PipeChat Digest #5300 - Thursday, April 28, 2005
 
Re: Making a Case for Wicks
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: tongues of flame
  by <BlueeyedBear@aol.com>
Stravinsky's Oiseau de feu (was tongues of flame)
  by "Robert Lind" <lindr@core.com>
Re: tongues of flame
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
Re: Making a Case for Wicks
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: tongues of flame
  by <BlueeyedBear@aol.com>
Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ?
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
And God created organs
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Wurly? Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ?
  by <ScottFop@aol.com>
Re: tongues of flame
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers)
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Tonality
  by "Randy Terry" <randy@peacham.homeip.net>
Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers)
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Tremolos
  by "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com>
Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ?
  by "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com>
Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ?
  by "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com>
Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers)
  by "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com>
Re: Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance
  by "Robert Ehrhardt" <r_ehrh@bellsouth.net>
Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ?
  by "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com>
Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers)
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Making a Case for Wicks From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:49:48 -0400   At 11:52 PM 2005-04-27, you wrote: >The John Weaver recording of the Wicks is not that good. However, I'm >still blown away scratching head, rubbing face, thinking "wow!". Wicks = and >Ruffatti seem to be going to similar phases. It seems as thought both >companies had pasts where the organs lacked warmth and are now in a >redemptive state that is making them among the choice for many. They both =   >also seem to be saying "Look, we know we have bad pasts, but listen to us = now!"   Hi,   I believe the time has come when the market for mediocre quality pipe = organ (both build quality and sound quality) is history. The marketplace = demands a high degree of workmanship and artistry if they are going to pay the price of a pipe organ.   With the advances made in digital organs and the cost which is a fraction of a pipe organ, there is no need to buy a second rate pipe organ. The marketplace has already determined that.   That is why I think you will find companies like Ruffatti and Wicks spend much more time and effort on tonal finishing and getting their sound to be =   really good.   Arie V.      
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame From: <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:51:18 EDT   In a message dated 4/28/05 5:59:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time, runyonr@muohio.edu writes:   > Any suggestions?   how about the last variation of durufle's Veni Creator? that's my = postlude that day. it lasts roughly about 3-1/2 minutes.   scot  
(back) Subject: Stravinsky's Oiseau de feu (was tongues of flame) From: "Robert Lind" <lindr@core.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:06:38 -0500   I'm hoping someone has transcribed this for organ, in whole or in part, during the recent resurgence of transcriptions in recitals. I'm = immediately thought Guillou did, but I'm pretty sure he took the 3 piano excerpts for piano from Petrouchka that Stravinsky, himself, had made.   As to the Firebird, Chester (=A9 1922) published (and possibly would = republish on individual demand) the Berceuse, Rondeau des princesses, and Finale.   Bob Lind   ----- Original Message ----- From: Randolph Runyon <runyonr@muohio.edu> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 8:40 AM Subject: Re: tongues of flame     > Has that been transcribed for organ? > > R. Runyon > > On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:38 AM, Larry McGuire wrote: > > > How about Stravinsky's Firebird??? > > > > Larry    
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:07:13 -0400   That's it--exactly what I was looking for! Thanks so much!   Randy Runyon     On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:51 AM, BlueeyedBear@aol.com wrote:   > In a message dated 4/28/05 5:59:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time,=20 > runyonr@muohio.edu writes: > > > Any suggestions? > > > how about the last variation of durufle's Veni Creator?=A0 that's my=20=   > postlude that day.=A0 it lasts roughly about 3-1/2 minutes. > > scot=  
