Rodgers 250DM

[searchinferu]

Anyone have experience with a Rodgers 250DM with pipe interface?

[jbird604]

From the tiny bit of info on the tech site, I surmise the 250 was more or less a typical 70's analog with some pipes and with lighted knobs. Pretty similar to the 205 I suppose, with older electronics and without the fancy case. The docs on the tech site are very crudely drawn, so they probably made only a handful of these, maybe just one or two, who knows?

As to what it is -- standard Rodgers hybrid organ, perhaps a precursor to the hybrids that became Rodgers's bread and butter in the 80's. The pipe complement was probably just two ranks -- a flute rank and a principal rank -- unless there were separate pairs for the great and the positiv divisions. The pipe stops listed in the spec are just basically the principals and the flutes in those two divisions. All pipes are unenclosed. Celestes, reeds, strings, all pedal stops, and lower pitches on the manuals are all analog electronics and the swell is all electronic, a very standard Rodgers classical spec.

I'm not poo-pooing the thing, but I would guess it's ok but not terribly exciting. Looks like it has a complete lighted knob capture action and other deluxe features that were so prized on the Rodgers analogs. If you've ever tried out one of the more common 80's analogs with two or four pipe ranks, then you know approximately what it's like. The age of it might be concerning, as there would obviously be no serious support from Rodgers, and in my experience, pipes that came with Rodgers analogs have become very hard to keep tuned, so much so that in many such installs we have simply turned off the pipes at the owner's request and made the organ all electronic. The pipes are pretty, but that's about it.

If you just want some "real pipes" because they are loud and have that pipe presence, then here they are. But with all the drawbacks of severe unification, and possibly even borrowing across divisions. Could be interesting and fun for a change. But I wouldn't count on it being a real heirloom piece.

[toodles]

JBird and I have differing opinions about the Rodgers Combination organs. He has, I'm sure, seen many more than I, and in real church installations. I have only heard them in careful controlled installations. That alone would account for a big difference in sound and impressions. The two I've heard have been at the NAMM (National Association of Music Merchants) convention around 1976 where I heard the 250 live, demonstrated by Joyce Jones, and the 205 (two rank cabinet model) at the Chicago area dealer. You can expect both were well voiced to show off their capabilities.

I found both to be very thrilling instruments. The pipes added a liveliness to the sound of the electronics that was otherwise absent.

The 250 actually has a fairly complete pipe complement--two full wind chests. According to the tech manual, one chest has a 4 ft. unit principal, 2 ft. unit principal, a II rank tertian, and a II to III rank scharf; the other wind chest has a unit spitzflote and a unit holzgedeckt. It was one of the first "standard" pipe combination models. It's similar to the 220 Cambridge in terms of stop list and console, but with considerably more resources. The 250 has a floating Brust-Positiv division (absent in the 220), and more electronics than the 220. For example, the swell has 2 electronic unit principals.

The 250 at the convention was in a moderately sized meeting room--certainly the room was much smaller than a church, maybe about the size of a typical chapel--comparable to a large living room. The sound was thrilling, and not at all over powering. Rodgers did scale their pipes to the installation, so if it's going into a small home from a very large church, the pipes might be voiced overly loud. The wind pressure is low, so they might still be fine in a smaller space.

The organ was built before Rodgers used serial keying to the pipes, so the interface is likely pretty simple. I have the technical manual as a pdf in multiple sections, so if you'd like that to review the technology in detail, forward your email address to me in a private message and I'll send it along.The pipe interface look, considerably simpler than the later models that used microprocessor keying--I think it used two multi-wire cables from the console to remote interface boards, making the electronic design pretty simple and probably very reliable.

Being early pipe combination models, the pipes were probably not built by Rodgers themselves, but by a pipe organ builder or supply house. This should make them of farily decent quality. JBird has mentioned in other posts that some of the church installations he's seen have pipes installed in such a way that access for tuning was difficult. That's a problem for any organ that incorporates pipes, as access is important.

[toodles]

You might find this interesting: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...Ak7QxkeJiAUlJ3

Though I can't be sure, the console in that article and two pipe chests look very much like a 250.

[jbird604]

Well, after reading what toodles has to say, I'll need to re-think some of my criticism. Had no idea that there were that many discrete pipe ranks in the 250, or that it had been played by Joyce Jones for a NAMM show. That calls for a little more respect. Joyce was one of my favorite players. And with several ranks to call upon, the unification may not be as severe as in the typical hybrid.

Also, if the pipes were built by a real pipe shop (a long time ago Rodgers apparently had a connection with Ruffati), they might be much better than the pipes we see so often around here that were sloppily attached to so many of the serial-keyed analogs by the local dealer, who was crazy about the pipes ($$$) but IMHO lacked experience and understanding of the voicing process.

It might come down to finding out what kind of shape the pipes are in, as well as the electronics of the organ. If the pipes have been regularly maintained and were installed in a clean safe space with good climate control, they might be in good condition. Keep in mind that they are probably about 40-45 years old, and even though pipe organs "last a thousand years" (we are often told) most pipe organs require ongoing maintenance and repairs. A major restoration -- tearing the organ down to the individual pipes, replacing all the felt, leather, and other soft materials, repairing pipes that have sagged or dented -- this type of work is done every few decades on the world's finest and largest pipe organs. So if these pipes haven't been touched in 40 or 45 years, they might be due for some work. But you'll never know unless you ask and follow up on it.

