What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?

[Guest]

How do you feel about hybrid organs?

Here are two instances of such hybrids.

The First United Methodist Church of Ocala, Florida, installed a nice Wicks pipe organ in the fifties. Around 2001, it was enlarged to some 90 ranks, over half of which are digital.

The current organist, when asked about the organ, says, in essence, don’t ask me, it didn’t happen under my watch.

A prior organist, now at a church in another city, says, ‘I arrived just as the last cables were being connected.’ He did report that the building has very poor acoustics and a famous consultant was brought in. Some effort was made to remove acoustic tiles, but the whole project got political and was abandoned.

http://www.fumcmusic.org/organ.htm

Trinity Episcopal Church in St. Augustine, Florida, established in 1821, is the oldest protestant church in Florida.

In the late sixties, they installed a new Aeolian-Skinner organ of just over 40 ranks, controlled by a three manual console. Most of the pipes were in the front of the sanctuary, but several ranks were located above the entrance at the west end of the building.

It had a very pleasing sound - I attended several concerts there during the seventies.

Circa 1999, the organ was renovated and enlarged with digital stops, to its present size of 91 ranks, over half of them digital.

Frankly, 91 ranks is a lot of sound for what is a relatively small building.

http://www.trinityepiscopalparish.org/organ.htm

I wassomewhat excited to learn than a Roman Catholic church in a nearby city had a 4/105 organ. I learned subsequently, that it has 6 ranks of actual pipes - everything else is digital. Somehow, that seems dishonest.

So, back to the original question - what about hybrid organs?

A couple of pipe organ builders say that it is virtually impossible to keep the digital stops in tune with the pipes.

[Guest]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



My personal preference is for an all pipe organ. Adding digital stops to extend the pedal at 16' and 32' seems to be common at present to save money and space. Adding a few digital stops to act as solo voices is ok and gives the organist a few more draw knobs on the console.

The problem with digital stops is the lack of a chorus effect when stops are combined. If a few digital stops are combined with mostly pipe stops the chorus effect should be ok. In a discussion with my organ teacher yesterday, we concluded that using the minimum number of stops to achieve a given effect adds to clarity of sound. For example, adding the Vox Humana to a large ensembles of Diapason, Tibia, Flute, strings does not enhance the sound but tends to muddy the wayers. Minimizing the number of digital stops makes the lack of the chorus effect less noticeable.

The tuning of the digital stops must change with temperature by sensing the room temperature and varying the pitch. I believe that some manufacturers of digital pipe organ additions do this.

[Guest]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?

[quote user="AllanP"]


The tuning of the digital stops must change with temperature by sensing the room temperature and varying the pitch. I believe that some manufacturers of digital pipe organ additions do this.

[/quote]

That makes sense, but sounds needlessly complicated.

[pipecutter]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



Hybrid organs tend to be better in theory than they are in practice. Bolstering a pedal division with a few digital stops is one thing, When you begin introducing them in the manuals (I am not including digital percussions) they tend to subtract from the sound of real pipes rather than enhancing or binding with them. While there are rare exceptions, most digital installations (with or without pipes) are done by local companies that seem to have no idea what they are supposed to sound like. Then enters the local "expert", consultant or even the house organist who weigh in with even more uninformed advice. Since the "voicing" is nothing more than a knob to be turned or a software program with parameters that are beyond the grasp of most users, the end result is often out of balance with itself much less with any pipework.

Tuning should not be an issue with modern digital instruments IF the pipes are properly placed. That is to say, if all the pipes are in a situation to stay in tune with each other, then the digital part of the instrument should be able to adjust to them.

[myorgan]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



Does anyone find the potential success of a hybridis (or is not) related to the speaking pitch of the stops added? Where the mixtures and upper workusually arequicker to go out of tune on a pipe organ, I'd think that would be the major issue when marrying it to a digital stop. I'm familiar with one hybrid installation near me, and was unable to hear it because the pipes weren't working.[:(]

As pipecutter stated: Tuning should not be an issue with modern digital instruments IF the pipes are properly placed. That is to say, if all the pipes are in a situation to stay in tune with each other, then the digital part of the instrument should be able to adjust to them.

In reality, how many pipe installations would one consider properly placed, and how many have been (for lack of a better word) bastardized by a myriad of self-proclaimed experts attempting to improve on their vision of what the original builder should have built?

I'm familiar with approximately 10 local installations, and I would only consider two to have pipes properly placed and are extant as the original builder intended (or close). The most recent restoration put one organ back in original condition as it was in 1860, but was done at a premium! The remainder have been "improved upon" by various organ "builders."

