PipeChat Digest #4894 - Thursday, November 11, 2004
 
RE: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs
  by "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com>
Re: reed organs and pipe organs: contextual note
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net>
Re: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: weird font
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: weird font
  by <Myosotis51@aol.com>
RE: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "Andrew Mead" <mead@eagle.ca>
Reminder - Paul Roberts Plays Rochester Wurlitzer this Sunday (cross-post
  by "Kenneth Evans" <kevans1@rochester.rr.com>
Theatre/pipe organs/digital organs
  by "EDWIN MAURER" <edmarthas@msn.com>
Recital X-posted
  by "Larry Wheelock" <llwheels@mac.com>
RE: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
RE: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
Re: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net>
Re: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
Re: A question regarding harmoniums.
  by "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com>
 

(back) Subject: RE: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs From: "Daniel Hancock" <dhancock@brpae.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:04:19 -0600     >I'm a total pipe organ nut and electronic organs do not interest me in the=20 least, at least never before but as we've discussed before I'm starting to=20 get intrigued with hammonds. But nevertheless this post has so many holes I=20 can't resist ripping it apart (in a friendly way). :)   >=20 > Reed organs and harmoniums are different from pipe organs, as are > digital/electronic organs. But, in my estimation, reed organs and > harmoniums have a few more things in their favor: >=20 > 1. Mechanical action--makes for very intimate contact with the reed > pallets. And I'm not condemning electro-pneumatic and direct- > electric actions, which I love! Perhaps so, but DE and EP pipe organs   have no more key expression than electronic organs.     But, I wasn't making any kind of claim that DE and EP organs have better key expression--only that I wouldn't discount them as viable instruments because they don't. Nor would I discount a digital organ, thought it isn't my preference!   >=20 > 2. Reeds produce a "real" sound. The vibrating tongue actually=20 > moves the air and produces a naturally generated sound. Hmmm... just like=20 a speaker cone. =20   Not really. =20   >=20 > 3. They come in "sets," sort of like ranks. By necessity (in most > cases being placed directly under or in line with the keys) they are > arranged in order of pitch, starting with the lowest and ending with=20 > the highest. This has to do with what?   This has to do with the fact that when you play this sort of organ, you hear the low tones coming from the left, and the higher ones from the right. And that's a pretty neat direct connection. Many smaller, mechanical action pipe organs also have this kind of arrangement. =20   >=20 > 4. There is a reed, or a pipe, for each note on the manual for every > stop. That many tone generators makes for a rich sound. So how rich a=20 sound is permissible before the instrument is worthy of discussion?   Not sure what you're getting at here. I don't think you got my point, though.   >=20 All of the above claims are great evidence in a case trying to prove that=20 winded organs are "better". As far as proving that electronic organs do not=20 count as viable instruments, they do the opposite. You have supported the=20 other side! =20   Not really. I was only attempting to make the argument that in these ways, pipe organs and reed organs have more in common. And in other, very different ways, pipe organs and digital/electronic organs have more in common.   >I was on jury duty the other day so my mind is in legal mode LOL   >Andy  
(back) Subject: Re: reed organs and pipe organs: contextual note From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:13:34 -0800   I would add another thought: remember when virtually everybody played Bach on the piano? And the harpsichord was considered a "primitive precursor of the pianoforte?"   Wanda Landowska was a voice crying in the wilderness, with her big ol' cast-iron-soundboard Pleyel (grin); yet she reclaimed the harpsichord literature for the harpsichord, virtually single-handedly.   Restoration of instruments in museums followed; then the building of modern harpsichords; urtext editions eventually supplanted the 19th century romantic piano editions with all their slurs and dynamics. People became interested in historically-informed performance practices, etc.   Likewise, the harmonium is a discrete instrument, with a discrete literature, and a discrete identity. It was taken seriously by composers (at least in Europe).   As Sebastian said, it wasn't (for the most part) touted as a "substitute for" or "just as good as" ... it shared some characteristics with the pipe organ, chiefly the ability to sustain a note as long as there was wind to blow it; its literature WAS playable on the pipe organ; but except for its use as a practice instrument, we don't have much evidence that pipe organ literature was played on it, except maybe on the large two-manual instruments with pedal that still serve as choir organs in some French churches.   