PipeChat Digest #5007 - Thursday, December 16, 2004
 
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net>
RE: The Willis family values
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Willis and yet more Willis
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
RE: Bourne Street.
  by "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk>
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "M Fox" <ophicleide16@direcway.com>
Re: Organ Shoes
  by "Ray Ahrens" <ray_ahrens@msn.com>
RE: Willis and yet more Willis
  by "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk>
Re: Willis and yet more Willis
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Ahrend & Brunzema
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
RE: Willis and yet more Willis
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
RE: Willis and yet more Willis plus Downs
  by "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk>
Ross' New Zealand
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, IL" <kzrev@rr1.net>
RE: Bourne Street.
  by "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Appropriate Console Footwear - and a new suggested topic
  by "Charlie Lester" <crl@137.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #5004 - 12/15/04
  by "John Foss" <harkat@kat.forthnet.gr>
Console Accessories
  by "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com>
console cheeks and their contents
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "F. Richard Burt" <effarbee@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:49:07 -0600   Good Morning, PipeChatters: =20 Organ playing shoes for me have never been too much=20 of a problem during regulation, because I am not being=20 judged for "playing." We are regulating the sound of=20 the beast. During regulation, there is a lot of on=20 and off the bench. So, I am with you Steve, on playing=20 in street shoes. =20 =20 My normal street shoes are SAS "walking" shoes from one=20 of the local stores. Wide soles; with comfort being=20 the primary property. =20 However, the same company manufactures a beautiful=20 "loafer" style shoe that is 100-percent leather, fully=20 leather lined, and much closer to dimensions that are=20 suitable for playing accurately. As poor as I am with=20 playing the pedals, whatever I attempt comes off better. =20 These shoes are made by San Antonio Shoe company, with=20 outlet stores everwhere. SAS loafers are one of the=20 better shoes still being manufactured. Price is not=20 as low as Organmasters or TicTacToe, but you can walk=20 comfortably in them anywhere, and not be penalized=20 with pedaling because the soles/heels won't fit. <grins> =20 AND, they take a great shine when buffed. That's=20 what leather still offers. =20 F. Richard Burt =20 =20 ..
(back) Subject: RE: The Willis family values From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:49:52 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   You're being very wicked Alan!   No Lewis would ever have motors straight out of Battersea power station, and reeds on 100 psi.   If the "Willis" has decent chorus-work, that has to be Lewis, surely?   I guess it's just a committee organ! Some committee! I wonder what Dupre made of it?   As for Liverpool, it has to ba a Willis 2, because the Willis 1 received a direct bombing hit whilst in storage!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK   --- alantaylor1 <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> wrote:   > But Colin, how could Westminster Cathedral be a > Lewis? Ross loves Lewis > organs and dislikes Willis. And he certainly doesn't > like Westminster > Cathedral organ. (grin)       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail  
(back) Subject: Re: Willis and yet more Willis From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:52:35 EST   Dear Colin:   I've only heard the RFH organ by Ralph Downes in recordings. I have a feeling the hall itself is as dead as a coffin nail. E. Power Biggs played the Toccata and Fugue in D minor on it by Bach. I didn't like the pedal reeds, being rattly and unmusical. That was the original 1954 opening concert year.   Virgil Fox made a Christmas Carol Album on the same organ. I liked the way he handled the instrument much better. It was made much later, probably late 60's early 70's. RD obviously had already made changes in its voicing and regulation smoothing the whole organ out. The place was still dead as a coffin nail, but the instrument seemed much more musical. I think, IMHO the organ sounds so hard because it can't sing, where the Brompton Oratory organ has a much more alive acoustic. The room blends the organ much better, than at RFH.   What is your perception? I've just given you mine.   Ron Severin    