I guess this begs the question, other than pedal extensions and stops (cost issue), is a hybrid ever appropriate for an original pipe installation? Why or why not?

Michael

[Guest]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



I agree thatit is dishonest to claimthat one has a 4/105 organ if 99 of 105 are digital.

I've played several hybrid organs, mostly by Rodgers, and they were all rather bland and uninspiring.

An outstanding musician will always prefer a good pipe organ. If it is artistically conceived and voiced (and played), even a small pipe organ can be gratifying and inspiring to play and hear.

David

[arie v]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



Hi,

I think it is mostly a matter of degree. There are pipe organs out there that tonally have problems because they are incomplete. Also there are pipe organs where they may want to add pipes, but there is no room.

I recently worked on a pipe organ, and turned it into a hybrid, and it truly was a successful marriage between pipes and digital. The organ was an original 1964, 16 rank neo-baroque Wicks organ. Many things about it were odd. It was a 2 manual console, but had a double swell. The specification was incomplete on all divisions. In the 1990s, a 3-4 rank Mixture was added, which sounds entirely unvoiced, with the top pitch getting really loud around every break and the bottom octave clucking loudly. To make matters worse, to make room for this Mixture they chopped down the 16' Quintadena bottom octave to play at 5 1'3' pitch. Very bizarre sounding. There was little in the way of softer sounds, solo stops, etc. While the organ did not sound real bad, it was not an interesting organ to play at all. I should also say, that the Wicks console was increasingly starting to show it's age, by things not always working.

So the accepted proposal was to re-do the console into a 3 manual, and add 20 or so digital stops by Walker Technical. There was no room for more pipes. In fact it was not even easy to put in speakers. The result is very satisfying, with most of the bread and butter of the organ being pipes but the fill-in, the softer stops, the 32' stops, the Royal Trumpet being digital. I myself was very pleased with the result.

I do agree with you on many Rodgers organs with some pipes. Basically they become a digital organ with some pipes. The pipe packages from Rodgers are of the one size fits all variety. They used to, maybe still do sell 1 rank, 2 rank, 4 rank, 6 and 8 rank packages. I never came across a single one that was an outstanding success. I don't doubt that there may be good ones, but as you say most were bland and poorly conceived. Mostly the problem was that 1 or 2 rank packages were not really scaled right for the situation and the extensive unification of the pipes. I suppose it made churches feel good that they were "into pipes".

These days, if a church really wants to go the route of pipes, they may want to check out used pipe organs. There are many organs and pipe ranks out there that can be had for very little money. Mind you, refurbishing and install costs can still be considerable, but overall costs will be a lot less than getting an all new organ.

The American Pipe Organ Builders Association has put out an edict that their members will not add digital stops to their pipe instruments. The only exceptions allowed are 32' stops and percussions (Chimes and Harp). So only if it conforms to their specifications can their organs be called pipe organs. Otherwise they are called hybrid, pipe/digital, or even worse names.

AV

[Guest]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?

[quote user="arie v"]


The American Pipe Organ Builders Association has put out an edict that their members will not add digital stops to their pipe instruments. The only exceptions allowed are 32' stops and percussions (Chimes and Harp). So only if it conforms to their specifications can their organs be called pipe organs. Otherwise they are called hybrid, pipe/digital, or even worse names.

AV

[/quote]

Good to know that someone is maintaining some semblance of standards.

[m&m's]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



I think the APOBA might be pushing things a bit far. While I agree that the pipe organ should be mostly pipes, and certainly for all of the major choruses (principal, flute, and reed), I see no reason why a few solo stops could not be digital, as solos are usually played one note at a time. Also, some of the softer stops, such as celestes, could be digital.

Some years ago I spent some time playing a fairly large Casavant organ in Salisbury, MD which had several celestes and 32' pedal stops added by Walker. As I understand it, the organ had no more room for pipes without major reworking. The stops were completely indistinguishable from pipes. The original organ had 66 ranks, and about ten digital ranks were added. To me that still is a pipe organ.

Now the organ in the Burdette Memorial Methodist Church in Hurricane WV is a different story. I found a website that claims the organ has 389 ranks. If it does, about 350 of those ranks are digital. No way does that organ qualify as a pipe organ!

[regeron]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



Price often dictates what happens, and quality and quantity are two different things.

A friend once visited from out of town. I arranged a private organ crawl to 8 or 10 instruments.

The most enjoyable was also the smallest - 2man Casavant with 15 real stops [+ 1 16'/8' extension in the pedal and 1 borrowing of the Swell 16' into the pedal.] It was in a wonderful acoustic, and although small, it kept my friend's attention the most. He tried out all manner of combinations, and everything was voiced to somehow blend yet be distinct enough as to avoid being bland. The smile on his face was like a kid in a candy shop.

