PipeChat Digest #4705 - Friday, August 20, 2004
 
Allen for sale on Ebay
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #4704 - 08/20/04
  by "Phil Stimmel" <pca@sover.net>
Re: why there are no organists
  by "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net>
Re: toe levers - tiraripieno (tiratutti?)
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
RE: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay
  by "Milo R. Shepherd" <mrstwin2@cox.net>
Re: why there are no organists
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: electronic organs
  by "Paul Valtos" <chercapa@enter.net>
Re: toe levers - tiraripieno (tiratutti?)
  by "John Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net>
USA Nat'l Anthem at Olympics
  by "Patricia/Thomas Gregory" <tgregory@speeddial.net>
Re: USA Nat'l Anthem at Olympics
  by "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com>
Charlotte County FL
  by "Judy A. Ollikkala" <71431.2534@compuserve.com>
 

(back) Subject: Allen for sale on Ebay From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:47:32 EDT   >_http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3D64429&item=3D374= 2763793 &rd=3D1_ (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3D64429&item=3D3742= 763793&rd=3D1)   There are real pipes shown, but above the console there are Conn pipe speakers shown. I wonder if that residence also has a pipe organ of some = sort or if they are there just as facade pipes. The description calls the organ the =   "latest technology" but having played some custom Allen organs that looked = just like it, I would venture a guess that it is MOS I or MOS II technology, because there are console "hints" that can age it as being at least = pre-MDS, and most likely pre-ADC era. Monty Bennett  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #4704 - 08/20/04 From: "Phil Stimmel" <pca@sover.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:55:30 -0400   Be very, very cautious around this seller. He knows absolutely nothing about classical organs, will promise you the moon, and cannot deliver. I was burned!   ----- Original Message ----- From: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 5:01 AM Subject: PipeChat Digest #4704 - 08/20/04     > PipeChat Digest #4704 - Friday, August 20, 2004 > > Re: toe levers - tiraripieno (tiratutti?) > by "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net> > Big 4-Manual Allen on eBay [x-posted] > by "Charlie Lester" <crl@137.com> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: toe levers - tiraripieno (tiratutti?) > From: "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net> > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:43:02 -0600 > > Hello, Collin: > > I have a curiosity question for you. > > Many of the English organs were built with a stop list > that included multiple diapasons, such as 8' Diapason-I, > 8' Diapason-II, etc. > > Can you give me a verbal description of how these > diapasons are normally voiced and scaled to build > up the diapason chorus? > > Do these stops carry in more than one timbre all > the way up through mixtures, or is this a way to > provide a broader-scaled chorus at the 8-foot > pitch only? > > Appreciatively, > F. Richard Burt > Dorian Organs > > > . > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Big 4-Manual Allen on eBay [x-posted] > From: "Charlie Lester" <crl@137.com> > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:47:45 -0700 > > Looks like quite a rig. Anyone know whose this is/was?? Is in the Albany > NY area. > > SEE: > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3D64429&item=3D37427= 63793 &rd=3D1 > > > ~ > C > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > End of PipeChat Digest > > > ****************************************************************** > "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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org>      
(back) Subject: Re: why there are no organists From: "Margo Dillard" <dillardm@airmail.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:01:14 -0500   Not getting rich is one thing - but the 30K job is obviously full time - and would be so time consuming as to prevent other employment beyond very miminal part time work. Read the job description again. Also, this is obviously a church that can afford to pay - they make reference to paid choir members. In some parts of the country 30K would be a reasonable lower! middle class income. But in San Diego?? You would be lucky to afford Govt. Subsidized housing.   Shelley Culver wrote: > I guess I fail to see what this proves. But maybe I missed the point = entirely. > > For part-time jobs, I didn't see anything too horrible. There was one = that mentioned a starting salary of $30,000. Even if that's full time, = what so wrong with that? A beginning teacher is lucky to make that much! > > I continue to say that if you're looking to get rich, church music is = not the place for you. You should have picked a different major in = college. And I hope that never changes for me. I would like to think that = I'd play for free (horrors!) if a church approached me and didn't have = enough money to pay a musician, but wanted music in their worship service. = Some of us aren't in it to get rich, some of us are in it for the = ministry. > > Respectfully, > Shelley > > >>>>quilisma@cox.net 08/19/04 12:02 PM >>> >>> > Here is a sampling of jobs posted on the San Diego AGO website. Note the =   > duties, hours per week, and the salaries (if given). > > Apparently prep time isn't taken into consideration. > > Cheers, > > Bud > >big snip   -- Dr. Margo Dillard Organist, FUMC, Lewisville, TX Musical Feast Choral Society Dillard Piano & Organ Studio    