(back) Subject: Re: Making a Case for Wicks From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 07:28:33 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   I have stayed out of this Wicks torch-song, possibly for the reason that I have never seen one, played one or heard one.   However, I suppose we share many of the same problems across the pond here in the UK, in that many organ-builders are now rather dismissed (if they still exist) on the basis that they produced organ-tone which, at the time, was highly fashionable.   I really empathise with organ-builders when this sort of discussion takes place, for the fact is, we are seldom aware of ALL the facts and circumstances, and we usually don't know what the consultant/committees had in mind at the time.   Unless an organ is gravely bad mechanically, or structurally, unreliable or just so overwhelmingly unmusical; we play judge and jury at our peril, and do great injustice to those who probably tried to give of their best at the time.   I always take, as a benchmark of integrity, the work that Harrison & Harrison did at the Royal Festival Hall. Like Israel fleeing Egypt, they were in strange territory, and I barely dare to contemplate the sleepless nights of those involved in what, at the time, was clearly a revolutionary project.   Were I called upon to be a tonal-consultant, and were I asked to advise on the creation of a wonderful, all singing and dancing Baroque Organ in large, well-clad, padded cell of a building, I would suggest that such was impossible or walk away from further involvement. THIS is the tragedy of building fashionable instruments rather than musically appropriate instruments.....a building "talks", and a good tonal artist must "listen" to what the building is saying.   Had the musicians and consultants reached the conclusion that neo-classical construct is a concept which has many different tonal interpretations, but MUST have tonal integrity WHATEVER THE STYLE OF VOICING AND SCALING, then we would all be the happier for the events of recent history.   Believe it or not, SOME neo-baroque organs are incredibly ROMANTIC of tone.   Sadly, in this day and age, organ-builders cannot "walk away" from a building and refuse work, as they once did here in the UK, when organ-building was a fairly large industry and builders could pick and choose.   So they are as much the victims of circumstance as the unfortunate listener, for their bread and butter depends upon a steady flow of work, and dare I suggest, a profit at the end of it?   Don't shoot the organ-builder.....shoot the consultants who didn't know what they were doing, but pretended otherwise.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK       --- DarrylbytheSea@aol.com wrote: > > I'm not sure would I go that far to say they were > "bad pasts", but > consistent with the period, so many of the organs of > the time by many builders had > thin scales, etc. It's just hard to get a warm sound > out of screaming mixtures > and puny principals. And the sad thing is some > builders have "got it" and > continue to build those sounds and call it historic > and informed.     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame From: <BlueeyedBear@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:55:25 EDT   In a message dated 4/28/05 7:08:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, runyonr@muohio.edu writes:   > That's it--exactly what I was looking for! Thanks so much! > > Randy Runyon   randy, if you have time to work up the whole set of variations, try doing = the theme & var. 1-3 for prelude, then the final one for postlude. that's = what i'm doing. also, i'm putting in the sunday bulletin a few explanatory = words about it, including how durufle chose to musically depict a "mighty wind" = on the mightiest wind instrument of all. that last variation always sounds kind = of, well, windy to me.   scot, (who's walking down the streets of the city, smiling at everybody he =   sees) tee hee  
(back) Subject: Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ? From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 07:57:53 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   Jarle makes an interesting point, but quotes the wrong builder!   A Wurlitzer organ is a fascinating piece of kit, with all sorts of different methods of sound production, and the same can be said of ANY theatre organ.   For instance, many Compton cinema-organs had electrostatic "Melotone" units....a strange, wailing sort of sound, and created entirely electronically.   Christie (a derivative of Hill, Norman & Beard Ltd) here in the UK, often used natural,closed labial pipes, but which had tubes coming out of the top dipping into water.....thus imitating the sound of bird-song.   Is that an organ-pipe, or a piece of noisy plumbing?     Almost ALL the Wurlitzer traps and effects, use REAL instruments within.....xylophones, drums, snares, tubular bells, sleigh bells etc etc   I think the one exception is the "sand-block"....a simple hiss of air to simulate the effect.   