The least enjoyable was one of the largest. The lack of satisfaction clearly came from it's being a hybrid. Although it had a lot of stop choices, sooner or later [mostly sooner] they became dull and lifeless. I noticed that after a few minutes of trying out different things, my friend went and looked at the church's windows while I continued to play the organ. The local organist had lots of ambition, but limited experience, so first began by altering the original pipework - at that point, it stopped sounding like an organ from one company, and more like an organ that was patched together from 3 or 4 different sources. Then with the advent of digital, the organ was 'expanded', original pipework was removed to make room for speakers, and the rest is history.

I admit to favoring pipe organs, but I allow that different people have different opinions. If you like digital or a pipe/digital hybrid, that's fine. But for me, if you want to impress me, do it with quality work, not with hundreds more stops than the organ down the road, because everything will eventually suffer.

As a student, I subbed around a lot. One place had an Allen from the 80's; I think it had about 45 sotps. I sat down one day to figure out which stopsI liked the most. There were 13. I used those almost exclusively when I played that instrument. The congregation commented on how good it sounded. They were clean and clear and versatile in their application.

By the way, the tuning on the hybrid didn't seem to be an issue.

[MarkS]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



There is a Casavant in this area with three added digital voices by an APOBA builder and one of them is a Tuba 8'. So perhaps APOBA is willing to stretch a bit.

In my opinion, the best sounding instrument around here is a 21 stop Casavant by Lawrence Phelps from the early 60's. It is claimed that the architects met Phelps in Quebec when they were designing the building. Phelps drew the specification;according to legend he had a hand in the voicing, too.

Most electronic organs could use fewer voices of better quality, too.

[NYCFarmboy]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?

my 2 cents: It seems dishonest to me to pretend to have a real pipe organ if any of the ranks are digital. I don't particularly care for the 32 digital ranks either.......it is like having a wonderful symphony orchestra playing and on one side is a ghetto box playing...yeah people out in the audience may not be able to tell which is real and which is the ghettobox...but in the end...the real instruments are playing real accoustic music with a tradition of the crafts that made them...and well... a memorex'd recording of something live played elsewhere being replicated via a speaker for the unwitting audience.

in the end fake is fake...even if only partially so.

[myorgan]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



[quote user="NYCFarmboy"]my 2 cents: It seems dishonest to me to pretend to have a real pipe organ if any of the ranks are digital. I don't particularly care for the 32 digital ranks either[/quote]

John, I think I agree. It really is dishonest to call an organ a digital or electronicif it has pipes on it.[;)] I wonder how they can call it that in good conscience? How can someone live with themselves--beingfake like that?[8-)] Just my ½ penny's worth!

P.S. I guess they'll just have to call 'em all hybrids.[8-|] I have another name I call them, but it's not suitable for polite conversation.

[circa1949]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



They used to, maybe still do sell 1 rank, 2 rank, 4 rank, 6 and 8 rank
packages. I never came across a single one that was an outstanding
success. I don't doubt that there may be good ones, but as you say
most were bland and poorly conceived. Mostly the problem was that 1 or
2 rank packages were not really scaled right for the situation and the
extensive unification of the pipes. I suppose it made churches feel
good that they were "into pipes".

Yeah but Arie, frankly, the 80s Rodgers analogs were so bland sounding (to my ears at the time), they needed these pipes to spruce things up! I truly think this was one of Rodger's best marketing move at the time, cause it made them more competitive with Allen. (who had quite a lot of literature back then about what a bad idea combining pipes and electronic was...maybe one day I'll scan some of it) I remember playing once at a church that had them...the pipes really added excitement. Badly conceived to you might have sounded great to the average parishioner. For example: take Allen's point (at the time) about the pipes being out of tune with the electronics. Well, I remember having that problem to some degree, it was a bit hurdy-gurdy-ish, but a case could be made that it improved the warmth of the ensemble.

[mpsnknox]

Re: What do you think about hybrid organs (part pipes, part digital)?



I do not have a problem with hybrids. I understand that any given church has to work around its financial/space resources and its desires. In the end however I find that hybrid organs typical sounds like two differnt instruments....a pipe organ... and a digital one. Due to the physics of the way the sound is produced the two just can not blend perfectly together.

I prefer all pipe organs, but understand hybrids have their place. And I am all for (as long as your rooms proportions and acoustics warrent it) 32' digital extentions in the pedal andpercussion stops in the manuels.