My thoughts, as a former pipe organ builder, with one of the preeminent companies, Visser-Rowland Associates.

At VRA, we built mainly trackers, of all sizes. I loved the sound, the look, and the maintenance accessibility. We did build some electric action organs, mostly on slider chests, and used electric action for coupling only on some of the largest instruments. Something like this would quite expensive per rank. The only more expensive would be from certain builders that specialize in historic replications.

American builders, throughout history, have had periods of really good and really bad works. If you want to work with Organ Clearing House (or any other similar venture), be sure to get a good idea of what the history is of the organ that now sits in storage or is unplayable in the church. You will also have to vet the company you choose to move the organ and re-install it. Almost any of these instruments should probably have a complete restoration, even with modern digital control systems for some of the electro-pneumatic organs.

As to the other kind of organs: I am in favor of some digital stops, and I won't refuse to play for a Liturgy on an electronic organ. And there is a significant difference between the older electronics (like the Allen mentioned in the original post) and the new generation of digital instruments. Stella Maris has an electro-pneumatic organ in the church and an older Rodgers (not digital) in the parish hall. I play regularly on both. My move to Charleston was to get back into organ building with Alan Ontko, who was also interested in hybrid organ building. Alas, that didn't work out, business-wise, and Alan is now retired, and I have moved on also.

Here are my points on hybrids:

1. Yes, pipe sound is better than speakers. No argument there.

2a. Pipes support congregational singing - at least if they are scaled and voiced properly, and well positioned in the building. Lousy tonal finishing of poor pipes in a poor location are no help to the congregation whatsoever. You really might as well be using speakers.

2b. But one good Principal chorus with at least a partial Flute chorus, on at least one manual and in the pedal, will be sufficient to accomplish that goal.

3. All the stops under expression - the color flutes, strings and celestes, and reeds - work just as well digitally. The flue stops move with temperature and weather, the reeds do not. Plan to spend $1,000 - $5,000 per year on tuning. N.B. The new generation of digital organ have the capacity for each and every note of every stop to individually "finished". Most of these stops have been "sampled" from good pipes in good organs, and those samples have been converted to digital wave forms, which can have their overtones shaped per note. If your church has both money and space for pipes, knock yourself out! Otherwise, get the most out of the pipes you purchase, AND the most out of your digital stops via good tonal finishing on both pipes and digital stops. Caveat: Not all sellers of digital organs have either the ability or the interest in spending much time on this kind of tonal finishing! (Then again, neither do some pipe organ companies!)

4. Many of you already know about chest layouts in pipe organs - how divided into whole tones is better sounding that chromatic (and more balanced looks and weight wise), and that a tierce (major third) layout enhances the intervalic tuning even more, i.e. major 3rds are all next to each other and major 2nds are far away from each other. The same can be accomplished in modern digital organs via channels - multiple speakers. Rather than all the generated wave-forms creating a composite wave-form due to the nature of a speaker cone, perfect 4ths and 5ths, and major 3rds, can all come from different speakers and blend in the organ case just like the wave-forms produced by pipes. And these many speakers will still take up less room and not weigh as much as their corresponding ranks of pipes.

The problems with hybrid organs are basically twofold:

A. Those businesses that sell digital organs don't usually really know much about tonal finishing. The manufacturer includes some basic guidelines for how to voice each stop, even each note, but that's as far as they go. They also don't typically work with pipes, much less well built pipes on well built wind-chests.

B. Pipe organ builders mostly refuse to do more than 32' pedal extensions with digital stops. In fact, the APOBA guidelines specify that their member firms must NOT do anything more than that, under penalty of losing their membership.

Therefore, the organ of the 21st century, the hybrid organ, will remain neither fish nor foul until some people step up and create the "best of both worlds", AND market their product successfully.

Again, if you are at a church with money and space, then by any and all means get a pipe organ - even a concert tracker! Otherwise, please realize you have reasonable options.

The Roland C-330 is no longer in production, none are available from the factory, however, there is a rather lively trade in pre-owned ones - I am installing one in a church and have a list of a few others available, if anyone is interested. Some were purchased as a step in a long term plan, just as Sir Frances mentions.

Roland, after 25 years, divested itself of certain businesses including Rodgers - which marketed and built the C-330 in the US, has new Dutch owners, GOG, who decided not to continue to build and sell the C-330. Roland continues to build the C-30 Harpsichord which is available in the US.

dots not dot important MJO. u r the king of dots

.

A "Bruestungsorgel" is one of many historical solutions to the problem of both low gallery height and minimal floor space, e.g.:

http://www.bigeloworgans.com/OpusPageOut.aspx?oid=30

bigelow - great works

My 10-rank Schantz runs about $800. per year for maintenance and tunings.

A Bruestungsorgel might work, if it weren't for the fact that choir people were concerned from the beginning about not being able to see the sanctuary. If we did that I would lose every member of my choir immediately, and my job as well.