(back) Subject: RE: Bourne Street. From: "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:58:08 -0000   I thought you would say that it is the Lewis sound that you liked. = However, I have to say that this organ sounds like many other Willis organs of that time.   My information also comes from the official church history. "Streets of Heaven" edited by Neville Price and published in 1999.   >Maybe that's why I liked the organ, if Lewis had a go at it? Lewis over Walker sounds good to me! Anyway, the history I was quoting comes from the official parish history, and it clearly states Willis, not Lewis. I wonder if the parish records, which presumably the writer of the history relied upon, has it wrong? Sometimes this happens.   >I'm unapologetic, to be honest. I was responding to your claim that the organ is a Willis, not a Walker. I responded "Not so" and you have not proved that it is a Willis, nor refuted the Walker original.   What about your claim then, that the UK cathedral organs shouldn't be = called Willis's, as they had been rebuilt by other builders.   Only 74. You will still be a young man then.   >Oh, please do. And I'd have a host of instruments I'd want to visit, and we'd talk till we dropped, totally exhausted from swopping yarns and stories. Sounds terrific, but finance precludes...... If I want the same time as between my 1st and 2nd visits to London, though, it'll be 2014 and I'll be 74!       -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.4 - Release Date: 15/12/2004    
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "M Fox" <ophicleide16@direcway.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:03:58 -0800     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>   >I figure if you can pull it off, why not? If I tried playing without the > organ shoes I'd screw up all over the place. Although I guess if I > practiced with the street shoes, I could play with them. I have to = stick > with what I'm used to. If its any consolation, the one time I went to > Lord > & Taylor in Philadelphia (actually I've been twice, but the first time > someone else was playing) Peter Conte was wearing boat shoes, and doing > quite well! I don't know if he always does that, but he did that day. > I was about to cite the example of Peter Conte myself. I don't remember if =   he was wearing topsiders or workboots, but I was amazed that ANYONE could play accurately in what he was wearing -- and the Wanamaker pedal board doesn't look exactly standard to me.   MAF    
(back) Subject: Re: Organ Shoes From: "Ray Ahrens" <ray_ahrens@msn.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:04:50 -0600   Could not copy the message to the digest, there was no plain text part
(back) Subject: RE: Willis and yet more Willis From: "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:21:23 -0000   I do agree that the RAH organ is really two organs. The join between the = two sections seem obvious. I am not sure that the organ was butchered by H & = H. It is recorded that there were major problems with the Fr Willis.   The organ as it now stands, most certainly does have a use and purpose. It has proved very popular with the general public. And certainly can hold = it's own against all comers. Including symphony orchestras.   >Festival Hall? Am I alone in actually admiring this instrument? In THAT dreadful hall, anything which is voiced "baroke" and sounds half musical, has got to be good. The pedal reeds are a travesty of good taste and a triumph of gallic peasantry.....rip 'em out, I say.   I paste below, something I posted on anther list, about my feelings on the RFH organ.   As Ian Bell has already pointed out. Downes was an amateur. He should = never have been given the responsibility of the new organ at the RFH. I am sure there were others, at the time, who were qualified and would have made a better job of it. I do feel that the professionals, who now have the responsibility of the rebuilding of the organ, have both the knowledge, = ears and no how to make this ghastly experiment into a musical instrument. I do hope they do what is necessary, without looking over their shoulders at those who would keep the beast as it is purely because Downes was allowed = to play, at the public expense, at being an organ designer.   Alan London     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.4 - Release Date: 15/12/2004    
(back) Subject: Re: Willis and yet more Willis From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:24:59 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   I think I answered this before reading your post Ron.   The RFH is terrible for music. Apparently, a loud cough on the stage, registers just 46dB in the hall.....barley audible.   Of course, the Mixtures were changed by H & H/Downes after the organ was opened, and the Pedal Reeds were tamed also.   I still think it is a very good organ in search of a suitable building, and I just marvel that the Barbican Concert Hall, with an excellent acoustic, has no organ at all!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- RonSeverin@aol.com wrote:   > Dear Colin: > > I've only heard the RFH organ by Ralph Downes in > recordings. > I have a feeling the hall itself is as dead as a > coffin nail. E. > Power Biggs played the Toccata and Fugue in D minor > on it > by Bach. I didn't like the pedal reeds, being rattly > and unmusical.   > RD (Ralph Downes) > obviously > had already made changes in its voicing and > regulation smoothing > the whole organ out.   __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Ahrend & Brunzema From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:34:03 -0500   Colin,   I'm not sure that G. Brunzema fit in very well at Casavant. In fact I am quite puzzled about him taking up a position there.   