "Perflex > disaster" is still a > >real event; the fact that there > >was a better previous formulation is cold comfort > to swindled churches.<snip> > > It wasn't a "disaster" until the formulation was > changed. The "swindled" > churches got the later formulation, indeed. Many > installation of the > original Perflex formulation are still working just > fine and will probably > outlast any leather. > > >When surrounded by such a range of evidence of the > failure of unidiomatic > >technology grafted to the organ, one has to wonder > who the ego-tripper is > >here.<snip> > > Not me...I'm just advancing some thoughts regarding > making instruments > affordable again, nothing more than that. When one > sees the price tags on > these silly "retro-organs" coming out lately, one > MUST challenge the logic > of Fesperman ("Uncle Fester") et al. > > dB > > > "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 >     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/  
(back) Subject: Re: organ-building From: <OrganMD@aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:14:54 EDT     --part1_103.28d36c8.281f680e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Hi All....   I feel inclined to jump into the middle of this discussion. I have been = in the organ business for 25 years and have done at least a little research = on the subject of the cost of pipe organs. My findings go like this.... 1. Pipe organs have always been expensive. Yes, even at the turn = of the last century. 2. Prior to 1960 there were not really any electronic substitutes that even could approximate the sound of the real thing for any cost. = From 1900-1939 the choice was pipe organ, reed organ, or piano. When there is = no other logical choice we tend to budget for what is required to get the job =   done. 3. People in general tend to look to the lowest cost solution for = any given problem. I.e. for many an amplified appliance is a good enough solution leaving funds available for other uses.   For us to win out with a client, the client has to see beyond the horizon. = They must want to do something of a permanent and lasting nature. Leave a =   legacy. They must care about real value quality, not just most bang for = the buck.   However as organ professionals we must be sure that we in fact give them a =   product that is of lasting value. Not one that follows the most current = fad but may in fact be gone in 15 years. The neo-baroque instruments of the = 60's and 70's have not endeared us to the contributing public. They have = watched rebuild after rebuild and dollar after dollar be thrown at many of these instruments in order to make them serviceable for church and in the end, frustration take over and they buy a new Allen or Rodgers to get an instrument on which they can make music suitable for worship.   Sometimes we organbuilders forgot that the organ must work for church first.....and if it could also deliver a good recital then that is an = added blessing.   OK, enough soapbox for now. I look forward to comments from all of you.   Bill Hesterman   --part1_103.28d36c8.281f680e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D3>Hi All.... <BR> <BR>I feel inclined to jump into the middle of this discussion. &nbsp;I = have been in <BR>the organ business for 25 years and have done at least a little = research on <BR>the subject of the cost of pipe organs. &nbsp;My findings go like = this.... <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. &nbsp;Pipe organs have always = been expensive. &nbsp;Yes, even at the turn of <BR>the last century. <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2. &nbsp;Prior to 1960 there were = not really any electronic substitutes <BR>that even could approximate the sound of the real thing for any cost. = &nbsp;From <BR>1900-1939 the choice was pipe organ, reed organ, or piano. &nbsp;When = there is no <BR>other logical choice we tend to budget for what is required to get the = job <BR>done. <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3. &nbsp;People in general tend = to look to the lowest cost solution for any <BR>given problem. &nbsp;I.e. for many an amplified appliance is a good = enough <BR>solution leaving funds available for other uses. <BR> <BR>For us to win out with a client, the client has to see beyond the = horizon. &nbsp; <BR>They must want to do something of a permanent and lasting nature. = &nbsp;Leave a <BR>legacy. &nbsp;They must care about real value quality, not just most = bang for the <BR>buck. <BR> <BR>However as organ professionals we must be sure that we in fact give = them a <BR>product that is of lasting value. &nbsp;Not one that follows the most = current fad <BR>but may in fact be gone in 15 years. &nbsp;The neo-baroque instruments = of the 60's <BR>and 70's have not endeared us to the contributing public. &nbsp;They = have watched <BR>rebuild after rebuild and dollar after dollar be thrown at many of = these <BR>instruments in order to make them serviceable for church and in the = end, <BR>frustration take over and they buy a new Allen or Rodgers to get an <BR>instrument on which they can make music suitable for worship. &nbsp; <BR> <BR>Sometimes we organbuilders forgot that the organ must work for church <BR>first.....and if it could also deliver a good recital then that is an = added <BR>blessing. <BR> <BR>OK, enough soapbox for now. &nbsp;I look forward to comments from all = of you. <BR> <BR>Bill Hesterman</FONT></HTML>   --part1_103.28d36c8.281f680e_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Janice Soprano From: "Wayne Grauel" <wgvideo@attglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:28:12 -0400   Yes, they hit the nail right on the head! I've followed the show since day one and the writers really have their act together. And they probably aren't far off base with the Contemporary Christian Music, A.K.A. pop ala Jesus.   Many pastors (Lutheran) I know have fallen off of the CCM bandwagon. To their surprise they discovered that it wasn"t Biblical.... HELLO... NO KIDDING!   The only thing I will say for it is that I have heard some contemporary Christian groups, one was at a wedding and it was the "church band". The musicianship and sound was CD quality. I'm purely liturgical when it comes to church music, but giving credit where credit is due, it sure sounds a hell of a lot better than Aunt Tilly who can't even count to 4 at the local Brethern church trying to play hymns. That's enough to make my skin crawl!   Wayne