PipeChat Digest #3961 - Saturday, September 13, 2003
 
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "Bill" <bill.hauser@cox.net>
Re: Funeral Parlor organs revisited
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by <ContraReed@aol.com>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "Mike Franch" <mike6514@hotmail.com>
Announcement
  by "Alicia Zeilenga" <azeilenga@theatreorgans.com>
Re: seduced by a digital
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle)
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Godless Pagans?
  by "james nerstheimer" <enigma1685@hotmail.com>
Pure Hammond - Mischief
  by <Kzimmer0817@aol.com>
Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief
  by <quilisma@cox.net>
Remembering an AGO meeting
  by "Stephen Best" <sbest@borg.com>
Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
1 manual AGP specs?
  by <rkinner@fuse.net>
Re: 1 manual AGP specs?
  by <Gfc234@aol.com>
Re: Out of the closet!
  by "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "Bill" <bill.hauser@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 14:56:21 -0500     Bud-   All those benefits would be nice even in a FOR-profit outfit, let alone = a NON-profit one.   But I mostly agree with you. We're called to do our best, and EXPECT no = less from those around us---especially in a church setting.   I like your heterodoxy.              
(back) Subject: Re: Funeral Parlor organs revisited From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 14:56:08 -0500   RonSeverin@aol.com wrote:   > It seems that large funery organizations are more conscious of > their bottom line, and their bonuses, than they are in providing > pipe organs for services. There are very few exceptions, but one > being Sky Rose Chapel, Rose Hills, Whittier, CA. they installed > a four manual 65 rank pipe organ by Quimby.   The building, is spectacular and although a funeral chapel has become popular as a wedding venue as well. Photographs and the specification of the organ can be seen on our website at http://www.quimbypipeorgans.com/skyrose.htm   John Speller      
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:00:10 -0500   At 10:54 AM 9/13/03 -0700, you wrote: >OK, y'all force me to come out. > >I AM a PROFESSIONAL CHURCH MUSICIAN who DOES expect the Church to provide =   >the following for me, IF they want my services ... It never ceases to amaze me that the church hierarchy has no problem giving the plumber or carpenter the going rate for their services, but always quibbles with the organist and organ serviceman about how = outrageous they are because they are trying to charge enough to provide for a decent living, not an affluent living, just a decent respectful living. Somehow they believe that you should sacrifice your services for the LORD (of course I'm sure the pastor would not consider taking a sovereign less for his services) Shame on you BUD for expecting anything better.   Jon    
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:32 -0700   Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Bob.   I should point out that things are WILDLY different in the US than they are in Australia (Bob's bailiwick), Canada, and even the UK, viz:   Bob Conway wrote: > Bud, 'et al', > > What Bud is saying is all well and good for a Cathedral Organist and > Choirmaster, but bears little realtionship to an ordinary Parish > Church, where the need for a highly qualified Church musician is not > really there.   There are many parish churches in the US that run "cathedral" music programs, with "full-time" musicians. I say "full-time" because the WORK is full-time; the compensation SELDOM is.   > > I have dealt with Bud's points as he writes them, with no disregard > for Bud, who has been put through the mill in the recent past! > > At 10:54 AM 9/13/03 -0700, Bud wrote: > >> (1) A living wage, based on my education, experience, and skill, >> and the cost of living in the area > > > That is assuming that the post is full time, many are not. In fact. > in my experience most are very much part time.   See above.   > >> (2) Medical, dental, and optical insurance, paid by the CHURCH, >> NOT by me > > > The same thing applies here. If you are full time, it should be > written in the contract, but it wouldn't do for a part time job.   In that case, the musician should pay half, and the church half.   > >> (3) A retirement plan that will allow me to live in something other >> than a refrigerator box on Skid Row when I retire > > > It might be that this could be done, but the organist would have to > pay into the scheme, I doubt that many one night practice and Sunday > Service Organists would qualify.   