Brunzema's best work in North America, was what he did under his own name. He was definitely someone who held strong opinions about organs, = but in person was softspoken, and a man of few words. His workmanship was of = a high order.   He was definitely one who believed in the minimalist school. Did not like =   combination actions, swell boxes, heavy basses, etc. He believed in = simple designs, that were musically functional (to him anyway). To one church he =   dismissed the swell box, only to be told that someone else would then get the contract. So he added horizontal shades on the Brustwerk to his proposal. He didn't get the deal. But his idea was the shades would change the direction of the sound rather than box up the sound.   Anyways, the organs of his that I came across, I found them beautiful, rather than exciting.   His largest surviving works are in Pella, Iowa and one in North Carolina.   He died in 1992, from liver failure. Apparently he had a childhood disease, that damaged his liver.   That is about all I know about him.   Arie V.           At 07:34 AM 2004-12-16 -0800, you wrote: >Hello, > >Thanks to Arie for that......I feel that a riddle has >now been solved. I was totally puzzled by a Brunzema >working in Canada, and an Ahrend working alone in >Europe. Now it makes perfect sense. > >I had assumed that were not many organ-builders called >Ahrend, and of course, his restoration work is the >stuff of legend. > >I think the splendid new organ I played in Amsterdam, >would be a few years old when I played it, and it >really is a very, very good instrument > >Regards, > >Colin Mitchell UK > > >--- Arie Vandenberg <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> wrote: > > > Colin, > > > > Jurgen Ahrend and Gerhard Brunzema were in business > > together for maybe 15 > > to 20 years. They may have been among the first to > > go into sympathetic > > organ restoration of old baroque organs, and > > together did some new organs > > in typical German baroque style.      
(back) Subject: RE: Willis and yet more Willis From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:38:04 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   What I ask, is an amateur?   Ralph Downes was a wonderful scholar, a fine organist and a great teacher.   Surely, by the dead reckoning of "experience," Fr Willis was an absolute novice! So too was Cavaille-Coll!   Sorry Alan.....I just don't go along with it.   I think the name of Denys Thurlow is a very significant one in professional organ-building, and he, as a wonderful voicer, is the FIRST to acknowledge the debt of gratitude he owed Ralph Downes. In point of fact, when Downes died, Denys wrote an appreciation of him for the IAO (Incoporporated Association of Organists) magazine; which copy I have somewhere.   Stephen Bicknell also speaks very highly of Downes' abilities.   Well, that's only two, I apprciate, but they carry a bit of weight behind them.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK       --- alantaylor1 <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> wrote:   > I do agree that the RAH organ is really two organs. > The join between the two > sections seem obvious. I am not sure that the organ > was butchered by H & H. > It is recorded that there were major problems with > the Fr Willis. > > The organ as it now stands, most certainly does have > a use and purpose. It > has proved very popular with the general public. And > certainly can hold it's > own against all comers. Including symphony > orchestras. > > >Festival Hall? Am I alone in actually admiring > this > instrument? In THAT dreadful hall, anything which > is > voiced "baroke" and sounds half musical, has got to > be > good. The pedal reeds are a travesty of good taste > and > a triumph of gallic peasantry.....rip 'em out, I > say. > > I paste below, something I posted on anther list, > about my feelings on the > RFH organ. > > As Ian Bell has already pointed out. Downes was an > amateur. He should never > have been given the responsibility of the new organ > at the RFH. I am sure > there were others, at the time, who were qualified > and would have made a > better job of it. I do feel that the professionals, > who now have the > responsibility of the rebuilding of the organ, have > both the knowledge, ears > and no how to make this ghastly experiment into a > musical instrument. I do > hope they do what is necessary, without looking over > their shoulders at > those who would keep the beast as it is purely > because Downes was allowed to > play, at the public expense, at being an organ > designer. > > Alan > London > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.4 - Release > Date: 15/12/2004 > > > > ****************************************************************** > "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> > >       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250  
