PipeChat Digest #4461 - Wednesday, April 28, 2004
 
Re: should fraudulent and unethical companies bare it all?
  by "T.Desiree' Hines" <nicemusica@yahoo.com>
Layout considerations.  Was: should fraudulent and unethical companies.  
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net>
leather and fraudulent and unethical companies
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net>
Swingin' Pipe Organs
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
Re: Swingin' Pipe Organs
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Swingin' Pipe Organs
  by "Robert Ehrhardt" <r_ehrh@bellsouth.net>
Re: Handel's Messiah
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Sacrifical music
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Sacrifical Sacrificing Colin
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Shady Pipe Organ Folks
  by "Charlie Lester" <crlester@137.com>
Swingin' pipes
  by "Charlie Lester" <crlester@137.com>
Re: Shady Pipe Organ Folks
  by <Swedish5702@aol.com>
RE: Swingin' pipes
  by "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu>
 

(back) Subject: Re: should fraudulent and unethical companies bare it all? From: "T.Desiree' Hines" <nicemusica@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 08:29:38 -0700 (PDT)   Paul you said this very eloquently! I agree whole-heartedly. This is EXACTLY what this company did...poorly = designd the organ to where no one over 200 LBS can get in to tune or work = on it. And they shoved 30 pounds of s&&& into a 3 pound box. Im sorry, I = still think they have done unethical work. Its a pipe organ folks...a PIPE ORGAN. And in my opinion, you don't take = cheap ways out looking at the fact that you have to buy milk and bread = tomorrow. Do one job, really well, and move on to the next...that keeps = you in business. Repairing things little by little and making excuses as = to polution in a city ruining leather, parking thats totally free and off = street, and all other blahzay stuff aside, still, if some of the organ = builders saw the work that was done (or not done) they would be = embarrassed. You dont take a pipe...and glue...a piece of LEATHER TO IT to = keep it from wiggling in a toeboard thats too damned big. Ah, h$$$. I give = up. LOL. I dunno...my teachers have just always taught me that organs are = delicate and special and such harsh treatment ot them is just uncalled = for. Desiree'   Paul Valtos <chercapa@enter.net> wrote: Dear Andy et al, One of the most surprising things I discovered when working around pipe organs was the absence of 'Value engineering." That is when the = product is built so that you have to remove a million parts to replace a ten cent item. American auto engineers used to be famous in their ability to build cars where it was relatively easy to work on the moving parts. Not anymore but SAE seems to have forgotten that principle. Organ builders never had = it. I assume, not having seen the innards of new builds that it is still done the old way. Why is an organ designed in such a way where it is darn near impossible to tune it. Why is an organ designed in a way that you need to remove the entire top of a reservoir or air chamber to repair a crack? = Being an Aero Engineer, I have seen more crazy designs in organs that do not = make sense except to fatten the wallets of the builder or his successor. If the pipe organ manufacturers want to stay in business, they will have to go = the modular route and, except for those orgnaizations with the gazillions of money, forget the custom innards of pipe organs. If the footprint can't handle all the wind supply, then go vertically rather than shoehorn ten pounds of **** in a 5 pound box. I believe that they do that in Europe = from what I see of designs in the Blue Book of Organs. Paul                                 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Lawrence" To: "PipeChat"   Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:51 AM Subject: RE: should fraudulent and unethical companies bare it all?     > This is a good discussion. I'm glad to hear someone playing devils advocate > here. It _does_ sound like there have been some questionable things = going > on. Mainly, taking advantage of an unknowledgeable customer. But I don't > really see anything inherently wrong with most of what has been done, except > it sounds like there may have been dishonesty about what was done and > therefore prices. The thing is, if money grew on trees we would restore > every organ from top to bottom as soon as it started showing signs of = wear > and tear. However, money does not grow on trees and therefore sometimes you > have to do things to get by and sometimes you can put off a restoration for > many years quite inexpensively. The problem is when you do things that are > irreversible, like using modern "yellow" glue where animal glues ought = to be > used, etc. And one must not charge as much money for a temporary repair as > a permanent one! > > For example, I am guilty of putting duct tape between opened sponsils on old > tracker organs to stop a cipher. A cheap, temporary repair? Sure. But the > alternative? Taking the whole friggin organ apart and retabling the chest. > If you have to put on a new piece of duct tape every time you tune for = 30 > years, it possibly could still be cheaper than retabling. I'm not saying > this is always the way to go. But should always be a consideration. > Depends on many variables, such as the condition of the rest of the = organ, > whether the organ fits the musical needs of the church and may get replaced > someday, etc. But I sure don't charge $20,000 for a piece of duct tape, or > call it a restoration. > > To touch closer to home, if I am restoring an organ and money is tight = (or > even if it isn't... just because money isn't tight doesn't mean you = should > go throwing it around) and the bellows isn't too buried, and it looks = like > it might last 3 more years, I suggest to the congregation to wait. Of > course, if you have to remove half the organ to get to it, better do it > during the restoration. > > I do not really see anything wrong with leather patches on the feet of pipes > to adapt them to a toeboard, if done carefully. Theoretically should = save > money over a new toeboard. Especially if the toeboard is not easily removed > from the chest. If the toeboards are not separate, you would have to = take > the whole chest back to the shop to make the change. BIG BUCKS! Problem is > when you cut a corner, but charge as much money as if you didn't cut the > corner, and don't inform the church of what you are doing. Of course, = tis a > shame that so many nice strings were turned into screeching upperwork, = but > hey, everyone was doing it. (upperwork is good, but not the screeching > kind). > > Over and over I see things from both sides, and both sides are often a > little bit right. As the "devils advocate" said (sorry, I've forgotten who > you are), it sounds like we could have some questionable practices going on > here. The many thousands of dollar releathering job does sound suspicious! > But then... did the pouchboards need work? Replacement? I have built new > replacement skinner pouchboards and pitman rails (old ones were water > damaged), and let me tell you, when doing them in small batches from > measurements of old ones (as opposed to a factory mass-production > situation), you get into the 5 digits fast! Holy cow, that was a pain in > the neck. Etc, etc. Really does depend on what was agreed upon, and what > damage was discovered. > > I just can't help but be another devils advocate because so many times I see > an organ replaced for gazillions of dollars because they got a quote of > gazillions of dollars to have the old one fully restored, when a little > leather here and there and other minor repairs could have put off the > restoration another 20 years. And so the people in the church will > say "organs are SO expensive to maintain!!" and soon everyone gives up = on > the idea that pipe organs have any kind of longevity. But you do the > latter, and you get labeled unethical by the guy who _does_ restore it = 20 > years later. Can't win! > > Don't get me wrong, Desiree, I'm sort of getting on a general soapbox, = not > so much reacting to your specific situation. I really do think you have > identified a problem here, mainly because it sounds like temporary = repairs > have been made, for the cost of real restoration. If this is _truly_ the > case, you have an unethical organ technician. As someone said, if he did in > the contract what he said he would do, he did nothing illegal. However, = I > think it could still be construed as unethical (maybe not in the legal > sense) even if the church agreed, if they were not properly informed of > their options and what they were really getting. It is this sort of > technician that ultimately leads to making the electronic organ saleman rich. > > Andy > > > A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service > PO Box 111 > Burlington, VT 05402 > (802)578-3936 > Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com > "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     --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