Again, base the percentage of who pays what on the REAL hours, not the church's fantasy. The Senior Warden at St. Matt's had the NERVE to tell me I WASN'T compensated for prep time ... I said, "well, how do you expect all this to happen WITHOUT prep time? and I'm CERTAINLY not donating it for FREE."   Um, here's the thing: the late Dr. Edwin Arthur Kraft had responsibility for ONE service on Sunday at Trinity Cathedral in Cleveland, Ohio: Solemn High Morning Prayer, with "The Communion" on the 1st Sunday of the month ... early on, he MIGHT have had Sunday Evensong, but that was gone by the time I came on the scene.   He was full-time.   I had responsibility for two Sunday Masses, Tuesday Evensong, and Holy Days. *I* was full-time, and there was MORE than 40 hours a week's worth of work to do.   > >> (4) An office with a computer and a SECRETARY > > > Why? If the Organist is just that, "The Organist", he/she doesn't > really need an office, computer or a Secretary. He/she needs an > organ, to play, and a space for Choir practice.   Um, a GREAT deal of my work was administrative ... typing service-lists and liturgy booklets, running off music WRITTEN on the computer, correspondence -- copyright permissions, correspondence concerning the pipe organ -- keeping the choirbooks up to date (an ENORMOUS task, considering that Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory, Communion, and often the Anthem and Motet had to be inserted in 15-20 books EVERY week), etc. etc. etc. ... a LOT of that COULD have been done by a secretary, freeing me up TO practice the organ.   I provided the office space at home; they provided the office equipment and supplies. That was fine; I could rest when I needed to, and write late at night without having to drive to the church.   > >> (5) A decent PIPE ORGAN > > > If they can afford it, - but this has been looked at in many other > threads on this list.   If they can afford a full-time priest and a full-time musician, they can afford a pipe organ. Period.   > >> (6) A choir that can SING and READ MUSIC, in which at least three >> singers on each part are present every Sunday > > > That's wishful thinking, - of course we would all like that, - but > you work with what you have, and if you are easy to work with, others > are likely to join the choir.   OK, that's fine; but don't demand big showy cathedral anthems of a choir that's 4-3-3-3 and volunteer, when they're all THERE, which was SELDOM.   > >> (7) a clergy-person with an IQ *exceeding* that of pond-scum, who >> can >> >> (a) assemble a declarative sentence (b) preach a 10-minute sermon >> and make his/her point (c) carry a tune, if the liturgy requires it >> (d) isn't threatened by another PROFESSIONAL on staff (e) TREATS >> me as a professional (f) didn't major in Ignorance and minor in >> Arrogance in seminar > > > That's one that we would all agree with, - but where are these > loving, kind, souls? It's just that some are better than others!   Mostly in heaven. Priests weren't so difficult when I was growing up.   > >> I'm not PRIMARILY in church music because of God, or my faith, or >> anything else; I happen to LIKE church music; I CHOOSE to make my >> LIVING doing church music; that does NOT, I repeat does NOT absolve >> the Church of competing in the larger marketplace for my skills. >> Nor does it absolve the Church of adhering to the values of social >> justice and a just wage that they trumpet from the pulpit on behalf >> of just about everybody BUT their OWN employees. > > > Bud, I say to you what I always taught my students, - "If you can't > stand the heat, - Get out of the kitchen." Find something better.   If I were younger and in good health, I WOULD. I would NOT advise ANYBODY to go into church music as a profession TODAY.   > >> And, no, I don't the quality of praise from my choir loft was any >> LESS acceptable to God than that of those who choose to give their >> skills away. > > > That may be true, but I think that many "Professional Choir members" > are in it for the money, - in a lot of cases.   And EVERYBODY says that as if it is wrong or bad ... my paid singers were mostly college students trying to make ends meet, like everybody = else.   As I often said to the Vestry (and the congregation):   "Sing, or pay somebody to do it FOR you; there IS no THIRD option of bitching because there's not an adequate choir. You pay the priest, the secretary, the pre-school director, the youth director, the gardeners, the cleaning service, and the bookkeeper because no one's willing to do THOSE jobs for free ... I don't see ANY difference with choir singing."   