In my area, Allen and Rodgers are the most common digital instruments. I would say there are more Allen than Rodgers instruments. They can be pricey. I know of other brands, to be sure. But their dealerships are few and far between. If money is an object, sometimes a good used instrument can have some years left in it. Have you talked to any AGO folks in your area? They can be a good source of local information.

My personal ranking would be Walker, Phoenix, Rodgers, Allen, and then Viscount/Johannus/anything else. This takes into account beauty of tone (such as it is), quality of amps/speakers provided, durability, and functionality.

I would say talk to Triune Music in Elmhurst and go listen to the organ they put in at St. Michael’s Church in Wheaton. It’s a hybrid, but switch off the pipe ranks and just listen to the digital stuff. I think it’s fairly astonishing; a lot of that is the room, but the combination of Walker and Rodgers samples is darn solid and in that soupy room, I sometimes failed the pipe/digital test.

Triune did our installation as well. Steve and David are great guys, and they have treated us well.

I’ve played two large 4m walkers, and one of them was astonishingly good, and the other was nice, but had directivity issues due to the chambers it was in.

I played the Ave Maria M&O and came away less enthused than anticipated. The color reeds were most excellent (there was a regal that was positively lifelike), but the rest wasn’t what I was led to believe based on other reviews. It was nice (don’t get me wrong) and the console was an absolute delight, but considering the massive bipolar array, I expected more than I experienced.

I’ve heard nice things about Phoenix organs, however they are relatively rare around my neck of the woods, and they are based out of Canada. It didn’t seem worth the trouble to audition them specifically since there wasn’t much to go off of (that I was aware of based on a cursory search at least). I think one thing they have going for them is that their installations are more custom, from what I understand. I don’t think they do as much “stock model” stuff as other firms do. I think you get some input on which samples make it in. That would be nice.

Allen upgraded their tone engine in the last year or so, and based on one demo comparison they’ve posted, it seems their newest gen tech might be palatable, but I wouldn’t touch anything that doesn’t have the new samples. I’ve played a few, including a fancy Diane Bish signature series with pipe facade (10-15yo installation now) and it’s “meh” at best (and it was obviously their Cadillac offering). At least it had moving drawknobs.

One thing I’ll say about Rodgers is that they have their tonal pallet system where each of the various voicings can be called back instantly, on a stop by stop basis. You don’t have to change everything to “french” but if the montre is better than the default principal, you can just change that one stop. In essence, that means you have 4 times the color pallet to play with, although everything isn’t available at once. There are also another 150 built in sounds recallable via midi piston, and so you really have a LOT to choose from, and it’s very quick and seamless. I like the system very much.

Did a comparison of Allen, (then) Rodgers, and Phoenix -
the Phoenix sound was, and remains, phenomenal.
solid construction, very few service calls (maybe four in 14 yrs)
not too far away installations from CHI area
ST. PAUL'S LUTHERAN CHURCH - Harvard, IL
DIVINE MERCY POLISH MISSION - Lombard, IL, USA
ALL SAINTS' CATHEDRAL PARISH - CHICAGO

I used to say you could drop one of the old Hammonds out of a second story window and it would still play. Same for the old Wurlitzer pianos.

I have also found the Allens to be more reliable than the Rodgers, even though I have a Rodgers at home.

Francis,

While I agree with you and have pushed pipe organs wherever I go, I think you may have missed the part in my original post that a pipe organ is not possible due to the construction of the building. So, yes, pipe organs are much better and a digital should only be a temporary... but again, considering the situation, it's rather pointless making the argument in this case because it won't happen outside of rebuilding a section of the church, and I know that won't be happening.

TCJ,

If someone proposed putting in a ramp for disabled persons, or a cry room for fussy children or cameras and a sound system to allow for the broadcast of Mass to an ever-growing internet-only parish... and some remodeling would be necessary to accomplish these.... how likely is your parish to allow/require the remodeling, and how likely, on the other hand, to dig in its heels and say "We can't have a ramp because it would require remodeling the building"? How persuadable are they?

the use of ANY organ is better than not having one at all.

I use a simulacrum, but would very much prefer the real article, and as we work toward getting our own church building I hope to advance the cause. A refugee camp is better than a warzone, but a refugee camp is only a temporary situation, not something to be sought.

"Chris Garton-Zavesky 7:20PM
Posts: 6,828

I use a simulacrum, but would very much prefer the real article, and as we work toward getting our own church building I hope to advance the cause. A refugee camp is better than a warzone, but a refugee camp is only a temporary situation, not something to be sought."

Let's just say ALL of us would rather have a lovely excellent quality "real" pipe organ to use in our services.

This is a given.

However, our parish is NOT going to have any budget in the near future - if ever - for remodeling the church building for a pipe organ that we cannot afford anyway. Sad to say, this is just reality.

Further, in our case, I do not consider it as a "refugee camp" to have had someone donate a digital organ and speaker system to a poor rural parish. I consider it a blessing.

Those of you that work at parishes that have large ornate churches, fine pipe organs, paid musical staff, etc. are extremely fortunate to be in such situations.

Back to the subject:

TCJ 7:40PM
Posts: 877

Getting a pipe organ in would require a major revamp which would quite likely involve removing the current organ loft (a brand new build) and putting in a new one.

........ I started this asking for information, not an argument about pipe/digital."

from the OP:

"Last organ cost roughly $35,000 with installation, but I know prices have jumped significantly since then and so does the pastor, so we are expecting to have to pay a significant amount more just to achieve a similar product (though I'm hoping for much better)."

Have you and the pastor decided on a final budget yet?

I have read somewhere that new Rodgers organs are actually using Johannus technology, thus the newer ones will sound like Johannus. Can anyone confirm if this is true?