(back) Subject: Layout considerations. Was: should fraudulent and unethical companies. . . From: "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:41:03 -0500   Paul Valtos wrote:   > One of the most surprising things I discovered when working around > pipe organs was the absence of 'Value engineering." That is when the > = product is built so that you have to remove a million parts to > replace a ten cent item.   <snip>   > Organ builders never had it. I assume, not having seen the innards of > = new builds that it is still done the old way. Why is an organ > designed in such a way where it is darn near impossible to tune it. > = Why is an organ designed in a way that you need to remove the entire > = top of a reservoir or air chamber to repair a crack?   OK.   I'm going to take issue with this!   As early as the turn of the last Century, Basil Austin of Austin Organs of Connecticut (no, I have NO connection with that company -just admire good work when I see it!) designed an organ construction method to make all operating parts readily accessible by opening a small door and going inside. You could even check out the operation on the wind this way!   Most builders I know (and ourselves included) work VERY hard to lay out organs that are easy to service. I think the days of "shoe-horning" instruments into impossible circumstances are done. I keep getting bigger as I age (not gracefully, BTW!) and know that if *moi* is going to tune them, then there has to be space for *moi*.   Check out some of our recent installations on our web page. The URL is listed below.   Faithfully,   G.A.   -- Richard Schneider, PRES/CEO <>< Schneider Pipe Organs, Inc. 41-43 Johnston St./P.O. Box 137 Kenney, IL 61749-0137 (217) 944-2454 VOX (877) 944-2454 TOLL-FREE (217) 944-2527 FAX arpschneider@starband.net Home Office EMAIL arp@schneiderpipeorgans.com SHOP EMAIL http://www.schneiderpipeorgans.com URL ADDRESS  
(back) Subject: leather and fraudulent and unethical companies From: "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:56:28 -0500   T. Desire=E9 Hines wrote: =20 > Do one job, really well, and move on to the next...that keeps you in > = business.=20   I concur, provided you can get a church to see it that way. It's RARE th= at they will. =20   <snip>   > making excuses as to polution in a city ruining leather   The information regarding problems with bad leather is well-documented. Even country churches had leather that failed very early after being re-done in the 1970's and 1980's.   That said, from the other descriptions I've read, it DOES sound as though much of the work done on your organ is highly questionable.   Faithfully,   G.A.   --=20 Richard Schneider, PRES/CEO <>< Schneider Pipe Organs, Inc. 41-43 Johnston St./P.O. Box 137 Kenney, IL 61749-0137 (217) 944-2454 VOX (877) 944-2454 TOLL-FREE (217) 944-2527 FAX arpschneider@starband.net Home Office EMAIL arp@schneiderpipeorgans.com SHOP EMAIL http://www.schneiderpipeorgans.com URL ADDRESS  
(back) Subject: Swingin' Pipe Organs From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:14:29 EDT   Stan Krider wrote: >I work for a pipe organ company, yet I am a fan of the electronic instruments >when they better suit the situation in which the church finds itself. = Except >for the famous Fats Waller, no (I may be wrong, however) church organist = can >make pipes swing the way the Hammond organ can.   Trust me, it can be done....and it is done weekly in a few churches, and surprisingly, there are a couple of white organists who do it, too! (I = speak from first hand experience LOL) However, it helps when you've got the right = kind of instrument on which to play--a neo-baroque squawk box doesn't quite cut = it, but a Romantic slushophone or anything with some theatre organ stops will = work just fine, thank you very much.   Monty Bennett Friendship Missionary Baptist Church Charlotte, NC    
(back) Subject: Re: Swingin' Pipe Organs From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:20:34 -0400   On 4/28/04 12:14 PM, "RMB10@aol.com" <RMB10@aol.com> wrote:   > Trust me, it can be done....and it is done weekly in a few churches, and > surprisingly, there are a couple of white organists who do it, too!   Monty, you know very well that some of us were awaiting your testimony!   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: Swingin' Pipe Organs From: "Robert Ehrhardt" <r_ehrh@bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:39:53 -0400   And give a listen to Wayne Marshall's CD of Gershwin on the Meyerson Fisk!   > > From: RMB10@aol.com > Date: 2004/04/28 Wed PM 12:14:29 EDT > To: pipechat@pipechat.org > Subject: Swingin' Pipe Organs > > Stan Krider wrote: > >I work for a pipe organ company, yet I am a fan of the electronic > instruments > >when they better suit the situation in which the church finds itself. = Except > >for the famous Fats Waller, no (I may be wrong, however) church = organist can > >make pipes swing the way the Hammond organ can. > > Trust me, it can be done....and it is done weekly in a few churches, and =   > surprisingly, there are a couple of white organists who do it, too! (I = speak from > first hand experience LOL) However, it helps when you've got the right = kind > of instrument on which to play--a neo-baroque squawk box doesn't quite = cut it, > but a Romantic slushophone or anything with some theatre organ stops = will work > just fine, thank you very much. > > Monty Bennett > Friendship Missionary Baptist Church > Charlotte, NC > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Handel's Messiah From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:34:07 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   Well this should amuse Blair and everyone!   During my student days, I made a memorable impression on my Harmony & Counterpoint tutor the first day.   "Write something in the style of Bach!"   I responded with, "Or Handel perhaps?"   He snarled, "Handel! Handel! He was little more than a musical prostitute who would do anything for position, money or royal favour!"   "Oh!" I replied, "Well there are lots of people like that. I suppose some fool will write something for the opening of the Humber Bridge!"   His eyes narrowed as he replied, "Well, as a matter of fact, I am doing just that! Get out!"   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- Blair Anderson <bda@shaw.ca> wrote: > Handel was a deeply religious and spiritual man, > generous with his sometimes > meagre resources. It is quoted that Handel didn't > care where "Messiah" was > performed was long as the performances raised money > for charities and > charitable purposes.       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover  
(back) Subject: Sacrifical music From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:33:23 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   All this talk about sacrifice....I'm starting to feel ill in a medieval sort of way....bad theology.   If I play good music from time to time, then it is usually the result of some "suffering" (I hate practising!)   For me, practise is a conscious decision....call it discipline....but I never think of it as sacrificial.   I can never remember a time when I wanted to sacrifice myself musically. It's just not in my nature, I'm afraid. Rather, I have simply shared whatever talent I may have and rejoiced in it gladly.   It may seem slightly perverse, but I recall two people weeping at my....if I say so myself....rather nice performance of the Vierne "Berceuse."   What was my reaction?   I just snickered to myself and thought, "Got to ya!"   Maybe I'm just evil.......   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK           --- Randolph Runyon <runyonr@muohio.edu> wrote: > on 4/26/04 4:06 PM, Alan Freed at > acfreed0904@earthlink.net wrote: > > > I think the only thing we can sacrifice is something > that is ours in the > first place (or at least something of which we have > stewardship). > > > This is it! It's brilliant. It's the ultimate > theological argument......   > Worship must > be "an acceptable sacrifice" (is that in the Bible > or just in > Bunyan?--dunno).     __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover  
(back) Subject: Re: Sacrifical Sacrificing Colin From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 13:49:02 -0400   On 4/28/04 1:33 PM, "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:   > Hello, > > All this talk about sacrifice....I'm starting to feel ill in a medieval = sort > of way....bad theology. > > If I play good music from time to time, then it is usually the result of = some > "suffering" (I hate practising!) > > For me, practise is a conscious decision....call it discipline....but I = never > think of it as sacrificial.   I think that's fine. I don't think "sacrifice" either. Maybe "offering" = is a better word in our time. > > I can never remember a time when I wanted to sacrifice myself musically. = It's > just not in my nature, I'm afraid. Rather, I have simply shared whatever > talent I may have and rejoiced in it gladly. > > It may seem slightly perverse, but I recall two people weeping at = my....if I > say so myself....rather nice performance of the Vierne "Berceuse." > > What was my reaction? > > I just snickered to myself and thought, "Got to ya!" > > Maybe I'm just evil.......   Well, partly, anyway. Maybe MORE than partly. EYE certainly am. Why should YOU be so morally superior? Maybe the more evil I am the more I SHOULD think "sacrifice."   Alan (who thinks you've imbibed too much Brit Puritanism against your own better judgment--as which of us has not?)        