I LOVED Dr. Rose's story of replacing the Lay-Vicars with Vicars-Choral at Magdalen College ... he heard the old Lay-Vicars scoop and slide just ONE time too often (chuckle) ... they were gone inside of a year.   > >> Have I ever HAD all of that? Yeah, ONCE, in fifty years. And they >> fired me for having a heart attack at a time "inconvenient" to the >> Rector. > > > I hear that, but you were expecting it, weren't you?   Oh, of course. It just confirms my opinion that the MAJORITY of Christians are OUTSIDE the churches (grin). Despite repeated assurances that I would be provided for, I was NOT.   > >> I wash my hands of the whole business. I can make a better living >> staying home and doing music engraving. > > > Good luck in your new career, it may be the very thing for you. > > Bob Conway, > > Yep. And it's a LOT more FUN (chuckle). And I can write what I PLEASE, and take the engraving jobs I PLEASE.   Cheers,   Bud      
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: <ContraReed@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 16:15:37 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/03 4:07:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, opus1100@catoe.org writes:   << It never ceases to amaze me that the church hierarchy has no problem giving the plumber or carpenter the going rate for their services, but always quibbles with the organist and organ serviceman about how = outrageous they are because they are trying to charge enough to provide for a decent =   living, not an affluent living, just a decent respectful living. >>   And let's not even get into the discussion of how much the flowers/cake/decorations/photographer/etc. cost at a wedding (and expect = to be paid for before hand), and handing the musicians a check and requesting it be held for a = couple of weeks......  
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "Mike Franch" <mike6514@hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:43:33 -0500   Pardon my sounding disrespectful. I don't make a living in the church business, as I have a job that can afford the luxury of volunteering for a =   Sat Prayer Service, but you sound like you picked up a lot of baggage = along the way, and have not been able to shake it.   When I graduated college, my "destiny" was in Television. A different = beast alltogether and not related at all except for the fact that I trained = myself in an specific career path that didn't allow for an "out" in case things went South. During my short (six year career) time in television, I saw countless colleauges laid off with much emotion that it sapped your = strength for the week, as well as very hard working individuals who could never get =   full time work with benefits. I escaped part time and lay offs for 4 = years. When I was hired at my last TV job, they assured me that there would be no =   more layoffs, as the station just got purchased and the new owners got rid =   of 50% of the staff. (That should have been a RED FLAG). They could not afford to let anymore go, as they were at a skeleton crew already. Well, 4 =   months later, just shy of my 6 month union tenure, I was laid off after hearing a 1 hour speech about the economy. (It took me awhile to figure = out what he was telling me). I was very angry at the fact that since I have a college degree, I was still susceptible to being laid off.     After I was called back (only because someone else left) I was treated = like I suffered a near death experience with some terminal illness. People = seemed shocked to even see me back in the station. But, what was I to do when = they called me back? Be proud and say I don't need to make a living?   Well after a year and a half I decided to go into sales. (The ANTITHESIS = of my career path!!!) Why did I choose to be in a business where no formal training is required, and most people are there because they're not smart enough to have a REAL job? Because it pays a living wage, I can count on always being able to transfer my skills to another industry regardless of the economy, and the most important, you're always the first to know if business is going bad.   So, all of my superior college friends have abandoned me, and were = replaced with salespeople who always have something nice to say, but still ask me, "you left television for this?" Am I still angry? You BET! But, I HAD to move on to something more realistic for me.   So, what I'm trying to say is LOSE THE HIGHER THAN THOU ATTITUDE and find something that you can do on a daily basis. Yes, that means lowering your standards, but it also means MAKING A LIVING FOR YOURSELF AND YOUR FAMILY. =   It's a tough pill to swallow, believe me. I've been there and still wish I =   could be back in Television. But, it still doesn't the stability of what I =   do now, some 10 years later.   Mike Franch in Madison, WI   _________________________________________________________________ Need more e-mail storage? Get 10MB with Hotmail Extra Storage. http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=3Dfeatures/es    