Of course, it works the other way.....using pipes as synthetic tones. Gabler, in the 18th century, was happy to use "bird song" pipes (Swegel?) and Thunder effects (Donner?) using some of the largest pipes playing together en-harmonically.   Some Compton organs are so cleverly voiced, it is possible to imitate Orchestral Oboes using just labial pipes.....a very convincing effect indeed!   Frans Casper Schnitger used 4th sounding ranks at Alkmaar in one of the Mixtures (Carillon?)....the effect is akin to electronic tubular-bells, and takes one completely by surprise.   So there is nothing NEW about tonal synthesis. It has quite a history and quite a pedigree.   Perhaps we ask the wrong questions, and therefore come up with the wrong answers, which are repeated endlessly on this, and other lists.   Hypothetical question:-   IF a digital organ came along, which was, in every way as good as anything to be heard from a pipe organ, on what grounds could we object to it?   They certainly wouldn't be MUSICAL grounds, surely?   The possible other reasons could be historic, archeological, visual, artistic heritage or just pure nostalgia.   The younger generation would jump aboard, and simply enjoy the musical experience without question, but I'll personally stick with the pipe organ, BECAUSE I'M STARTING TO GET OLD, AND THINGS 'AINT WHAT THEY USED TO BE WHEN I WAS A BOY!!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK       --- Jarle Fagerheim <jarle_fagerheim@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:   > Then what would a Wurlitzer be ;)? >     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: And God created organs From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:05:49 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   Creation is an eclectic compromise.   Now if God had called in the right consultants at the time..........   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK           --- "N. Russotto" <ravenrockdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:   > > *In fact, I know a few organists who could find > something wrong with the > way God handled the creation.* > > ** > There's nothing wrong with creation. . . God just > should've created humans > and THEN made light. We wanna be first! <g>     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Wurly? Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ? From: <ScottFop@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:30:26 EDT   In a message dated 4/28/05 5:38:16 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jarle_fagerheim@yahoo.co.uk writes:   Then what would a Wurlitzer be?       A theatre pipe organ. Scott F. Foppiano   Organist and Director of Parish Music Holy Rosary Catholic Church, Memphis, TN In te Domine speravi, non confundar in aeternum.  
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:32:53 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   Pentecost organ music:-   Veni Creator Spiritus (1981) Carl R=FCtti   Komm, heiliger Geist, Herre Gott Franz Tunder   Komm, heiliger Geist, Herre Gott BuxWV 199 Dietrich Buxtehude   Fantasia super Komm, Heiliger Geist BWV 651 J.S. Bach   Messe de la Pentec=F4te (1950) Olivier Messiaen Communion Sortie   Veni Creator Spiritus Nicholas de Grigny En taille =E0 5 Fugue =E0 5 Duo R=E9cit de Cromorne Dialogue sur les Grands Jeux   Tournemire L=92Orgue Mystique 35 (In Festo Pentecostes): Fantaisie-Choral   Messe de la Pentec=F4te Messiaen   Sounds like a lot of hard work to me!!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK       __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers) From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:50:08 EDT   Dear Maurits:   I was witness to this sort of thing in 1968 in a RCC. I thought it totally out of place in a sanctuary. It bordered on the sensual and even pornographic. I don't ever want to see it again either. I don't see any reason what so ever to do anything like this in a church. They call it liturgical dance, but was it ever liturgical to do it. I say no to that. It smacks of prurient intent and nothing sacred about burlesque in a sacred place.   Ron Severin    
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:51:50 EDT   I'd be careful on this one. Whenever I attend an organ recital, I make sure to remove my clothing = and perform a distinctive interpretive dance for each selection on the = program. Despite these things being billed as "cultural events," the reaction never =   seems to be appropriate to the spirit in which my performance was = intended. Although I have no formal dance training, I try to be as artistic as possible, but it is difficult to be sensitive and expressive when being = jeered and bludgeoned with baseball bats. How can these people judge my work if I'm arrested before completing a piece? Maybe THAT's what's causing the = decline in organ recital attendance.  
