A scholar is soon to publish an article in which he posits that Bach never actually played his 'chorales' at the organ, instead playing a continuo accompaniment that supported the choral parts.

That's so obvious it seems like it hardly deserves an article...when singing chorales for the congregation and choir in the cantatas all the scores included string parts for the chorales...so it was common practice. It's not like the orchestra would pack up and leave early. I bet if he played organ only on a hymn he'd hear about it in the morning at staff meeting, at the local coffee house.

"Herr Bach, forgot to write out the string parts again, eh?"

Francis, I've played Schnitger's instruments in Altenbruch, Hamburg and Grasberg. Further south, I've played a number of Silbermann's instruments in Dreseden, Rotha, Frauenstein and Freiberg, as well as an instrument by his competitor, whose name currently escapes my very tired mind.

Lest I be accused of some kind of Germanic bias, I hasten to add that I've also played historical instruments in Belgium and England (Snetzler etc), and am hoping for further trips to Italy and France, but have simply been too busy to plan anything yet.

These instruments have been amazing, and have made me understand the repertoire in a way that nothing else could have!

Giovanni, you don't perchance have a syndicated teleprogramme on EWTN and elsewhere in the ether wherein you demonstrate the great organs of the West?
I love that series!
Or,......am I worse than an amateur, neigh a heretic for asking? I'm confused.

Charles, interesting you should mention the scenario of your Mixture III and having its 2' rank playable by itself. That's how my Schantz is...the great has a Mixture III but the 2' was made playable by itself when it was built. There's a 2' Flagolet in the Swell which is an extension of the 4' Gemshorn. But you do have a 2' flute on the Great, which will be a nice bonus when you do have the 2' principal playable by itself.

And also interesting that someone mentioned the Bedient organ that was built for Christ Church Cathedral here in Louisville. I never saw or heard that organ but I've always heard the same thing about why it didn't last in that church. It was a terribly impractical design for that church. It was based on a CC organ of similar size, and while I'm sure it would have been fun to play....it just wasn't a design which lent itself in that setting at all. Fortunately, as was pointed out, that organ has found better use in another church.

Some may break bread together on their knees.
In this thread breaking bread together has no tracker traction.
Instead, breaking bread wind together separately and at loggerheads
is done here on our toes ... or on our toes and heels ... or not at all.
We cannot even seem to agree to disagree and be done with it.

On reflection, I can't help but feel that this thread has been helpful in many respects. Plenty of heat, but also plenty of light.

I think it's really revealed what some of the important issues surrounding pipe organs in Catholic churches are: price, specification, parish politics. What it might need to move to, in another thread, is how to encourage parishes to get the best possible instruments and make doing so financially viable in almost every circumstance. There are a few 'no-contests' in this thread, I think:
1. Tracker organs really do have the most sensitive playing action of all organs.
2. Tracker organs require the least maintenance in the long term.
3. Parishes have felt unable to purchase mechanical action organs for reasons of:
a. Cost
b. Dimensions
c. Specifications

I can't help but think that if the best minds were at work on this for long enough, ways would be found of reducing costs without compromising quality. I mean, seriously, if this was getting the intellectual power and money that have gone into building a better car, imagine what could have been done by now. This is where I am devoting my energies, and I would like for as many people as feel comfortable doing so to join me. To my mind, the key is small but effective organs, and teaching organists just how much one can do with a small instrument. Part of me wants to set up a website with lots of recordings and links to scores, and the other part wants to continue working towards my cost-effective tracker organ, which I believe is possible to build almost anywhere in the world. If we build networks for design and production, we could lower those costs even more. C'mon, folks - We've done it with chant, we've done it with polyphony. We CAN help organ builders: the ones that I know professionally have been invariably kind and patient, and welcome the interest and manual assistance of non-builders, provided that they're willing to listen and work under the builders' expert guidance.

There are people reading this thread who have all sorts of talents to contribute. I'm sure there's an engineer or two, an accountant, shipping merchant, economist, experts in technical design, electricians, carpenters, acoustical engineers (yes, we need you to tell us which harmonics are magnified in a particular church etc!). Arp Schnitger didn't actually build his instruments entirely and had little 'teams' helping him in every town. We could do the same on a much larger scale. I already have a pilot project on the way, but I don't want it to be confined to one place in the world. We can all be a part of this. My only conditions are:
a. The organ will compete in price with "alternatives"
b. One manual
c. Small specification
d. Small footprint/adjustable height - ie. something that can be fitted into most buildings.
e. Maximum bang for buck!

There is a need for basic knowledge about how pipe organs work to run a company like this otherwise quality ends up being entrusted to others. Let's put a basic question out there as an example:

Who can be first to name the three things happen to the sound of a Swell division when the expression pedal opens the shutters? (both tracker mechanical & electric shutters)

Palestrina:

I am not about to agree to be indifferent

I did not say that, I talked about agreeing to disagree, not to be indifferent. Yes, this discussion has musical consequences. But, for most of the past 100-200 posts in this thread, all I hear is one person saying one thing, another disagreeing and saying another thing, and yet another saying something else ... over and over and over and over.

At some point, one has to understand that what one person says is either agreed to or falls of the ears of someone who disagrees, and there is next to no chance that any further discussion will convince the intransigent person who does not see eye to eye.

You may have noticed that I have thanked you for several of your comments ... I come from the tracker world, so I understand. This is not against you ... or anyone.

Palestrina - You've still descended to an ad hominum attack. Even to the point that my charity in occasionally waiving fees for those who cannot afford to pay attracts criticism. Shame on you.

It really boils down to whether an organist is doing this because it is a way to make money or because they love doing it and often get paid as a result.

I never charge for a funeral or evan a wedding where the family cannot afford much.

This discussion is finished, thanks to all, I think that we and others have learned a lot from it about organs and people.

I like the hat, Francis!

I cannot see the point of building an organ with action that modern software can play better or as badly as a real person. No art in operating switches.