TBH: with all of the meetings, etc., I'm getting sick of this whole thing. I'm almost at the point of saying that when the A***n goes we burn the hymnals and go completely to unaccompanied plainchant, with the occasional choir motet, and just forgetting it.

Is a small chamber organ a possibility? It would be extremely limited in the literature it could play, but it would be real.

Or, is it possible to cantelever a reasonable number of ranks on one or more of walls within the church and voice them so that they permeate the chruch in a nice way?

Sackbuts & shawms is a delightful suggestion. So Gabrielian! (Cornets, too!)

(We really are trying to be helpful.)

(I know of at least one church, Bruton Parish in Willamsburg, that has a Skinner of some size above the ceiling (meaning 'in the attic') - though I believe that they have replaced it in the last few years.)

@Salieri I forgot you're in New England (or environs). The $1k is probably about right thanks to the overhead. Down here, for a 10rk or so organ, I'd expect about $300/visit (plus mileage) unless a temperament was being set, which shouldn't be necessary very often.

As @advocatus mentions, just get something cone tuned and you only need to worry about the reeds!

Amen to DBP!

Digital organs are fine if that's all you can afford. Let's face it, the economies of scale don't exist in pipe organ manufacturing and they are frightfully expensive. Someone from Austin remarked that they built 100 or so instruments a year in the early part of the last century. Now, 10 is a more normal number. You can develop a pipe organ over a period of years with an accommodating builder, but we Americans are not a patient lot and many organists don't stay in positions long enough for that.

I have a 25 year old Rodgers in my home as a practice instrument. It is nice to not have to go out in the weather to practice. When the Rodgers goes, I am going to look into retrofitting the console with Hauptwerk. That seems like one of the best deals around.

I saw the ads for that organ, Salieri. If it is in good shape and if it will fit your building, then the best of luck to you in getting it installed and operating.

Massachusetts? I would contact Czelusniak et Dugal. They have vast experience with relocating instruments, they do the highest quality work, and they are very trustworthy.

Apoba in the web is a great source of builders. They are all highly recommended.
Again, I would go with some that are the closest - you save money in travel for the firm, housing etc.

So, after a few arduous, years the wheels have finally been put completely into motion.

This coming week we begin the process of relocating a 1915 George W. Reed tracker.

I want to thank all of you for your prayers, and for you kindness, for your words of wisdom, of humour, and of encouragement. This process was carried out to completion, I think, thanks to you.

God bless!

Here's the link to the OHS entry: https://pipeorgandatabase.org/OrganDetails.php?OrganID=32570

I played it, and it is definitely a Victorian instrument, which is fine with me! Our builder suggests the possibility, maybe at a future date (depending on time, etc.), of replacing the 8' Dulciana with a 2' Superoctave to spice up the great, but for now, all is well!

When I auditioned the instrument yesterday (Wednesday, April 10), I played the Buxtehude E Major Praeludium on the plenum (as it currently is, manuals coupled), and it really worked well. I am hoping to get the funds to add the 2', unless I get really attached to the dulciana!

I echo the congratulations. What a joy to have a real organ! Please, let us know how the project goes. Perhaps there's a soundbite you could post?

Ooh, I'd love some sound clips of the new beauty whenever you have them, too!

I am not an organist, but I thought I might toss in this favourable view, which dates from 2004.

Just a couple of thoughts on the English Dulciana. Although it was originally (I believe) introduced as a solo or colour stop, and in fact displaced the 4-foot flute on English chamber organs, the reason it became established and lasted for so long is that it is really very useful.
Although taken on its own I agree that "insipid" is probably the best description, when used in combination with the other 8-foot registers on a given manual it opens up endless new colouring possibilities. Most importantly, on the Great of a 2-manual organ, alone or with the 8-foot stopped flute, it creates a virtual Choir for accompanying or contrasting with the Swell. In other words, the addition of a single stop adds the illusion of a third level of sound.
Ideally, I suppose, the Great should have four 8-foot stops: Open and Stopped Diapasons, Harmonic Flute and Dulciana. If this has to be cut down to three, as in most early 20th-century Casavants, then a Melodia often stands in for both the Stopped Diapason and the Flute.
Benjamin Waterhouse
Quebec

From Mander Organs discussion site.

a place that's...unique

Ugh, BruceL, I clicked the link, realized which unique place you were talking about, and I almost lost my lunch! I need a trigger warning!

The only organs I hate are American organs of the fifties - sixties era, the so-called organ reform movement. Those are horrid. Probably why I don't like German Baroque music to this day.

I am with you on the Victorian organs. They have a nice sound. The late 19th century American organs are quite beautiful, too.

Regarding the Roland c330 mentioned earlier, avoid them like the plague. They can make some nice sounds (certainly nicer than what I’m playing now) but are extremely poorly made. I’ve played them and one installed in a church was suffering malfunctions less than a year after it was put there.

It’s been a few years since I subbed at the church, but if memory serves there was a dead pedal and the swell shoe inconsistently working. It was scarcely a year old when I subbed for them.