(back) Subject: Announcement From: "Alicia Zeilenga" <azeilenga@theatreorgans.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:44:25 -0500   Hello, PipeChatters, The Organ/Harpsichord Division of the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign and the American Guild of Organists at UI are hosting two weekends to introduce the organ and the harpsichord to high school students this October. For more information, please see our AGO webpage http://www2.uiuc.edu/ro/agoui/ Requires PDF reader. If you know any one who might be interested, please pass the word on.   Thanks.   Alicia Zeilenga Sub-Dean AGO@UI "Santa Caecilia, ora pro nobis"      
(back) Subject: Re: seduced by a digital From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:30:18 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/2003 12:50:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, DNance@svdp-edu.org writes:   > And they're one of the few survivors who have gone way > out of the way to be able to support old hardware   But often their support of old hardware is to require you to update to current hardware. Rodgers, COS/Baldwin, Ahlborn-Galanti and yes verily = even the dreaded Johannus can support old stuff.   As to Allen's coming out of the box well done they all are that way these days. And most can be voiced---many without an expensive programmer and = laptop.   Use what you have to the best end possible.   Kind of like Love thy God and thy neighbor as thyself and all the rest is commentary.   dale in Florida    
(back) Subject: Re: some further points, and no, I'm NOT going to give up (chuckle) From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:36:02 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/2003 3:11:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, = Gfc234@aol.com writes:   > questions is the bass coupler that Allen puts on its organs. > > >   And COS and Ahlborn-Galanti and Johannus and........   dale in Florida    
(back) Subject: Godless Pagans? From: "james nerstheimer" <enigma1685@hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 16:40:17 -0500   "It's interesting how the pro-electronics crew always casts the pro-pipe-organ crew as godless pagans because we have *musical* = STANDARDS." , said Bud.   Eh? We pagans have more Gods than an anteater with an allergy could = sneeze at, hee hee! But, back to the subject, a digital instrument as a = temproary measure could prove its worth in the long run. As the newer instruments = can be voiced in somewhat the manner of the real thing, the musician and congregation--if indeed they are interested in that sort of thing--could work out what sort of tonal direction they would want to go when they do install the pipe organ. Unfortunately there are some pipe organs that are =   not that well voiced (which could be). How does everything blend on your own instruments? Are your mixtures a club or a crown? I am going to propose to my vestry some judicious digital additions to our instrument of =   37 ranks--only what could possibly fit in the space as real pipe ranks = until we have the funds to add them. After hearing what I heard last week as I spent four hours lost in digital delight, I'm convinced that no one will = be able to tell which ranks are which when we're done. I'm not going to tell =   anyone which ones are which--they're going to have to guess when they come =   to visit. :*) Who knows, I may myself end up as a purveyor of digital demons. I need to make a living from something other than shit jobs. = I've been trying for years to get an apprenticeship with a pipe organ builder = and none has given me a break. So then, whose fault is THAT? Sorry if I = offend anyone, but zeal for houses has been eating me up and I refuse to be devoured--unlike the cake before me which has no choice in the matter!   Jim, the Episcopagan   O):^)   _________________________________________________________________ Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3D3963    