Whether or not the electronic voices will ring your chimes is a matter of opinion and taste. I've heard some Rodgers analog organs that blew me away. Especially the larger ones, and especially when installed in very spacious and lively churches where the sound benefits from all the reflections and blooming. Not necessarily so great though in a smaller space. No doubt Rodgers built the electronic portion with considerable care, but it's still 40 or 45 years old, so there could be some issues. As toodles mentions, this is before the "serial-keyed" era, so the electronic parts are probably more of the off-the-shelf variety, mostly still available somewhere. It's probably possible to keep it going for a long time, but then again there could be some costs involved.

Anyway, it's an interesting idea, and I look forward to hearing more about it if and when you are able to bring it home.

[toodles]

Note that Rodgers, to my knowledge, always used "direct electric" chests, so if the felt is good on the action valves, they should not need repairs. As JBird suggests, the condition of the pipes, chests, and console need to be evaluated before deciding on whether this is an organ worth anything.

As Jbird suggests, the typical 1980's "combination" Rodgers often was just 2 unified ranks. It adds to the electronics, but, of course, has limitations. And if the ranks are placed in an inaccessible location--I've often seen pictures of them placed high on a santuary wall--tuning becomes difficult, and, perhaps, dangerous to the tuner.

I will say that even the 205 short (49 note) pipe ranks did add a liveliness to the sound, though of course there were lots of limitations. An advantage to that instrument was that some of the stops were available as pipe or electronic voices, so if you paid attention to what you were combining you could control how the unification was used. Of course, on that instrument, the pipes were "in your face" so it would be hard for it not to add a liveliness of sound.

[searchinferu]

Thanks fellas. A lot of info there. I may take a drive and go see it. Im told its fully functional. Though I have known organist that could play most any broken down old bag oh bolts and make music out of it. The console looks very much like the one in your attachment Toodles. However, the ranks seemed to be about four foot high, while the article mention a 32 foot stop. That's ok, as I don't have 32 foot ceilings!

[toodles]

The 32 ft stop on the 250 was an electronic stop, and the standard complement of pipes started at 4 ft long pipes, providing tenor C of the 8 ft stops, and low C of the 4 ft. stops. The actual pipes are probably more like 5 ft tall, since the foot of the pipe is in addition to the speaking length of the pipe. Take along a stiff tape measure so you can estimate the height of the pipes from the floor (including the wind chests).

Any of the pipe complements would be at least semi-custom, so installations could vary and still be the same model--for example, they might have all the pipes on one one chest, or provide further division into 3 or 4 smaller chests.

For the missing notes on the pipe ranks, Rodgers provided analog extensions in the electronics. Also, offset chests for the 8 ft pipe octaves could be provided as options in some installations.

[searchinferu]

Yes. The tallest pipes approach 5 feet in length. The two chests are mounted on legs and are about 3 foot high. Do you know it the pipes are marked in any way to help with reassembly?

[jbird604]

The article does seem to say that the 32' Bourdon was real. Of course bourdons are stopped flutes, so a 32' note would only be 16' long physically. But perhaps that is an error in the article, or the writer misunderstood the facts.

[John Vanderlee]

We just installed a 205 in a nursing home chapel. It is played regularly by professional organists. Everyone is delighted with it. After all,;-) it replaced a failing Hammond H100 type!
The good thing is this nursing home keeps a steady 75 degrees in there.

[jbird604]

You coulda replaced the H100 with a kazoo and everyone would've been delighted! ;-)

Kidding aside, I can imagine that a 205 makes a nice organ for such a chapel, and particularly if the temperature is regulated so closely.

[searchinferu]

It would seem that in a smaller venue, the pipes might overpower the electronic stops. What effect might lowering the system pressure have on volume and tone? Would this also possibly induce a delay in sound production?

[toodles]

Pipes have to be scaled and voiced to the wind pressure being used. If pressure is raised too high, they overblow, and speak an octave higher, and develop an unintended harmonic structure. (Harmonic stops are the exception, as they are designed to be overblown.)

Sightly lower pressure have a little effect on the sound, but not much. Speech time is not really effected. If you've ever played a wind instrument (clarinet, flute, saxophone, oboe, etc.) you realize there is a limited range of pressure that works. and limited change in tonality with change in pressure, though they do get a little louder or softer with changes in pressure.. And the wind instrument speaks at about the same speed based on wind pressure. Pipes are about the same in all respects.

The 205 has pipes that are voiced for playing "In your face". The 205 isn't really a good choice for a large church because of this--it was designed for living rooms or small chapels. Rodgers pipes were voiced for about 2-1/2 to 3 inches of wind pressure, considered "low pressure".

[John Vanderlee]

The pipes definitely match the electronics in speech volume. It is just right for this chapel. I have it on good authority that Rodgers had pipes built by the Stinkens Co. a respected pipe builder in the Netherlands. It's almost ironic that now Rodgers is owned by Johannes Organs, also in the Netherlands!

[John Vanderlee]

I need to correct something LOL:-> It is the JohannUs Organ co. JohannEs is my original Dutch Name! My mind did 'auto-spell':o

[searchinferu]

Thanks fellers. the 250 seems to be a bit of a different animal and may or may not have louder pipes. I noticed that one speaker option used that humoungoussssss 6x9 speaker assembly that takes up a lot of space. A second option uses speaker cases approximately 2 foot square. Apparently either was powered by a 100watt amplifier. So perhaps the pipe power would have to be dummed down to match the limited power of the electronics. But the 250 gave up that nice neat self contained look and went with two chests, a separate blower, and also a separate controller of some sort in addition to the amp or amps, which in case of the Rogers speakers, was probably mounted inside the speaker assembly. Not sure, but would like to attempt to move the chests with the pipes installed. But if I hit a good size bump, I could end up with tinker toy wind chimes all over the trailer.

If it sounds like im a little out of my element, I am. However, isn't that how we learn?