PipeChat Digest #4902 - Saturday, November 13, 2004
 
Re: Quoting Williams and Owen
  by "Scott Montgomery" <montre1978@yahoo.com>
smokin' A***ns
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
RE: Actions and pipe speech onset
  by "Will Light" <will.light@btinternet.com>
RE: Actions and pipe speech onset
  by "Jarle Fagerheim" <jarle_fagerheim@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: A tiny requiem
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Actions and pipe speech onset
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: Actions and pipe speech onset
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Actions and pipe speech onset
  by "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au>
The action or the chest?
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: Actions and pipe speech onset
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
Re: smokin' A***ns
  by <Keys4bach@aol.com>
Re: smokin' A***ns
  by "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Quoting Williams and Owen From: "Scott Montgomery" <montre1978@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:12:30 -0600   Do organist try to get the pipe to speak on its attack or on it's release? =   I have always been taught that its the release, which can sound very beautiful: at least when I play :)   Scott Montgomery 619 W Church St. Champaign, IL 61820 217.390.0158 www.ScottMontgomeryMusic.net   Interesting... you have proven the test not only invalid, but non- applicable. No need to run the test. We have proven on paper that for these organs, an electric action of some type would have made more sense. No?   Andy     On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 08:01:17 +1300, TheShieling wrote > >I think it is time that this theory (about tracker actions allowing the > skilled organist to affect the sound by controlling the speed of the > pallet opening etc. etc.) to be put to the test. Now that we have a > number of organs with tracker action for the integral console and > electric action for the remote console - like the Disney Hall one..... > > For my part, I believe there are problems associated with your suggested > test. For example, if pipes are not voiced to have their speech > alterable, and if the action is not made in such a way as to allow > it either, then the test would be invalid, effectively ruling out > tracker organs generally from, say, 1840 to 1960. Too, I believe it > not really possible to build a large organ to produce this effect. > It doesn't seem really possible on very large pipes or very small > pipes, either. > > In my experience, it only really works with 8fts and 4fts, of sensitive > speech, on low pressure, on an action designed appropriately. Given = those > conditions, however, I've played small organs (say, up to 6 stops on > the chest) where the 8ft Open Diapason and Principal, or Stopped > Diapason and 4ft Flute, in pairs or singly, were indeed touch- > sensitive, especially from about TenA to two octaves above. > > I do not think it possible, in other words, to do your proposed test > on, say, a 3m Forster & Andrews tracker of 48 to 50 stops from the > 1880s, or on a 90rk tracker from Mander, Klais or Ron Sharp. > > Ross > > ****************************************************************** > "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>       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 List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org>    
(back) Subject: smokin' A***ns From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:41:07 -0800   But DIGITAL organs NEVER need repairs, yes/no? (grinning, ducking)   A. Nonnie Mousse      
(back) Subject: RE: Actions and pipe speech onset From: "Will Light" <will.light@btinternet.com> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 22:30:32 -0000   So does this mean, Sebastian that you would agree with Ross that my = proposed test would be invalid because pipes need to be specially voiced in order = to make them expressively played via tracker action and moving the same = pallets with a magnet or an electro-pneumatic action pulling the same tracker = would somehow cause the same pipes to behave differently? My feeling is that this idea of "controlling the beauty of the speech of = the pipes by altering the manual touch" is what is "smoke and mirrors" and I = am yet to be convinced that it makes any audible result. BUT if there is indeed such an effect, then surely designers of electric actions should be looking to make velocity and touch sensitive keyboards with the pallets being opened by servo-motors or some such gizmo so that = we can all enjoy the benefits of it on organs which because of their = disposal require electric actions? =20   Will Light Coventry UK   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of TubaMagna@aol.com Sent: 13 November 2004 20:06 To: pipechat@pipechat.org Subject: Actions and pipe speech onset   PipeChatters: Any voicer or finisher who has