(back) Subject: Re: toe levers - tiraripieno (tiratutti?) From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:02:55 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   The English love of first and second Diapason ranks was, I believe, a response to the Schulze phenomenon of the 1850's-60's.   Schulze had arrived in the UK with his huge German romantic scaling, open foot voicing, low cut-ups and relatively low wind pressures.......a BIG sound, but a bit slow of speech.   This sound totally transformed organ-building in the north of England especially, but was also a source of inspiration for Lewis (Southwark Cathedral etc)   So far so good, but of course, the big scale, low pressure approach was not really an appropriate sound for Anglican worship, and in any event, the UK builders other than Lewis, simply could not get to grips with the German master's style of voicing, and did not understand it.   William Hill (along with Elliot) had tried various ways of getting more power out of choruses, and there was the celebrated example of York Minster, where multiple 8ft and 4ft Diapasons had been included in the design. (I believe there were a staggering 10 X 4ft Principals on the Great!!!!!!)   The concept was a complete flop.   It was also done at St Bavo, Haarlem, where the 8ft Hoofdwerk Principal has two ranks.   Hill, groping in the dark, enlarged his scales, and found greater success in the move towards the "heroic" romantic sound.   Others climbed on the band-wagon, and the "Schulze style" which so influenced northern organ builders, was simply a normal English Diapason of much wider scale and greater power, with normal (nicked, closed foot) voicing methods.   So whilst there is no real definitive answer, I think it would be fair to suggest that the first diapason is usually a substantial sound of normal diapason tone added to the the smaller scales of the remaining chorus-work.   Brindley & Foster, who worked closely with Schulze (they shared workmen/voicers etc) used identical scaling and voicing treatment for both the second diapason and the Choir Gamba (enclosed).....that tells you that the voicing was slightly stringy and not overloud. His first diapasons were very substantial.   By and large, English chorus-work (where it existed) was essentially based on the second diapason, with the large scaled first diapason adding an appropriate flood of sound for accompaniment purposes......in other words, a seperate addition to the sound.   Of course, once the Edwardian period began, and Arthur Harrison came under the influence of Lt.Col George-Dixon, then not only did the scales increase further, the wind pressures rose and the top lips were leathered.....but only for the first diapason. It is a type of diapason familiar to any cinema/theatre organ, and we tend to avoid using them on Arthur Harrison organs, as they do not blend well.   As regards scales, I don't have these to hand immediately, but I could no doubt research it for you, given a little time.   However, I would suggest that the scaling for a first diapason was entirely normal, and the voicing treatment also quite normal, but perhaps two or three notes larger in scale. (No builder ever copied the enormity of Schulze's scales.....2.25 inches at middle C, open foot and LOUD)   Certainly, no one other than Lewis, ever understood or utilised the Schulze "straight line" scaling methods he employed....absolutely shattering to English ears, when it carried through all the way to the big Mixture stops.   If you wish to "cheat" a little, get hold of a recording of the Mander at St.Andrew's Holborn, London. It was a deliberate and very successful attempt to re-create the English sound of William Hill ( as influenced by Dr Gauntlett/Mendelssohn)   Does this answer the question?   Let me know!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net> wrote:   > Hello, Collin: > > I have a curiosity question for you. > > Many of the English organs were built with a stop > list > that included multiple diapasons, such as 8' > Diapason-I, > 8' Diapason-II, etc. > > Can you give me a verbal description of how these > diapasons are normally voiced and scaled to build > up the diapason chorus? > > Do these stops carry in more than one timbre all > the way up through mixtures, or is this a way to > provide a broader-scaled chorus at the 8-foot > pitch only?       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:22:32 EDT   In a message dated 08/20/04 4:48:42 AM, crl@137.com writes: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3D64429&item=3D37427= 63793&r d=3D1   Get a load of the photographs. I wonder if all of that battered and dented pipework, which looks like =   it's been through a train wreck and subsequent CIA interrogation, comes = with the deal. Maybe the ancient Conn CathedraCoustic ElectroPipes, also shown, can = be gotten in a package deal with the K-Mart ceiling fan. Whoever wins the auction is better off just keeping it a pure Allen instrument. That way, it's the real thing for what it is, and has some = integrity.    