Then there is the issue of durability. Thirty years ago, I located a two-manual and pedal pressure Vocalion for a mission church here locally .... the priest was determined not to have an electronic ... it was restored and put into use. It was in the west gallery of a live room; it played the service well, and as much literature as an organist in that somewhat remote church would ever play.   You guessed it ... a change of clergy and organist, and they "had to have something better." They're now on their second or third electronic organ. Fortunately, the Vocalion went to a former church that is now a museum / wedding chapel, where it's still played regularly.   Jonathan Orwig's postings of harmonium music in the public domain have opened up a whole body of literature that was hitherto little-known. I have several friends who anxiously await his next posting, and snatch up the music as fast as I can download it and print it (grin). It is attractive, and accessible; some of it is quite challenging.   Cheers,   Bud                      
(back) Subject: Re: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:10:43 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   Mmmmmmmm!   I once had a Hohner plug-in-the-wall organ, which used reeds..........bloody awful thing!   I played a good Makin digital recently, and Vierne's "Berceuse" sounded gorgeous on the gentle strings and celeste sounds.   Draw your own conclusions!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK   --- "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> wrote:   > > To these I would add that, being a wind instrument, > the reed organ has an > expressive quality that is lacking in electronic > instruments.   __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:17:51 -0600     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:50 AM Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums.     > What electronic manufacturer could claim to have > included in their staff the names of Cavaille-Coll and > Fr.Willis?   That is, both Cavaill=E9-Coll and Henry Willis I began their organbuilding careers voicing harmonium-style reeds. This seems to have stood them in very good stead developing the reeds that made their respective pipe = organs so famous. > > Actually, the harmonium grew out of the idea of organ > "free-reeds," and many German Romantic instruments > virtually had a "harmonium division" in a box > enclosure, so it isn't far removed from the organ at > all.   The American "Melodeon" was also a kind of precursor of the reed organ.   > How many people know that Yamaha made harmoniums, way > back in time?   I never knew this before either. I find on searching that there are = details of a Yamaha reed organ on the Reed Organ Society's webpage at http://www.reedsoc.org/ROdatabase/FrROOutput.asp?fs=3Dyamaha&Choice=3D2&Sty= le=3DI&Reg_no=3D0&B1=3DFind+information&Photo=3DY   In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the Japanese were amazing = at mechanism. A good example is Japanese Clocks. The Japanese day was split into equal hours, so that in the winter the hours were shorter than in the summer. They built fantastic clockwork timepieces that were able to take account of this.   John Speller.      
(back) Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:38:57 -0800 (PST)   Hello,   I always smile when people think that Japan was somehow "undeveloped" or "backward" before 1960.   Yamaha are one of the oldest manufacturers of an amazing range of musical instruments, the organ being perhaps their least successful range.   Off-topic perhaps, but Nissan are, I think, one of the founding fathers of motor-transport, and during WWII, the Japanese made a monoplane virtually the equal of the Spitfire!   I didn't know about Japanese clocks....thanks for that John.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK       --- "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> wrote:   > > > > In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the > Japanese were amazing at > mechanism. A good example is Japanese Clocks. The > Japanese day was split > into equal hours, so that in the winter the hours > were shorter than in the > summer. They built fantastic clockwork timepieces > that were able to take > account of this.       __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com    
(back) Subject: Re: weird font From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:51:14 -0500   On 11/10/04 9:05 PM, "Administrator" <admin@pipechat.org> wrote:   > But please be aware we have some older folks on this list who have some = vision > problems.and many not be a computer savvy as I am and may not be able to > reformat an email as easily as I can.   David, you sure nailed me there! Old, largely blind, and MOST non-savvy. = I AM learning some of the tricks as I go along. Almost always "can do" what must be done.   Thanks, big time!   Alan      