(back) Subject: Pure Hammond - Mischief From: <Kzimmer0817@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:40:47 EDT   Posters,   I'm enjoying this "Here We Go Again" thread in spite of my = observation that most peoples' minds really are made up on the matter, and we posters = are really only venting our opinions. Perhaps there are a few nonposting = readers who can glean some facts within all of this to formulate their own = opinions.   In the discussion of appropriate organs for types of churches and music, he mentioned the use of the Hammond organ for Gospel style of music = so prevalent in the South. He justified his recommendation of this = particular [Hammond] electronic by stating that the sound was produced mechanically = by rotating tone wheels. So the Hammond organ is a legitimate instrument for which = there is a legitimate body of literature composed.   There's a bit of mischief in me right now that makes me want to capitalize on a little selfish notion that I might have caught Bud with = his own words. Truly, I don't mean this to represent any disrespect to Bud, but = in his acceptance of the Hammond organ as legitimate, I wonder if he's erred. . . =     Hasn't Hammond replaced its tone wheel method of tone production = with electronically produced tones - still using the drawbars as the method of control? IOW, the modern Hammond is no longer using electronics simply to = amplify a mechanically produced sound, but the entire Hammond sound is generated electronically. Perhaps I'm wrong, I'm sure there are those who can = correct me.   If this is true, and we follow the same logic as we've been using = in this thread, then we must condemn the use of these newer Hammonds on the = same grounds. We must require churches to purchase the older Hammonds (perhaps = with the two "starter switches") in order to be genuine and not fake.   O well, let's all have some clean fun and debate. Keith    
(back) Subject: Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:47:10 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/2003 5:42:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Kzimmer0817@aol.com writes:   > the modern Hammond is no longer using electronics simply to amplify a > mechanically produced sound, but the entire Hammond sound is generated > electronically. Perhaps I'm wrong, I'm sure there are those who can = correct   all digital all the time!!!!!! since the US Hammond closed NO MORE TONE WHEELS....   But BIG business in used ones....   dale in Florida    
(back) Subject: Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief From: <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 14:56:16 -0700   And Hammond purists on the HamTech list do exactly THAT (chuckle). They are having NONE of the electronic synthesizers. And, having played (gasp!) a digital Hammond-Suzuki, I can attest to the fact that they DONT'T sound like a classic tonewheeler, despite all the vibrato and key-click and attack adjustments possible.   A cherry B-3 tonewheeler will fetch MORE today in TODAY'S dollars than it cost NEW in 1950s dollars (!). Check 'em out on e-bay or The Church Organ Trader or the Theatre Organ Classifieds. They're the ONLY electro-mechanical organ-like instrument that APPRECIATE in value.   The ONLY reason SOME rock bands are accepting the digital substitute is that they're lighter and more portable than the tonewheelers.   Cheers,   Bud   Kzimmer0817@aol.com wrote: > Posters, > > I'm enjoying this "Here We Go Again" thread in spite of my > observation that most peoples' minds really are made up on the matter, > and we posters are really only venting our opinions. Perhaps there are > a few nonposting readers who can glean some facts within all of this to > formulate their own opinions. > > In the discussion of appropriate organs for types of churches and =   > music, he mentioned the use of the Hammond organ for Gospel style of > music so prevalent in the South. He justified his recommendation of > this particular [Hammond] electronic by stating that the sound was > produced mechanically by rotating tone wheels. So the Hammond organ is > a legitimate instrument for which there is a legitimate body of > literature composed. > > There's a bit of mischief in me right now that makes me want to > capitalize on a little selfish notion that I might have caught Bud with > his own words. Truly, I don't mean this to represent any disrespect to > Bud, but in his acceptance of the Hammond organ as legitimate, I wonder > if he's erred. . . > > Hasn't Hammond replaced its tone wheel method of tone production > with electronically produced tones - still using the drawbars as the > method of control? IOW, the modern Hammond is no longer using > electronics simply to amplify a mechanically produced sound, but the > entire Hammond sound is generated electronically. Perhaps I'm wrong, > I'm sure there are those who can correct me. > > If this is true, and we follow the same logic as we've been using =   > in this thread, then we must condemn the use of these newer Hammonds on > the same grounds. We must require churches to purchase the older > Hammonds (perhaps with the two "starter switches") in order to be > genuine and not fake. > > O well, let's all have some clean fun and debate. > Keith        