(back) Subject: Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:51:12 -0400   At 09:22 AM 2004-08-20 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 08/20/04 4:48:42 AM, crl@137.com writes: >http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3D64429&item=3D3742= 763793&r >d=3D1 > >Get a load of the photographs. > I wonder if all of that battered and dented pipework, which looks = like >it's been through a train wreck and subsequent CIA interrogation, comes >with the >deal. > Maybe the ancient Conn CathedraCoustic ElectroPipes, also shown, can = be >gotten in a package deal with the K-Mart ceiling fan. > Whoever wins the auction is better off just keeping it a pure Allen >instrument. That way, it's the real thing for what it is, and has some >integrity.   Sebastian,   This has got to be the first time that you mention Allen with the "real thing" and having integrity. You even use the word "pure". Have you had your morning coffee yet? Are you softening up on these digi-wonders?   I agree with you that you don't want to corrupt this organ with pipes, = fake or otherwise.   Arie V.      
(back) Subject: Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:13:21 EDT   Yes, I actually meant what I said. A four-manual electronic practice instrument for somebody's home is exactly what it is. There is no intent to deceive, and it is a unit unto = itself, designed and purchased for a purpose. My sense is that the present brokers, who have brokered this broken instrument in the past, would probably get themselves a higher price if = they had left Allen's unit as it was, or tried to auction it in its original, unadulterated form, by removing the offending junk. Amateur junk add-ons don't only hurt the builders of real pipe organs. =   Although I cannot presume to speak for the folks at Allen, I'm sure = they felt that the unit they produced did not need the ghastly "enhancements" revealed by the photographs. As with any manufacturer on that scale, they = went through a great deal of research and development to come up with a = marketable product in its final form. In the end, what ruined the instrument in = question was NOT its "electronic-ness," but an idiotic and amateurish attempt at pipe = organ building.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City Just back from looking at the ruins of Rome (buildings and organs)   ..  
(back) Subject: RE: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay From: "Milo R. Shepherd" <mrstwin2@cox.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:23:33 -0400   well it has been said for years that one man's junk is another's treasure. Looking at this instrument, the console looks good but once you get away from that, then you see something that could possibly be in "Junkyard = Wars". I would probably take the console and throw away the rest and get some = nice speakers to add to it and go that route. It could make a nice small = chapel organ for a church that doesn't have alot of money. But still the adage = of buyer beware is still true to this day.   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of TubaMagna@aol.com Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 10:13 AM To: pipechat@pipechat.org Subject: Re: Big 4-Manual "project" on E-bay     Yes, I actually meant what I said. A four-manual electronic practice instrument for somebody's home is exactly what it is. There is no intent to deceive, and it is a unit unto itself, designed and purchased for a purpose. My sense is that the present brokers, who have brokered this broken instrument in the past, would probably get themselves a higher price if = they had left Allen's unit as it was, or tried to auction it in its original, unadulterated form, by removing the offending junk. Amateur junk add-ons don't only hurt the builders of real pipe organs. Although I cannot presume to speak for the folks at Allen, I'm sure = they felt that the unit they produced did not need the ghastly "enhancements" revealed by the photographs. As with any manufacturer on that scale, they went through a great deal of research and development to come up with a marketable product in its final form. In the end, what ruined the instrument in question was NOT its "electronic-ness," but an idiotic and amateurish attempt at pipe organ building.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City Just back from looking at the ruins of Rome (buildings and organs)      
(back) Subject: Re: why there are no organists From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:29:07 -0700       Margo Dillard wrote: > Not getting rich is one thing - but the 30K job is obviously full time - =   > and would be so time consuming as to prevent other employment beyond > very miminal part time work. Read the job description again. Also, > this is obviously a church that can afford to pay - they make reference > to paid choir members. In some parts of the country 30K would be a > reasonable lower! middle class income. But in San Diego?? You would be =   > lucky to afford Govt. Subsidized housing. >   My point precisely.   Our rent for a run-down 2 br 1 ba cottage in a questionable part of town nowhere NEAR the beach is $1400/mo; our utilities run around $200 a month (San Diego Greed and Extortion, aka San Diego Gas and Electric, has some of the highest rates in the nation).   The rents NEAR those church jobs (most are in North County, a 30-45 minute commute from central San Diego, where the "affordable" housing is) is even higher.   When I first moved to San Diego in 1976, the rent for a DECENT 2 br flat was $250/mo; those same flats now rent for $1000+/mo.   I stay because I have extended family here, and I can't AFFORD to move anyplace ELSE.   Cheers,   Bud            