(back) Subject: Re: weird font From: <Myosotis51@aol.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:39:13 EST   Hello admin@pipechat.org,     In reference to your comment: I know that some email programs make it hard to send in Plain Text but there is usually a way to do so if you hunt for it.       AOL finally fixed this: In version 9.0, one simply right-clicks anywhere = on the email one's writing, and selects the "Compose as PLain Text" option. =   About time! Victoria  
(back) Subject: RE: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "Andrew Mead" <mead@eagle.ca> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:51:35 -0500   I know the answer but I will not post it. The question itself is much more interesting.   Regards, AjMead   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of Bob Conway Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:42 AM To: PipeChat Subject: A question regarding harmoniums.     At 09:02 AM 11/11/2004, Colin wrote: >I just came across a brief list of harmonium >books/arrangements and original works.....quite >amazing!   Colin 'et al', Thanks for the clips. This really piques my interest!   But it also brings to mind another question.   Why do we have the eternal warring factions of pipe organs versus electronic organs? These harmonium clips are every bit as far removed = from pipe organs as electronic organs are, - yet they are acceptable to the = pipe organ aficionados! Just my immediate thoughts!   Bob Conway     ****************************************************************** "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: Reminder - Paul Roberts Plays Rochester Wurlitzer this Sunday (cross-posted) From: "Kenneth Evans" <kevans1@rochester.rr.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:18:13 -0500   England's famed theater organist Paul Roberts will play the RTOS 4/23 Wurlitzer at 2:30 PM, this Sunday afternoon, November 14th in the NEW Auditorium Theatre, 875 East Main Street, Rochester, NY 14605.   Tickets at only $15 each will be available at the Box Office starting an hour before this event. For driving directions and much more please visit our website at http://theatreorgans.com/rochestr/ .   See you on Sunday afternoon for this don't miss "Pops on Pipes" event!   Announcement by Ken Evans, RTOS director kevans1@rochester.rr.com      
(back) Subject: Theatre/pipe organs/digital organs From: "EDWIN MAURER" <edmarthas@msn.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:47:20 -0800     When I read all these writings on Pipe Chat I wonder some time if this = list needs to separated for Classical Pipes and Theatre Pipes. It always = seems to be Classical. My self I have a Roland Digital and I love my organ, but I also=20 realize that I do not have room in my home for a Theatre organ. The = Theatre Organ is disappearing instrument, with only three in the Seattle = area in public venues. I guess that why I have 150 Pipe organs Theatre = to Classical, Church. But I can and do love Theatre Organs and do enjoy there sounds and = also Love to hear some Church Organs and it music. We all need to express our opinions and enjoy the list. Ed ****************************************************************** "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org<http://www.pipechat.org/> List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org<mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org> Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org<mailto:admin@pipechat.org> List-Subscribe: = <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org<mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org>> List-Digest: = <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org<mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org>= > List-Unsubscribe: = <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org<mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org>>    
(back) Subject: Recital X-posted From: "Larry Wheelock" <llwheels@mac.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:10:27 -0600   Andrew Fredel, Director of Music at St. Peter's Church, Madison Street, Chicago will play a program sponsored by the local Wisconsin chapter of the Organ Historical Society.   Place: Church of St. Francis of Assisi 327 West Brown Street Milwaukee, Wisconsin   Time: 3:00 PM   Date: Sunday, November 18, 2004   Instrument: This is a very, very significant historical instrument, built by William Schuelke of Milwaukee in 1885. The instrument is favorably situated in its original location; the West Gallery of the Romanesque stone building (which was designed by William Schikel of N.Y.). The organ has mechanical action with inverted Barker-Levers. The room is quite reverberant despite the fact that (the last time I was in the building, about 5 years ago) there was a significant amount of carpeting present. The instrument is not often heard by the general public and has a wonderful clear warm sound. I highly recommend the program, for the performer, of course, but also for the rare chance to hear this important instrument. Larry Wheelock Director of Music Ministries Kenwood United Methodist Church Milwaukee, Wisconsin musicdirector@kenwood-umc.org