voiced or finished on both mechanical = and   assisted actions can tell you the same things:   The sound of a particular pipe is ever so slightly different (at = least in=20 speech onset characteristics) with each strike of the key. One can, with overarching approaches to touch and technique, get a=20 general type of attack to the tone -- a perceptible, general style of articulation=20 that one can use to noticeable effect in performance. One cannot alter tone or ictus with anywhere near the level of = control=20 that an orchestral instrumentalist can. Using various types of touch to affect=20 attack is different from having absolute "control" over pipe speech. Once the pallet seal is broken, the wind is on its own, and the = pipes at   its mercy. It is this very randomness and constant variation that make the = sound of   a pipe organ so intriguing to our ears, the give-and-take, the = individuality   of each pipe, even with in the context of the most meticulous tonal finishing. A fine pipe organ with a well-regulated wind supply "breathes" and=20 responds to the artist's touch. I do NOT mean bouncing or sagging wind, = but a=20 responsive winding system that imparts a vocal quality to the ensemble.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.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 List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org>    
(back) Subject: RE: Actions and pipe speech onset From: "Jarle Fagerheim" <jarle_fagerheim@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 23:53:12 +0100 (CET)   On a typical Scandinavian tracker organ of 5-25 stops from the 80's and 90's, the touch actually makes a noticeable difference. The release is especially important -- a too abrubt release can make listening quite unpleasant after a while. Harpsichord experience seems to be quite helpful when playing these instruments.   - Jarle http://jarle.moo.no    
(back) Subject: Re: reed organs/pipe organs/digital organs From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:00:20 -0500   On 11/12/04 2:16 PM, "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> wrote:   > Sometimes you have a person objecting to the term pipe organ unless it = is a > mechanical action pipe organ. Otherwise they are referred to as an = electric > pipe organ.   Oh, surely that's extremely silly! (And I favor mechanical instruments!)   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: A tiny requiem From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:01:43 -0500   On 11/12/04 2:28 PM, "OMusic@aol.com" <OMusic@aol.com> wrote:   > I was thinking of something like Handel's Water Music in his memory.   Oh=8Bthat's for a Baptismal service, isn't it?   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: Actions and pipe speech onset From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:59:27 -0800   Um, why go to all that trouble and use all that electronic gear to mimic something that happens naturally if you simply build an organ with the same action organs have had ever since there've BEEN organs?   I'm speaking of pipe organs here, not electronics with their "chiff" and "chuff" and "swell shades slamming" and "blower starting" sound-effects (grin).   It's long been known that pipes DO have to be voiced differently for different actions. There is perhaps LESS difference between a slider chest with mechanical key action and a slider chest with electro-mechanical or electro-pneumatic key action, but you're still up against the same old thing, UNLESS you resort to touch-sensitive keyboards and all that electronic gear:   ANY electrical circuit is either open, or closed.   That's why Wicks added whatchamacallits to their direct electric (TM) actions between the pipes and the pallet valves ... to cushion the sudden blow of the pallet opening wide.   Far too many organ mechanics have learned (to their sorrow) that you CAN'T just pick up pipes and move them from one kind of action to another, or change the action of an existing pitman windchest, for instance. Pipes that are voiced to play on one kind of action are NOT going to behave themselves on another.   Before you fire up your flame-emitting Bombardes, I know: many home organ enthusiasts will point with pride to their 100-rank Heinz 57s that run the gamut from Hook pipes to Wurlitzer pipes, with everything from electrocuted slider chests to Lionel-train-transformer-powered electro-mechanical chests underneath them. That's not a joke, BTW. I've actually SEEN that, for a Vox-in-a-box; I've also seen a rectifier powered by a car battery.   I will grant that there are a handful of rooms where the disposition of the organ may "require" electric action; more often, the church isn't willing to make the correction of that problem a priority ... "my great-aunt Minnie GAVE that window of the Transmutation of St. Fidgeta, and you're not gonna move it or cover it up with no damn ORGAN!"   Sound familiar?   Or, "we don't want the music coming from the back; nobody will sing in the choir if they can't be SEEN."   