(back) Subject: Re: electronic organs From: "Paul Valtos" <chercapa@enter.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:28:49 -0400   To Richard, I really believe that a new or needed market is opening for skilled voicers, whether pipe or electronic, to furnish the needed abilities to churches and, in some cases, auditoriums. A perfect example is the work = that Walter Strony is doing with Allen Theatre organs as well as Tom Hazelton's work with church organs. Many people say that one of the main reasons that Moller went belly up was its tendency to just assemble an organ in a = church and never voice it. It seems to have been the problem with some other pipe organ manufacturers as well as the electronic ones. In the old days, there wasn't very much you could do to voice an electronic analog organ as adjustments were neigh negligible. But now with the digital revolution, = and console controllers and Dove, it is relatively easy to custom voice the organ to the surroundings. If it costs $500. to $2,000 to properly voice = an Allen to its environment, what is that in percentage to the total = investment for a church organ or even, in some cases, a home theatre organ. I had my Allen Theatre III voiced by Walt and what a difference. Still needs some trem adjustments but overall a fantastic instrument and it is only MDS, = not Heritage or Quantum.If I were a dealer, I would arrange, as part of the package, to have one or the other of these gentlemen go through the organ and shake it down as a service to the customer unless they have a real pro in their shop. These customers would continue to come back to the same dealer and honor would be restored. Paul                                 ----- Original Message ----- From: "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 9:30 PM Subject: Re: electronic organs     > Hello, Stephen, et al: > > You observed quite nicely: > > > What Bud doesn't mention is the capacity of the individual who > does the > > tonal finishing/.voicing. Not every pipe organ > technician/worker can do > > tonal finishing/voicing. I have also observed that not every > electronc > > organ salesman can do tonal finishing/voicing. > > That is quite true. Alas, many of these people have excellent > understanding of Ohm's law and higher levels of electronic > theory and applications. What is lacking is their understanding > of how pipes sound and how they (properly) blend together > to make a musical organ ensemble. > > So, how does one correct this deficiency? > > > I remain concern that there's no corporate overseeing of what > > the electronic organ installers do out in the field, not even in > > large instruments. > > Back to Economics 101: If the factory has to oversee all of > the hundreds of installations done each year, the price of the > organs will rise proportionally to what it costs for those persons > to make some business enemies out of the dealers. > > In my opinion, the last thing that a dealer wants is for a person > from the factory telling him how to run his business, install the > organs, or impose another's opinion on how the organs should > sound. ALL OF THAT COSTS THE DEALER MONEY, > BECAUSE THE FACTORY MUST ADD TO THE COST > OF THE ORGAN BEING SOLD. > > I believe it is not until the dealer costs the factory money that > they take a negative position with the dealer and apply pressure > on his contract sales performance requirements. This may not > be true in every dealer-factory relationship, but it is basic > economics. > > * * * > > > He should have known better. > > Yes, but as long as a music merchant moves sufficient volume > of product for the factory, that is a problem (from the factory > perspective) only for the dealer to resolve to his own > satisfaction > with his clientel. > > The factories (all of them) have a steady rate of expense demanded > of them to stay in business. As long as dealers sell organs, the > factory is fed. If the deales don't sell organs and the factory > is not > receiving sufficient cash flow (the feeding process of business), > then things may change between the factory and the dealer. > > It is the dealer's responsibility to satisfy the customer. Do > that > and the factory is satisfied. Then, what is the factory's concern > about a customer buying an organ and maybe not knowing > if it is suitable/satisfactory for the job of making organ music? > > If the customer is ignorant enough and he has no real reason > to know that an organ IS or IS NOT performing up to par, > then the dealer most likely will not hear a complaint from the > customer. > > However, if one us, who regard ourselves