(back) Subject: Remembering an AGO meeting From: "Stephen Best" <sbest@borg.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:55:04 -0400   The digital vs. pipe debate will never end -- but James's thought recalled a recent AGO meeting that was revealing. We went to a large Catholic church to hear a new Rodger digital/pipe combination. As part of the program, we had a quiz: one of our members played various excerpts on individual stops. We sat with paper scorecard in hand, having only to note whether the example was played on electronics or pipes. There must have been about 35 people present, virtually all of whom were organists. JUST ONE person got it all correct! A whole lot missed half. Kind of frightening to those of us (myself included) who really do prefer pipes.   Steve Best in Utica, NY   james nerstheimer wrote:   > After hearing what I heard last week as I spent four hours lost in > digital delight, I'm convinced that no one will be able to tell which > ranks are which when we're done. I'm not going to tell anyone which > ones are which--they're going to have to guess when they come to visit. =          
(back) Subject: Re: Pure Hammond - Mischief From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:23:20 EDT   In a message dated 9/13/2003 4:42:42 PM Central Daylight Time, Kzimmer0817@aol.com writes: Hasn't Hammond replaced its tone wheel method of tone production with electronically produced tones Yes, Hammond was bought by Suzuki and is now producing junk. The guts of = the instrument are now a computer-its close to the real thing-but not quite. = The casework is also VERY poor compared to the original thing. The good = hammonds are b3's c3's and a100s-and there is a genre of music (jazz organ) that requires these instruments-and NO substitutes.   Gregory Ceurvorst M.M. Organ Performance Northwestern University Director of Music and Organist St. Peter's U.C.C. Frankfort, IL 847.332.2788 home 708.243.2549 mobile gfc234@aol.com    
(back) Subject: 1 manual AGP specs? From: <rkinner@fuse.net> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:37:49 -0400   I've midified a used pedalboard for use under a Yamaha keyboard. I have = Barne's book, "The Contemporary American Organ," which gives the AGO = dimensions for a three-manual console, but what about a 1-manual? Should = I go by the great, the choir, or something else? In other words... What = should be the vertical distance from top of the middle E pedal to the = surface of the keyboard? And what is the horizontal distance from the = front of the middle D# pedal to the front edge of the keyboard?   Thanks, Bob   Where your treasures lie, there will your heart be also. Matthew 6:21    
(back) Subject: Re: 1 manual AGP specs? From: <Gfc234@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:42:48 EDT   if i were you i would go to your favorite organ and take your own measurments. if you don't feel like doing that, use the ago measurments = for the great-unless you want one manual to be in your lap...   Gregory Ceurvorst M.M. Organ Performance Northwestern University Director of Music and Organist St. Peter's U.C.C. Frankfort, IL 847.332.2788 home 708.243.2549 mobile gfc234@aol.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Out of the closet! From: "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:39:38 -0500   At 03:43 PM 9/13/03 -0500, you wrote: >When I graduated college, my "destiny" was in Television. A different >beast alltogether and not related at all except for the fact that I >trained myself in an specific career path that didn't allow for an "out" >in case things went South.   I can certainly relate to Mike's story. I managed to survive 20 years at a =   television station only because I had just enough seniority to avoid the first big cut. Fortunately for the bulk of my career the company preferred =   buying out the higher seniority employees to get rid of the folks with the =   most vacation weeks. During this time I stayed at the bottom of the seniority list and never got real good choices for vacation days, worked all the holidays...did get Christmas and Thanksgiving off one year because =   we were walking the picket line during that period. Saw lots of good folks =   go....and those of us left compelled to make up the difference. TV is certainly not the place to look for career stability. It was not always so....but that was before automation and big conglomerates with their hoardes of bean counters came on the scene,   jch