Hmmm ...   Cheers,   Bud       Will Light wrote:   > So does this mean, Sebastian that you would agree with Ross that my = proposed > test would be invalid because pipes need to be specially voiced in order = to > make them expressively played via tracker action and moving the same = pallets > with a magnet or an electro-pneumatic action pulling the same tracker = would > somehow cause the same pipes to behave differently? > My feeling is that this idea of "controlling the beauty of the speech of = the > pipes by altering the manual touch" is what is "smoke and mirrors" and I = am > yet to be convinced that it makes any audible result. > BUT if there is indeed such an effect, then surely designers of electric > actions should be looking to make velocity and touch sensitive keyboards > with the pallets being opened by servo-motors or some such gizmo so that = we > can all enjoy the benefits of it on organs which because of their = disposal > require electric actions? > > Will Light > Coventry UK > > -----Original Message----- > From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org] On Behalf Of > TubaMagna@aol.com > Sent: 13 November 2004 20:06 > To: pipechat@pipechat.org > Subject: Actions and pipe speech onset > > PipeChatters: > Any voicer or finisher who has voiced or finished on both mechanical = and > > assisted actions can tell you the same things: > > The sound of a particular pipe is ever so slightly different (at = least > in > speech onset characteristics) with each strike of the key. > One can, with overarching approaches to touch and technique, get a > general type of attack to the tone -- a perceptible, general style of > articulation > that one can use to noticeable effect in performance. > One cannot alter tone or ictus with anywhere near the level of = control > that an orchestral instrumentalist can. Using various types of touch to > affect > attack is different from having absolute "control" over pipe speech. > Once the pallet seal is broken, the wind is on its own, and the = pipes at > > its mercy. > It is this very randomness and constant variation that make the = sound of > > a pipe organ so intriguing to our ears, the give-and-take, the = individuality > > of each pipe, even with in the context of the most meticulous tonal > finishing. > A fine pipe organ with a well-regulated wind supply "breathes" and > responds to the artist's touch. I do NOT mean bouncing or sagging wind, = but > a > responsive winding system that imparts a vocal quality to the ensemble. > > Sebastian M. Gluck > New York City > http://www.glucknewyork.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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@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 > List-Subscribe: <mailto:pipechat-on@pipechat.org> > List-Digest: <mailto:pipechat-digest@pipechat.org> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pipechat-off@pipechat.org> > >      
(back) Subject: Re: Actions and pipe speech onset From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:25:13 EST     In a message dated 11/13/04 5:31:33 PM, will.light@btinternet.com writes:   << So does this mean, Sebastian, that you would agree with Ross that my proposed test would be invalid, because pipes need to be specially voiced in order = to make them expressively played via tracker action and moving the same = pallets with a magnet or an electro-pneumatic action pulling the same tracker = would somehow cause the same pipes to behave differently?>>   You are actually asking me to answer two different questions, which require two different answers. The test is not "invalid." The test HAS been made, and those who have played from both mechanical =   and electric-pulldown transmissions on the SAME organ have noticed a = difference in the way the pipes speak. The consensus seems to be that there is a more =   abrupt or violent "gulp" to the speech of pipes when the pallet is = "yanked" open by a solenoid. Let me clarify that although one can ALTER one's touch when playing a mechanical action, one CANNOT be guaranteed of specific individual = results. There is no sense of note shaping as a woodwind, brass, or string player might have, and the type of phrase shaping possible on a pianoforte is not = available. Pipes do not "need to be specially voiced in order to make them expressively played via tracker action." Good voicing is good voicing, and = expressive playing is the charge of the organist. However, organ pipes are voiced differently on different types of soundboards or windchests, and different styles of action. I would venture = to say that the tonal finisher and tonal director would most likely put their = energies into getting the best possible tone from the organ playing from the direct =   mechanical linkages, knowing that the tone might differ, if not suffer, if = played via a remote, assisted action.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/ ..  