(back) Subject: RE: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:12:07 -0500   You're right... I did totally misunderstand your intent! Sorry about that :) The thread seemed to be headed in the direction of saying, = "sure, harmoniums are legitimate instruments, but electronic organs are not" and = it was from that angle that I read your post. I understand your angle now, I =   think, that reed organs do have their strengths. Thanks for clearing it up. :)   On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:04:19 -0600, Daniel Hancock wrote > >I'm a total pipe organ nut and electronic organs do not interest me in > the > least, at least never before but as we've discussed before I'm starting > to > get intrigued with hammonds. But nevertheless this post has so many > holes I > can't resist ripping it apart (in a friendly way). :) > > > > > Reed organs and harmoniums are different from pipe organs, as are > > digital/electronic organs. But, in my estimation, reed organs and > > harmoniums have a few more things in their favor: > > > > 1. Mechanical action--makes for very intimate contact with the reed > > pallets. And I'm not condemning electro-pneumatic and direct- > > electric actions, which I love! Perhaps so, but DE and EP pipe organs > > have no more key expression than electronic organs. > > But, I wasn't making any kind of claim that DE and EP organs have better > key expression--only that I wouldn't discount them as viable instruments > because they don't. Nor would I discount a digital organ, thought it > isn't my preference! > > > > > 2. Reeds produce a "real" sound. The vibrating tongue actually > > moves the air and produces a naturally generated sound. Hmmm... just > like > a speaker cone. > > Not really. > > > > > 3. They come in "sets," sort of like ranks. By necessity (in most > > cases being placed directly under or in line with the keys) they are > > arranged in order of pitch, starting with the lowest and ending with > > the highest. This has to do with what? > > This has to do with the fact that when you play this sort of organ, you > hear the low tones coming from the left, and the higher ones from the > right. And that's a pretty neat direct connection. Many smaller, > mechanical action pipe organs also have this kind of arrangement. > > > > > 4. There is a reed, or a pipe, for each note on the manual for every > > stop. That many tone generators makes for a rich sound. So how rich > a > sound is permissible before the instrument is worthy of discussion? > > Not sure what you're getting at here. I don't think you got my > point, though. > > > > All of the above claims are great evidence in a case trying to prove > that > winded organs are "better". As far as proving that electronic > organs do not count as viable instruments, they do the opposite. > You have supported the other side! > > Not really. I was only attempting to make the argument that in these > ways, pipe organs and reed organs have more in common. And in other, > very different ways, pipe organs and digital/electronic organs have more > in common. > > >I was on jury duty the other day so my mind is in legal mode LOL > > >Andy     A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service PO Box 111 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)578-3936 Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com  
(back) Subject: RE: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:16:55 -0500   At 01:51 PM 11/11/2004, Andrew Mead wrote: >I know the answer but I will not post it. The question itself is much = more >interesting.   Bob Conway comments;   I have read all the posts regarding my original question, and I suppose that you might consider the comments quite valid. However, I really do = not think that a harmonium is any more of an organ than an electronic organ.   I do not think that there is much of an "organ" tone to a harmonium, and I =   do think that some electronic organs sound remarkably like a pipe organ, for instance the Marshall and Ogletree installed in Trinity Church on Wall =   Street, Manhattan.   After all, a vibrating reed works in the same manner as a Vibrating = speaker cone, - does it not?   I am a bit of a pragmatic person, - if it works, let it be!   Bob Conway    
(back) Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:41:22 -0800       Bob Conway wrote:   > > > > Bob Conway comments; > > I have read all the posts regarding my original question, and I suppose > that you might consider the comments quite valid. However, I really do > not think that a harmonium is any more of an organ than an electronic > organ. > > I do not think that there is much of an "organ" tone to a harmonium, and =   > I do think that some electronic organs sound remarkably like a pipe > organ, for instance the Marshall and Ogletree installed in Trinity > Church on Wall Street, Manhattan. > > After all, a vibrating reed works in the same manner as a Vibrating > speaker cone, - does it not? >     Um, nope. A vibrating reed (in a harmonium OR a pipe organ) CREATES the tone; the loudspeaker merely REPRODUCES a pre-existing recorded tone, whether a CD, sampling, or whatever.   I suppose it could be argued that Musicom and similar real-time systems (like Trinity Wall Street?) come CLOSER, but I don't know enough about the technical side to really argue that point one way or another.   