(back) Subject: Shady Pipe Organ Folks From: "Charlie Lester" <crlester@137.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:50:08 -0700   In defense of Desir=E9e [not that she needs defending, of course!], I point to the experience my church had back in the 1960s when they set about purchasing a new pipe organ. They were, essentially, HAD by a swindler.   No, they were not stupid, or naive, or devoid of good business practice. The one thing they DID lack -- as does, what, 99% of humanity?, was knowledge of pipe organs - how they work, what they cost, what's involved in getting them repaired, etc. There is only so much information a church committee can learn in the process of getting a pipe organ. Especially in instances where they have never had one before, and their organist is also not trained on or experienced with them.   Most of the time, even in situations where there ARE learned people on the committee, churches are at the mercy of organ builders and they do go in with a sense, an expectation, that the builder they choose will be honest and forthright. Sad to say, it does not always happen that way. Some organ builders are all too ready to do little work, put in little material, and charge big money.   In my situation, the church selected -- wisely, they thought -- the lowest bidder on a pipe organ of 2 manuals and 28 ranks. His bid for the instrument was about $17,000. Keep in mind this was 40 years ago. (The highest bid, by a considerable margin, had come from =C6olian-Skinner btw, who bid about $37,000 and who presumed to inform the church that the specification the church provided for them to bid on was "inappropriate," so they tendered their bid based on a completely revised specification.)   The church gave the organ builder about half the money up-front to purchase pipes and build the console. They did not have any misgivings about this since he had represented himself as a small, local, independent organ builder who built them one at a time, so he was not able to maintain a large reserve of funds. This seemed to make sense to them -- the "starving artisan" syndrome, they smiled condescendingly.   Then, a few months later, he came to them and apologetically asked if it would be possible to get the rest of the funds -- seems a shipment of pipes had come from Germany (Durst) and were sitting in the L.A.Harbor. Because of some unforeseen financial calamity he did not had the cash in hand to pick up the pipes which had been shipped C.O.D.   So, once again, the church kindly came to the man's rescue, feeling good about helping out a local artist and feeling very optimistic that their new pipe organ soon would be installed.   What they did not know was that the man actually was a crook, and that no sooner had they given him the money than he vanished. They ended up spending quite a lot of additional money with lawyers, investigators, organ consultants, etc., and had to start all over with another builder. This time they wisely chose Justin Kramer who did the best he could under the severe financial constraints: The pipe organ that they ended up getting was a greatly reduced instrument, a truly bare-bones (14-rank) instrument.   The whole affair is a long, dramatic, plot-twisted story that would make an eye-bugging movie of the week. I won't belabor all the details here. Suffice it to say that the church ended up very much holding the bag -- paying, in the end, nearly double what they had originally agreed to pay, and getting about half the instrument they had hoped for.   -ooOoo-   More recently, another church with whom I am very familiar had their modest 2-manual organ enlarged. For better or worse, they chose a certain high-profile builder to do the work.   Here's what they got, to the best of my recollection:   A set of 16-foot "flower pot" Principal pipes tacked up on the wall on either side of the chamber. A new 3-manual console. Some releathering & recovering of chests and reservoirs, and relocation of the existing Great into an exposed position along with a new III-Mixture [for a total of about 10 ranks I believe]. No new work was added to the tiny Swell Organ of about 5 or 6 ranks, which is obviously all but useless for playing any type of literature. The 3rd manual, anachronistic Positif tinklewerk if you go by the imaginary stop names, is console-only and likely will never actually go in. Probably just as well.   Here's what they paid: $260,000.00 and change.   Now, perhaps I am blissfully unaware of what stuff costs these days, but that seems to me to be kinda high for what they got, even factoring in the high cost of 12 principal pipes.   