as "organ builders" > sells an organ that doesn't sound right, sound good, or make > strong positive musical impressions, then it hurts us badly, and > we may never sell another organ. > > If you go into a music merchant's store, pick out an instrument, > buy it, have it delivered but never ask for the dealer to tonally > finish it, then the music merchant is free of further > responsibility > to the customer because the customer accepted it. > > Most of the people at the factory are hourly-paid people > who invest some level of competence into the business of > building organs and selling them to the dealers. The dealers > are the factory's customers. As long as the cash flow is > sufficient, then the factory could care less if the organs > are ever sold or sound good in a church. > > Think about it. Complain if you wish, but if the churches do > not know that they are dealing with a local merchant, . . . not > the factory (in most cases), then the merchant can "get away > with anything the churches will buy." > > I am not bitter. I am being realistic in this description. > > If you want a better sounding organ, you need to find one > of us (dealers) who live or die by installing good sounding > organs. I do my very best with every installation to live > up to that challenge every day. > > Think about it. Think about it. Think about it a lot. > > Both a surgeon and a meat market butcher can take out > a person's appendix. Which one is better equipped to > remove it and leave the patient with a good experience > when it is done? > > F. Richard Burt > Dorian Organs > > > . > > > > ****************************************************************** > "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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org> >     --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/2004    
(back) Subject: Re: toe levers - tiraripieno (tiratutti?) From: "John Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:26:35 -0700 (PDT)   So far as the current way of scaling them is concerned what Colin says is = probably true. The idea of having two diapasons, however, goes back at = least to the late sixteenth century, and dates from when most cathedral = organs were placed on the quire screen or pulpitum (as a few still are). = When you had two facades -- one each side -- you would need two sets of = facade pipes. Hence two diapasons. Until the middle of the nineteenth = century these would be identically scaled and voiced. Organists soon = discovered that interesting contrasts not so much of volume as timbre were = available when you used both at once, and two diapasons became popular = even on organs that didn't have two facades. In the middle of the = nineteenth century it became popular to scale the diapasons differently, = to produce a wider range of timbres and volumes. By the early twentieth = century you might get something like a scale 40 (N-4) No. 1 Open Diapason = with leathered lips (often as much a solo Stentorphon as a chorus stop), a scale 42 (N-2) No. 2 and a scale 44 (N) No. 3. John Speller Colin Mitchell <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Hello,   The English love of first and second Diapason ranks was, I believe, a response to the Schulze phenomenon of the 1850's-60's.
(back) Subject: USA Nat'l Anthem at Olympics From: "Patricia/Thomas Gregory" <tgregory@speeddial.net> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:29:20 -0500   Greetings:   My wife and I have found the new arrangement of the National Anthem to be very refreshing; a breath of fresh air from the militaristic settings we have heard in the past.   This "less aggressive" setting speaks well for our nation and those of us who are deeply troubled by the goals and objectives of the present administration.   Does anyone know who made this arrangement and if it might be available in = a keyboard setting?   Sincerely,   Thomas Gregory  
(back) Subject: Re: USA Nat'l Anthem at Olympics From: "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:46:16 -0400   The stringy "Star-Spangled Banner" at the Olympics reminds me of someone crooning "A Might Fortress is our God". If you look at the text of the anthem, you will plainly see that is a song about war and the flag of the USA waving valiantly in the twilight of dawn after a night of battle. It = is not about a limp rag on some bucolic hillside with birds warbling in the early morning light. It's tenor is similar, although not so bloody, to "La =   Marseillaise". "God Save the Queen" could get away with the stringy treatment. I'm not sure about "O, Canada" or whichever stanza they're singing in Deutschland these days. The only non-traditional rendition of the "Star-Spangled Banner" I ever liked was the electronic version I heard =   maybe 20 to 30 years ago on TV sign off. Totally synthesized, but it = wasn't wimpy.   Ross Coulson "Cole" Votaw -- Springfield, Ohio, USA    
(back) Subject: Charlotte County FL From: "Judy A. Ollikkala" <71431.2534@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400   There are no pipe organs in Charlotte County, Florida. However there are some nice ones in Lee and Collier Counties. Judy Ollikkala