(back) Subject: RE: Willis and yet more Willis plus Downs From: "alantaylor1" <alantaylor1@members.v21.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:16:16 -0000   Not so Colin. Both Fr Willis and Cavaille-Coll were organ builders by profession. They didn't play at it. And, as I have already said, at the = RFH Downes did it at the expense of the general public.   Yes, he was a wonderful scholar, a fine organist And a great teacher. But not an organ builder or designer.   It is a pity that RD didn't show the same regard and respect for the = work of the others who came before him. And, although I like many aspects of the Gloucester organ, the original shouldn't have been so wilfully = destroyed. Even going to the trouble/lengths of cutting the 32ft into small pieces. = And this, in the teeth of opposition from both Sumsion and Howells. But what would Sumsion and Howells have known about the needs of an Anglican Cathedral organ!=20   I really don=92t understand why the organs of Ralph Downes are now = considered =93Sacred Cows=94 and it is considered almost sacrilege to alter them. = As I understand the situation, it is impossible to keep the reeds in tune at Gloucester, as they are too thin. But it is not possible to rectify this situation as they are the original RD designed reeds. They only RD organ = I would want to see, tonally at least, left alone, would be the organ of Brompton Oratory.   Alan London     >What I ask, is an amateur?   >Ralph Downs was a wonderful scholar, a fine organist and a great teacher.=20   >Surely, by the dead reckoning of "experience," Fr Willis was an absolute novice! So too was Cavaille-Coll!   >Sorry Alan.....I just don't go along with it.   >I think the name of Denys Thurlow is a very significant one in professional organ-building, and he, as a wonderful voicer, is the FIRST to acknowledge the debt of gratitude he owed Ralph Downes. In point of fact, when Downes died, Denys wrote an appreciation of him for the IAO (Incoporporated Association of Organists) magazine; which copy I have somewhere.   >Stephen Bicknell also speaks very highly of Downes' abilities.   >Well, that's only two, I apprciate, but they carry a bit of weight behind them.     --=20 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.4 - Release Date: 15/12/2004 =20    
(back) Subject: Ross' New Zealand From: "First Christian Church of Casey, IL" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:17:39 -0600   And, Ross, I would love to visit NZ and see the building and organ you've mentioned--as well as that breathtaking scenery one sees in "The Lord of = the Rings" film series.   Hmmmmmm, I'll have to check airline fees from midwest USA to NZ!   Dennis Steckley Lover of Cats, Pipe Organs & 1940-65 Sewing Machines    
(back) Subject: RE: Bourne Street. From: "TheShieling" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:41:54 +1300   Alan, my good friend,   We'd better quit this little thread on Bourne Street now, or we'll be de-Listed for being boring.   >What about your claim then, that the UK cathedral organs shouldn't be called Willis's, as they had been rebuilt by other builders.   Some certainly are Willis. Some of them are just, well, bits of this ad that, resulting in a hotch of bits from all over the place. And that's not necessarily criticism, as the buildings themselves are wonderful precisely because of their quirks and idiosyncrasies over many years and styles. I think of many cathedrals with Norman and Gothic happily mixed, or = sometimes gratingly tacked on: they're wonderful and would sometimes be boring if all-of-a-piece. I think of the little parish church on Lindisfarne, where one side of the church is Norman and the other Gothic, and there are not even the same number of bays each side. Ditto organs in UK cathedrals, perhaps, especially for the functions they have to fulfil.   How, now, I wonder lastly and finally and ultimately, should Malvern Priory's organ be characterised? It was built originally by Hele, retains all the Hele pipework, but has been completely rebuilt by Nicholson = recently and revoiced, right through, by Guy Russell, making a splendid instrument which, I was told by those who've known the organ since before the = rebuild, has never ever sounded so wonderful. Hele? Nicholson? Hele/Nicholson? In = the end, it doesn't matter, so I think I'll not try to label it. Quite unscientifically, I'll just say, "It's great", without even adding why I think so, or that that's just my own thoughts.   >Only 74. You will still be a young man then.   Hey, you really are a wonderful guy. I suddenly feel terrific. "Young"? = What beautiful word.   Now, off for a quick shower and then do some key-holding for a friend's Christmas tunings.   Ross        