(back) Subject: Re: Actions and pipe speech onset From: "bobelms" <bobelms@westnet.com.au> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 08:30:05 +0800   Wicks were not the only firm that used that device. Paul Hufner of Western =   Australia provided an expansion chamber under each pipe foot on his extension organs to rid them of that abrupt attack and release you get sometimes with electric action. It seems to work very well. In all this argument pro and con the advantages of tracker action let me = say this. There may be touch sensitive tracker organs where the speed of = opening of the pallet can be controlled by the finger but three things cross my mind: 1. Is this effect detectable in the huge churches where the Schnitgers and =   such are installed and there is a long reverb period? Not to the listener = I would think though it may be evident to the player if the touch is light enough. 2. My Dutch friends tell me that the tracker organs of the 17th and 18C in =   Holland are so heavy that no variation of speed of opening the pallet is possible. They are therefore not touch sensitive, though there may be exceptions to this. 3. Ross mentioned Forster and Andrews as an example of trackers which are too heavy to be touch sensitive. Let me add Wm Hill to this. There is a = Hill (1893) in a church here and I have tried to vary the speed of opening the pallet and it is not possible. You press hard and then the key goes down suddenly. There is no advantage over the Hufner organ round the corner = with electric action; in fact the Hufner is far easier to play and considerably =   less fatiguing.   An organ is an organ is an organ, and if the instrument is well voiced I fail to see that tracker action has much advantage though it may help the player IF it is a well regulated action and light enough for the player to =   vary the attack. But this is rather rare I would say. Bob Elms. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 7:59 AM Subject: Re: Actions and pipe speech onset snip> > ANY electrical circuit is either open, or closed. > > That's why Wicks added whatchamacallits to their direct electric (TM) > actions between the pipes and the pallet valves ... to cushion the = sudden > blow of the pallet opening wide. > > Far too many organ mechanics have learned (to their sorrow) that you = CAN'T > just pick up pipes and move them from one kind of action to another, or > change the action of an existing pitman windchest, for instance. Pipes > that are voiced to play on one kind of action are NOT going to behave > themselves on another. > >snip I will grant that there are a handful of rooms where the disposition =   >of the organ may "require" electric action; more often, the church isn't >willing to make the correction of that problem a priority ... "my >great-aunt Minnie GAVE that window of the Transmutation of St. Fidgeta, = and >you're not gonna move it or cover it up with no damn ORGAN!" > >> So does this mean, Sebastian that you would agree with Ross that my >> proposed >> test would be invalid because pipes need to be specially voiced in = order >> to >> make them expressively played via tracker action and moving the same >> pallets >> with a magnet or an electro-pneumatic action pulling the same tracker >> would >> somehow cause the same pipes to behave differently? >> My feeling is that this idea of "controlling the beauty of the speech = of >> the >> pipes by altering the manual touch" is what is "smoke and mirrors" and = I >> am >> yet to be convinced that it makes any audible result. >> >> >> Will Light >> Coventry UK >>    
(back) Subject: The action or the chest? From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:13:18 EST   What we're talking about here is not whether or not we can control the =   speech of the pipe with the action, but rather, what a particular = combination of factors does to the overall speech of organ pipes. The combination of factors that seems to please a great many respected =   musicians is slider-and-pallet soundboards, non-fatiguing, direct = mechanical linkage between the key and the pallet, a resonant case, and an elevated = position for the instrument, projecting the sound down the longer dimension of the auditorium. That auditorium is most pleasing when it is resonant, NOT necessarily overly reverberant. When somebody says, "Well, it's a nice room, but it's = not Saint John the Divine," it reveals some degree of ignorance. Most music = suffers in that room, unless the listener is right up by the sound source, just as = the magnificent structures of Widor, Vierne, and Durufle get smeared into an unholy mess in the average French cathedral. GOOD ORGANBUILDING IS NOT DEPENDENT UPON A SINGLE FACTOR. We have learned that, which is why we now understand that a Kimball, a =   Lewis, an Isnard, or a Trost are all valid and great organs, even if the = works of the latter are difficult enough to play that some cannot get past the = action to concentrate on music-making. Please distinguish between the CONCEPT of mechanical action, and the technology of it. Of course, it has evolved. Modern actions are responsive = because we can calculate leverages, pass the trackers through frictionless Teflon combs, employ lightweight materials, and pivot squares on far more precise =   bearings than our forefathers. We do not discard these ancient works of = art because they are difficult for some less athletic organists to play, and NO, they = are NOT sewing machines. They are machines, but they are works of art used to convey other works of art.   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City http://www.glucknewyork.com/ ..  