(back) Subject: Tonality From: "Randy Terry" <randy@peacham.homeip.net> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:07:24 -0700   Each builder is unique, and during the neo-baroque era, each builder approached their craft in the way they felt was best.   Why are we comparing Ruffatti and Wicks? I see more in common with the experimentation with solid-state applications early on than tonality.   Except for a few Wicks installations where someone was firm about thorough tonal finishing, I found most Wicks from the 70's to be quite raw, and = thus, tonal finishing later down the line was easy (I'm not talking about scaling.)   On the other hand, the Ruffattis I came across had a much better ensemble, and the flutes and principals 8 and 4 never seemed raw to me. I'll agree that the scaling may have been thin and the over-emphasis of mixtures was present, but generally, the ensemble and individual stops made sense for = the period.   There were some interesting mechanical features - anyone remember "Proper Automatic Pedal?"   I don't see anything wrong with stating an opinion, but I suggest we = refrain from "grand" pronouncements. I can think of instruments by every major builder that would generally be considered less than perfect.   Why not try looking at both good and not-so-good aspects of every organ. Except for a few instances, if you can't find at least one "good" comment about any instrument, then I question your honesty. Not looking for something "outstanding," but just that in any organ, most of us should be able to find its strength and build on that.   +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Randy Terry Music Minister The Episcopal Church of St. Peter Redwood City, California          
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:09:13 -0400   At 12:51 PM 2005-04-28, you wrote: > I'd be careful on this one. > Whenever I attend an organ recital, I make sure to remove my = clothing > and >perform a distinctive interpretive dance for each selection on the = program. >Despite these things being billed as "cultural events," the reaction = never >seems to be appropriate to the spirit in which my performance was = intended. > Although I have no formal dance training, I try to be as artistic as >possible, but it is difficult to be sensitive and expressive when being >jeered and >bludgeoned with baseball bats. How can these people judge my work if I'm >arrested before completing a piece? Maybe THAT's what's causing the >decline in >organ recital attendance. Big Tuba,   You have to be thankful, that at least these so-called critics showed up for your exquisite, masterful artistry, and swelled the numbers for you.   AV      
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers) From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:13:30 -0700 (PDT)   Hello,   Now I'm all for this!   I feel sure that worship would be greatly enhanced by choristers dancing to the organ music of Petr Eben....as indeed they already do with their feet, but safely out of sight in the stalls.   I remember well, the choristers at York Minster processing in for the Service of 9 lessons and carols at Christmas. One of the boys gave a little skip as he walked......he was suitably reprimanded afterwards.   If God made us, he gave us joints and suitable bits to dance with. Why should the puritans have all the non-fun, when there is a whole world of expression to be explored?   It seems so wrong not to move to Eben's "Liturgical Dances."   The churches in Europe were often rowdy places, where people held meetings and made a lot of noise. Why has church become so dull.....so cold.....so inhuman?   Have we done something wrong? (I do hope so! It shows we are alive!)   The 'Vicar of Dibley' featured the delightful dancing choirmaster, so I say, let's go for it.   It may raise a few eyebrows if the entire dancing choir is male, but the congregations will soon get used to it once the initial shock has worn off.   In my experience, at least half the choir will probably be practicing for the all-male Saturday night disco.....but that's another can of worms.   I think we should a new "dance" Fugue to rival that of Bach's......perhaps based on the splendid Michael Jackson song "I just can't control my feet."   If Sebastian could let us know the time and date of his next performance, I may be tempted to fly over there.   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK     --- RonSeverin@aol.com wrote:   > > I was witness to this sort of thing in 1968 in a > RCC. I thought it > totally out of place in a sanctuary. It bordered on > the sensual > and even pornographic.   __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Tremolos From: "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:27:06 -0400   Red would work on Pentecost and Reformation Day especially well. You know, =   the Holy Ghost and all (8-P   Cole Votaw -- Springfield, Ohio, USA   John wrote: >We used white felt, but I guess red would do equally >well :-)     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.4 - Release Date: 4/27/2005      