(back) Subject: Appropriate Console Footwear - and a new suggested topic From: "Charlie Lester" <crl@137.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:31:00 -0800   Aside from having a suitable shoe to play in, several organ maintenance folk have told me another important reason for special organ shoes is that by playing in street shoes, you will scratch the finish up on the pedal keys because of the grit and grime on your shoes. Organ shoes that never touch the outside ground stay smooth and grit-free.   I suppose you could put a door mat by the console to wipe your shoes before mounting the bench. Or if you have carpeting (ugh - hopefully not), you could scuff your feet along the carpet as you approach the bench.   -------   Then, here's a topic I don't think has ever been discussed: What do you store in your console key-cheeks? Other than, I mean, the "de rigueur" hymnals, paper clips, pencils, stick-on page markers, mints, tylenol, organ maintenance journal, tissues, etc.? Some people do keep all sorts of stuff in the console. Sometimes it looks like an office!   And what kinds of "surprises" have organ maintenance folk found in consoles, the bench, etc? Back in the day when I did service work with as company back east, we occasionally found "surprises" - some funny, some icky. Like the time we found a pair of BVDs stuffed in the bench. One only hoped they had not been previously used but were just stored there as "emergency spares." Then we sometimes found things like food (sometimes very old and covered with green mold), flasks, all sorts of reading material ranging from sublime to sordid.......     ~ C      
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #5004 - 12/15/04 From: "John Foss" <harkat@kat.forthnet.gr> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:26:06 +0200   Alan Taylor writes,   "We all agree that the best organ stop is the building itself"   Yes - and where the organ is placed! I would venture to suggest that Westminster Cathedral sounds as well as it does partly because it is in = the West Gallery speaking directly into the building - whatever others may think, it is a fine instrument. King's College Cambridge is not so clearly =   focused. The other option is to put the pipes in good tonal boxes which focus but do not block the sound - see New College Oxford and the Lyons Concert Hall as good examples of this.   It helps if it is a good organ in the first place. A good organ will sound =   good wherever it is put, though better in some places than others, a not = so good organ can sound better than it deserves in a good position in a rich warm acoustic.   John Foss http://www.organsandorganistsonline.com/      
(back) Subject: Console Accessories From: "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:47:21 -0600     >Then, here's a topic I don't think has ever been discussed:=20 What do you store in your console key-cheeks? Other than, I=20 mean, the "de rigueur" hymnals, paper clips, pencils,=20 stick-on page markers, mints, tylenol, organ maintenance=20 journal, tissues, etc.? Some people do keep all sorts of=20 stuff in the console. Sometimes it looks like an office!   I don't like to keep much at all--a pencil or two, sometimes a yellow sticky-note pad, and a small New Testament that was a gift. I'm embarrassed sometimes when I visit other consoles and find bottles of lotion, used Kleenex, bottles of aspirin, more than 10 pens and pencils and highlighers, scissors, scotch tape, etc. It's like finding your self in a cross between someone's office and bathroom. =20   In addition, the console I play is oriented so that my back to the congregation--I face the same way they do. So even if I didn't mind having all the personal effects there "aesthetically" I still wouldn't do it because it would look sloppy to them!   > Like the time we=20 found a pair of BVDs stuffed in the bench. One only hoped=20 they had not been previously used but were just stored there=20 as "emergency spares."=20   Now what's BVD? It's probably obvious, I know!   Daniel Hancock Springfield, Missouri      
(back) Subject: console cheeks and their contents From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:02:27 -0800   The old cobbled Austin at St. Paul's Winter Haven had lost its roll-top, and couldn't be locked. I kept a large black (fake) spider named "Ida" on the side with the motor switch, to keep away the unauthorized. By all reports from the Altar Guild, it was MOST effective (chuckle).   I had a bookcase within reach at the treble end of the console at St. Matthew's for all that junk ... the cheeks of the old Allen were taken up with control tabs and and the card reader, etc.   Paperclips on the cheeks are NOT a good idea. They tend to end up between the keys. Along the same lines, I wonder how many people remove their music from the music rack before making erasures?   Cheers,   Bud     Charlie Lester wrote: > > Then, here's a topic I don't think has ever been discussed: What do you > store in your console key-cheeks? Other than, I mean, the "de rigueur" > hymnals, paper clips, pencils, stick-on page markers, mints, tylenol, > organ maintenance journal, tissues, etc.? Some people do keep all sorts > of stuff in the console. Sometimes it looks like an office! > > And what kinds of "surprises" have organ maintenance folk found in > consoles, the bench, etc? Back in the day when I did service work with > as company back east, we occasionally found "surprises" - some funny, > some icky. Like the time we found a pair of BVDs stuffed in the bench. > One only hoped they had not been previously used but were just stored > there as "emergency spares." Then we sometimes found things like food > (sometimes very old and covered with green mold), flasks, all sorts of > reading material ranging from sublime to sordid....... > > > ~ > 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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org> > >