(back) Subject: Re: Actions and pipe speech onset From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:59:01 -0800       bobelms wrote:   > Wicks were not the only firm that used that device. Paul Hufner of > Western Australia provided an expansion chamber under each pipe foot on =   > his extension organs to rid them of that abrupt attack and release you > get sometimes with electric action. It seems to work very well. > In all this argument pro and con the advantages of tracker action let me =   > say this. There may be touch sensitive tracker organs where the speed of =   > opening of the pallet can be controlled by the finger but three things > cross my mind: > 1. Is this effect detectable in the huge churches where the Schnitgers > and such are installed and there is a long reverb period? Not to the > listener I would think though it may be evident to the player if the > touch is light enough.   I think the effect would be noticeable, not so much because one could hear the difference downstairs, but because it would affect the organist's ARTICULATION.   > 2. My Dutch friends tell me that the tracker organs of the 17th and 18C > in Holland are so heavy that no variation of speed of opening the pallet =   > is possible. They are therefore not touch sensitive, though there may be =   > exceptions to this.   Um, I'd question the restoration methods used (if any) ... there is one famous Cliquot (?) from the 18th century with an especially remarkable original (light) touch, and they're TERRIFIED to do anything radical to it, for fear of changing it.   > 3. Ross mentioned Forster and Andrews as an example of trackers which > are too heavy to be touch sensitive. Let me add Wm Hill to this. There > is a Hill (1893) in a church here and I have tried to vary the speed of > opening the pallet and it is not possible. You press hard and then the > key goes down suddenly. There is no advantage over the Hufner organ > round the corner with electric action; in fact the Hufner is far easier > to play and considerably less fatiguing.   In all the above cases, you're speaking of OLD tracker organs, which may or may not have received sympathetic care/restoration. Nor is it universally true, even if they HAVEN'T.   Most Koehnken & Grimm organs have a touch similar to a good harpsichord, even with the coupler drawn. Koehnken was a 19th century German-American builder who built mainly in Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana; he apprenticed with Matthias Schwabe, who (legend has it) apprenticed with one of the Silbermanns in Germany. Schwabe's and Koehnken's organs both basically follow the South German pattern ... full chorus on the Great, soft stops and solo reeds on the Swell ... though that's a generalization ... he built somewhat differently for Lutherans than he did for Catholics. Interestingly enough, he himself was a Lutheran, but built for virtually every Catholic church in the tri-state area, at a time when ecumenism was unheard-of (chuckle). > > An organ is an organ is an organ, and if the instrument is well voiced I =   > fail to see that tracker action has much advantage though it may help > the player IF it is a well regulated action and light enough for the > player to vary the attack. But this is rather rare I would say. > Bob Elms.   There are GOOD tracker (both ancient and modern) and there are BAD trackers, just as there are good and bad EP and EM organs. Oh, and before anybody jumps my case about tracker organs needing "restoration", yeah, they do ... about every hundred years or so (chuckle), and MAYBE the occasional leather nut or stepped-on Pedal tracker. Unless, of course, they're beat to death and/or played constantly, as in a conservatory of music; but those old Koehnkens played 4-6 Masses, seven days a week; the one we took down and moved COULD have gone back up with little more than some patches on the bellows and a few replacement trackers and ivories, but we decided to do it right whilst we had it apart. The pallet leathers were IMMACULATE, which says something about the quality of leather a hundred years ago ... those old Catholic barns ALL had smoky soft-coal furnaces, incense, and candle-smoke.   Cheers,   Bud      
(back) Subject: Re: smokin' A***ns From: <Keys4bach@aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:56:20 EST   In a message dated 11/13/2004 4:37:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, quilisma@cox.net writes:   > But DIGITAL organs NEVER need repairs, yes/no? (grinning, ducking) >   do not duck, or quack,   if a church believes they never need repair they deserve what they get.   if they believe a company has ALL PARTS FOR ALL organs, they get what they =   deserve. anytime you have to upgrade and put in a new computer, it is not =   repairing with parts, it is replacing.   oh well, guess it shows i am not an Allen fan.   dale in florida  
(back) Subject: Re: smokin' A***ns From: "Liquescent" <quilisma@cox.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:16:44 -0800   I was somewhat particular about an analog Rodgers I used to play, but it seems to me I had about as many service calls on it as I did on a couple of '60s Mollers in previous jobs. This was in the 1980s; the organ was a 750, bought new in 1980.   Once we got the Allen 301-C fixed at St. Matt's (new key contacts, new combination action), it was VERY reliable. I don't know about newer ones. The church now has an Allen Renaissance, so I imagine I'll hear from my spies if it gives trouble (chuckle).   Cheers,   Bud   Keys4bach@aol.com wrote:   > In a message dated 11/13/2004 4:37:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, > quilisma@cox.net writes: > >> But DIGITAL organs NEVER need repairs, yes/no? (grinning, ducking) > > > > do not duck, or quack, > > if a church believes they never need repair they deserve what they get. > > if they believe a company has ALL PARTS FOR ALL organs, they get what > they deserve. anytime you have to upgrade and put in a new computer, it =   > is not repairing with parts, it is replacing. > > oh well, guess it shows i am not an Allen fan. > > dale in florida