(back) Subject: Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ? From: "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:33:31 -0400   Maurits wrote: >All others (except of course the pure electronical ones) are hybrids.   I heard that the Skinner in the National Cathedral (St. Peter and St. = Paul) in Washington, D.C. had an electronic bass somewhere. Does that make the organ a hybrid?   When is a (wo)man not a (wo)man? When s/he has an artificial leg?   Cole Votaw -- Springfield, Ohio, USA     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.4 - Release Date: 4/27/2005      
(back) Subject: Re: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ? From: "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:37:32 -0400   Jarle wrote: >Then what would a Wurlitzer be ;)?   All of the above? A pipe organ, an electronic organ, and (I am sure there is one somewhere) a hybrid: What WurliTzer are we referencing?   Cole Votaw -- Springfield, Ohio, USA     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.4 - Release Date: 4/27/2005      
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers) From: "Cole" <rcolev@woh.rr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:50:36 -0400   Now didn't David dance before the Ark of the Covenant? I think he was unclothed. I don't think there was organ music involved, though.   Cole Votaw -- Springfield, Ohio, USA     -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.4 - Release Date: 4/27/2005      
(back) Subject: Re: Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance From: "Robert Ehrhardt" <r_ehrh@bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:51:47 -0400   Well, I would pay money to see that!   Robert Ehrhardt Noel Memorial UMC Shreveport, LA > > From: TubaMagna@aol.com > Date: 2005/04/28 Thu PM 12:51:50 EDT > To: pipechat@pipechat.org > Subject: Re: tongues of flame and liturgical dance > > I'd be careful on this one. > Whenever I attend an organ recital, I make sure to remove my = clothing and > perform a distinctive interpretive dance for each selection on the = program. > Despite these things being billed as "cultural events," the reaction = never > seems to be appropriate to the spirit in which my performance was = intended. > Although I have no formal dance training, I try to be as artistic as =   > possible, but it is difficult to be sensitive and expressive when being = jeered and > bludgeoned with baseball bats. How can these people judge my work if I'm =   > arrested before completing a piece? Maybe THAT's what's causing the = decline in > organ recital attendance. > > ****************************************************************** > "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: When is a pipe organ not a pipe organ? From: "Arie Vandenberg" <ArieV@ClassicOrgan.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:52:55 -0400   At 03:43 AM 2005-04-28, you wrote: >Pipe organs with electronic stops are nothing new: we have >plenty in our catalogue with a couple of electronic stops, >typically substituting big Pedal pipes. > >But there are also organs with some pipe ranks and lots >of electronic sounds. Some just seem to have a couple >of ranks of real pipes in the fa=E7ade, with nothing >but speakers behind them. > >Should I include these in our catalogue as being pipe >organs just because they do have *some* real pipes? >Or should organs in which, say, over 50% of stops >are electronic be excluded? > >I have to confess that I'm unsure where to draw >the line and would welcome guidance from list >members. > >Peter Rodwell >International Organ Foundation >http://www.IntOrg.org   Peter,   I may not be of much help here, but APOBA (American Pipe Organ Builders=20 Association), has a definition of a pipe organ that states that all stops=20 should be pipe, with the only allowances being 32' stops and Chimes.   As a result a number of member pipe organ outfits were disqualified because= =20 they built so-called hybrids.   Arie V.      
(back) Subject: Re: tongues of flame(liturgical dancers) From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:55:35 -0400   I guess you didn't read my original post, that began this discussion. I had already pointed that out.   Randy Runyon     On Apr 28, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Cole wrote:   > Now didn't David dance before the Ark of the Covenant? I think he was > unclothed. I don't think there was organ music involved, though. > > Cole Votaw -- Springfield, Ohio, USA > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.4 - Release Date: 4/27/2005 > > > > ****************************************************************** > "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> >