Especially when the organbuilder was, apparently, totally uninformed -- or completely unsympathetic with -- the overall nature of the musical worship of the congregation. I say that because the organ they got is so far removed from what they do, musically, that either it was willfully made that way, or the builder just didn't know. Or care.   -ooOoo-   I know that these kinds of discussions make organ builders and service people uncomfortable because they fear that they're all getting broadbrushed. That's not the case. Certainly, and my experience over the years has borne this out, the vast majority of them ARE honest -- to a fault, often doing work and providing materials that they do not charge for -- and go out of their way to accommodate fussy, quirky organists and clueless committees. (Or worse, committees with the one person who went to the library and checkout Audsley's hundred pounds of organ verbiage and is thus an expert having consumed every page thereof.)   The point is that, yes, churches do have an obligation to become educated, as much as possible, about what they are getting into. At the same time, organ builders and service people have an obligation to provide honest work at a fair price. The suggestion was made, "If the church and the builder agreed to a sum of a million dollars, then no fraud was committed." Perhaps not, by the letter of the law. But certainly, no organbuilder with a conscience could charge that kind of money for revoicing a few ranks of pipes. Just because they COULD get away with it doesn't mean they SHOULD. Or that most of them would even consider doing so.   ~ C    
(back) Subject: Swingin' pipes From: "Charlie Lester" <crlester@137.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:59:59 -0700   =3D-> I work for a pipe organ company, yet I am a fan of the electronic instruments when they better suit the situation in which the church finds itself. Except for the famous Fats Waller, no (I may be wrong, however) church organist can make pipes swing the way the Hammond organ can. <-=3D     Yes, with all due respect, the writer is quite wrong in this regard. I do it every Sunday. So does Monty Bennett. And a few others who would never admit to it in polite company!   n.b., I believe the writer may have made the mistake of assuming that because Desir=E9e is African-American, she is a gospel-organist. I don't believe that is the case! Any more than when people assume that I, a "regulation issue" white guy, play only classical music on a pipe organ. I can do gospel [on Hammond OR pipes] as well as any organist, of any "flava," if you want to know the truth about it.   ~ C    
(back) Subject: Re: Shady Pipe Organ Folks From: <Swedish5702@aol.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:06:01 EDT   Hello Posters:   Your email reminds me just why so many congregations are going with = digital instruments over pipes.   I recall an ad in Diapason many years ago that said: IF IT DOESN'T HAVE PIPES, IT ISN'T AN ORGAN! LOL!   My grandparents church had a beautiful EM Skinner from 1925 that a = company unnamed now out of business rebuilt to their specs and not of the = organists and that beautiful Skinner lost its Flugelhorn...Vox Humana...French Horn and some lovely strings for pure poor replacements and additions. Shame on = them for doing so. I am happy they are out of business so they can't take advantage = of anymore congregations.   Best, Craig Johnson Lock Haven, Pa.    
(back) Subject: RE: Swingin' pipes From: "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 13:10:26 -0500   As a witness to the extraordinary order of worship at Charlie's church, = I'll vouch for his exceptional skills in the gospel realm. Wish I could = go every week! =20   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of = Charlie Lester Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:00 PM To: PipeChat Subject: Swingin' pipes   =3D-> I work for a pipe organ company, yet I am a fan of the=20 electronic instruments when they better suit the situation=20 in which the church finds itself. Except for the famous Fats=20 Waller, no (I may be wrong, however) church organist can=20 make pipes swing the way the Hammond organ can. <-=3D     Yes, with all due respect, the writer is quite wrong in this=20 regard. I do it every Sunday. So does Monty Bennett. And a=20 few others who would never admit to it in polite company!   n.b., I believe the writer may have made the mistake of=20 assuming that because Desir=E9e is African-American, she is a=20 gospel-organist. I don't believe that is the case! Any more=20 than when people assume that I, a "regulation issue" white=20 guy, play only classical music on a pipe organ. I can do=20 gospel [on Hammond OR pipes] as well as any organist, of any=20 "flava," if you want to know the truth about it.   ~ C   "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