An electronic instrument that uses real-time tone generation is probably a true SYNTHESIZER; and synthesizers ARE legitimate musical instruments; but there's still no such thing as a "digital pipe organ," UNLESS you mean by that an instrument that has both electronic AND wind-blown pipe voices.   I suppose we could kick around the legitimacy of using free reeds in pipe organs as a cost and space-saving measure, just for fun ... does that make them harmonium/organs?   16' reed boxes were quite common in small stock model unit organs, and Sebastian revived the practice recently for the bass octave of the 16' Dulciana in his chapel organ for First Pres (?).   Sadly the free-reed 32' Elephant Fart of Doom is gone from Smoky Mary's organ ... I always thought that was kinda fun (grin), unless you happened to be standing by the bass octave when it came on (chuckle).   Free-reed celestes (Estey made an ELEGANT Vox Jubilante) and soft strings and reeds MIGHT be an interesting cost-saving measure to consider, where space and funds are limited. Problem is, the tuning doesn't drift with the rest of the organ. That doesn't matter so much in the 16' octave, but it would higher up.   Cheers,   Bud      
(back) Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@swbell.net> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:43:15 -0600     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 6:16 PM Subject: RE: A question regarding harmoniums.     > At 01:51 PM 11/11/2004, Andrew Mead wrote: > >I know the answer but I will not post it. The question itself is much more > >interesting. > > Bob Conway comments; > > I have read all the posts regarding my original question, and I suppose > that you might consider the comments quite valid. However, I really do not > think that a harmonium is any more of an organ than an electronic organ. > > I do not think that there is much of an "organ" tone to a harmonium, and = I > do think that some electronic organs sound remarkably like a pipe organ, > for instance the Marshall and Ogletree installed in Trinity Church on = Wall > Street, Manhattan.   So what? There is not much of a violin tone to a bassoon. There is not much of a clarinet tone to a glockenspiel. In comparing organs and harmoniums you are comparing apples and oranges. So why shouldn't harmoniums be decent instruments?   John Speller.      
(back) Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:14:29 -0500   > > Free-reed celestes (Estey made an ELEGANT Vox Jubilante) and soft > strings and reeds MIGHT be an interesting cost-saving measure to > consider, where space and funds are limited. Problem is, the tuning > doesn't drift with the rest of the organ. That doesn't matter so > much in the 16' octave, but it would higher up. >   now THAT'S an interesting idea. A free-reed celeste. I know a lot of technicians who never bother tuning celestes anyway, and while it drives = me nuts, I do have to admit that when playing, I often cant' tell. Maybe a little tuning drift (or lack of it) wouldn't matter too much with a celeste. It would matter a lot less if both (or more) of the undulating ranks were reeds, rather than reeds with pipes. Hmmmmm... The reed celestes on my estey 2M&P reed organ sound nice, except that they become inaudible in the bass, which is annoying. That's the voicer's "fault", obviously.   Andy   A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service PO Box 111 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)578-3936 Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com  
(back) Subject: Re: A question regarding harmoniums. From: "Andy Lawrence" <andy@ablorgans.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:22:02 -0500   > > So what? There is not much of a violin tone to a bassoon. There is > not much of a clarinet tone to a glockenspiel. In comparing organs and > harmoniums you are comparing apples and oranges. So why shouldn't > harmoniums be decent instruments?   This is an interesting point too. How many pipe organ Violas, Trumpets, Oboes, Vox Humanas(!!!), bassoons, etc sound much like the instruments = they are named after? I haven't seen one yet. Some come closer than others. = Of course, the intersting thing is, if one could build an organ that sounded just like an orchestra, that would be great for playing orchestra music, = but wouldn't be too good for playing organ music!   When my 10-rank 2M&P Estey reed organ was not all disassembled, I = practiced regularly on it. I never did find a piece that I couldn't play on it, = until it had so many wind leaks that the speech was too slow. I did Bach fugues =   and everything. Had to get a little creative with registration, but = that's only because there was no upperwork (just one 4' stop, a bunch of 8' = stops, and a 16' for the manuals, and two 16's for the pedals).   But yeah, the tone sure was different! But still musical. And admittedly =   much more satisfying than any electronic I've played despite the fact that =   most electronics do actually come closer to mimicking the actual pipe = organ sound. Interesting. There is something to an accoustic sound.   Andy     A.B.Lawrence Pipe Organ Service PO Box 111 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)578-3936 Visit our website at www.ablorgans.com