This is false. They are owned by the same conglomerate entity, but each company retains its own essential essence. They DO have a new tone-generation platform called "Direct streaming" which is now used by multiple brands, but all that means is that samples stream directly from hard drives since SSDs are so fast now. The samples and voicings are still fairly distinct. And, ironically, it's Johannus that's using a lot of the Rodgers tech, not the other way around.

I recently played a nearby "monarke" installation which was put in shortly after my own installation was done. While they have the same zimbelstern, that's about all they have in common, and I pity the other church (as does the installer).

And don't let anyone guilt you about going digital. I was in the same boat. Our church was built with small chambers up by the sanctuary, and the loft was never intended to hold an organ (and the chambers were never intended for pipes). Our loft's ceiling height is only 14' tall at its highest point, with most of it being lower than that. We had an engineer look at our blueprints, and we discovered that to hold any significant weight, we would have to install steel girders in our vestibule (which already has a very low ceiling) that would need to go down into the footings of the bell tower's foundation. We also needed to move some significant HVAC equipment that was rather unfortunately placed in the loft prior to my tenure. Moving/reconfiguring that equipment alone was on the order of 10k. Then retrofitting the structure of the loft was going to cost many thousands more. Then add in the fact that all of our pedal division would have to be mitred or haskeled... (which complicated the acquisition efforts of existing instruments from places like organ clearinghouse) and I haven't even mentioned the knock-on effects and space concerns that doing this would have caused.

Ultimately, we still hope to add some essential pipework and convert the instrument to a 'hybrid', but at the time we needed to pull the trigger, it was a non-starter to have to spend 40k before we could even think about installing pipes, when that was 1/3 our budget to begin with.

But the simple fact of the matter is: purists can B&M all they want, but not every situation is ideal, and not every situation can accommodate a pipe organ in a healthy way. Ivory towers are great for those who can afford them, but the rest of us mere mortals need to just do the best we can with the card we've been dealt.

I am all in favor of pipes, but not every pipe organ sounds better than a digital. I have heard some really rotten sounding pipe organs, especially those built in the height of the "organ reform." Funny thing about reforms. They often destroy more than they preserve.

Regardless, I can say with 100% certainty that reconstruction and/or loans to effect getting a pipe organ, even if they were approved by the pastor, would not get approval from the diocese (which is required). Not happening at the moment.

Back on topic, please?

Serviam,

That Rodgers model is one I was looking at as probably a good fit (at first glance anyway) for the parish.

Also good to know that Rodgers isn't using the same technology as Johannus because that would have put me off instantly.



Thanks to everyone who answered with information so far. If you have anything else, go for it.

If one were to compare the organs purely on durability and quality/ease of service, how would you rate the following?

Phoenix
Rodgers
Allen

...and for the fun of it...

Johannus

... and even though there are no dealers even close to me, I'm just curious about...

Ahlborn-Galanti

...because I've not seen them mentioned yet, but I have seen videos of people playing them on YouTube.

I have played a (temporary) Hauptwerk at Church of the Presentation (ordinariate) in the far north of Houston.
For a simulacrum I found it more convincing than Allen or Rodgers
P.S. - By the way - 'simulacrum' is singular and 'simulacra' is plural.

How does this technology differ from Viscount's Physis technology? My understanding is that Physis creates the 3D model of a pipe with other variables that can be manipulated through some apps. The closest Viscount Hybrid I know of is in Altoona, PA. Dr. Latona did the dedication recital on that instrument.

Most of the modern builders use sampling now, so they are all glorified hauptwerk instruments. The only difference is you can’t load extra sample sets on a whim. Viscount is the notable exception here, for good and for ill. Pianoteq has proved that algorithmic instruments can be shockingly realistic, so the concept certainly shouldn’t be dismissed, but organs are quite a bit more complex and difficult to model.

One thing I’ll add about Rodgers (I’m not sure what latitude exists for Allens these days) is that the voicing capabilities are quite robust and every single note of every single rank can be adjusted a dozen different ways. It’s mesmerizing to watch the instrument be voiced because there are so many different parameters that can be tweaked. So it’s the best of both worlds in a way: the samples are of real pipes, but they can be improved to fit our speaker setup and room, well beyond basic volume or “brightness” adjustments. In this respect, I know Viscounts are pretty good too, since it’s all computational.

David, that’s what I meant. With the big builders you’re stuck with whatever (multiple) voicings are baked into the instrument. Genuine hauptwerk installations can have whatever samplesets you desire.

I’ve played a large HW installation (48 channels, I believe) and I wasn’t all that impressed. It partly suffered from speaker placement relative to the console. But you have to be VERY careful with choosing the right samplesets for reproduction in a large room. If you truncate wet samplesets there isn’t enough detail, so ideally you voice a totally dry set, and allow the room to do its thing. That’s a whole other discussion.

I am pretty comfortable on computers and have used HW before, so I could probably solve a problem given enough time. But the organist who comes after me, or a sub who covers for me, may be an excellent organist but lack the tech interest sufficient to keep the thing up and running,

This is precisely why I did not pursue this option, although I think I could have pulled it off pretty well. I wanted whatever we got to last well beyond me and not require me to come back if something ever went awry.

Old organists never die, they just try to retire...

I have found that it doesn't matter how long it has been since you retired, you will get a call every time something goes wrong.

To the OP

>> 2) Unless you pick one sample set you like and go to Phoenix or Classic Organ Works or another builder

Our Phoenix has four

True confession

I drove 120 miles to pick up a full hauptwerk console (two high end manuals and ago pedalboard two touchscreen monitors, amp and high end speakers)

I got it couple of years ago but still have not put it together. HELP!!

CGZ

Forgive my ignorance. I haven’t a clue about that dimension.

Which Hauptwerk provider did you use, Liam?