What do I call our organ?

[poehthusiest]

The nameplate on the Penn Yan, NY First Baptist organ says "Marr and Colton". But should it say "Johnson Organ Company"?

Indeed Marr& Colton was responsible for the chests, console, blower, and the present location of the pipework inthree chambers. This was done in 1931.But most of the pipeworkcomes from the church's first organ, built in 1871 byWm. Johnson - hisopus 345. There doesn't seem to bea lot of revoicing exceptthat whichwas necessary foroperation on 5" of wind. The Johnson case, seen in my avatar and on the website below is gone. [:(]

Just to make things worse,Marr& Colton, (a theater organ company whichhad turned toChurch organbuilding)furnished the organ with a horseshoe console. They spread out the ranks from the originaltwo manual Johnson into athree manual configuration, with allthree weaker divisions under expression. Two flute stops were unified, but the rest is straight.80 to 90 % ofits pipework camefrom the Johnson organ, one of the last to leave their original factory before it burned.

Now forthe positive! The organhas since been cleverly reconfigured back intoa 2 manual organ with a typical Johnson stoplist. (anda "dead" third keyboard) The swell shades were all removed except for the swell division. Lauren Peckham and Son, who are involved in church organ building as well as theater organ restoration did this work. When the talented David Peckham played Variations on 'America' by Ivesatthe rededication recital, I was transported back 100+ years!

To call our organ a Marr& Colton is to leave out it's all important Johnson heritage.And itmakes it sound as if it is a theater organ!

So,dowe call it a Johnson / Marr and Colton/ Peckham organ? What is the practice in such a case?

See the organ - 1871 to present at: http://www.geocities.com/pennyanfbc/photos1.html

[Austin766]

Re: What do I call our organ?

Quite frankly, you could call the organ Boris Badenov if you wanted to. On a more serious note, generally the practice is to refer to the original builder.

Let me tell you about three organs about a half hour from where I live.

1) The Skerrit-Cumming Memorial organ at First Baptist Church of Cleveland.
The organ was originally built as a 1911 Austin, it was rebuilt and enlarged by Austin in 1929 and rebuilt by Austin again in 1954. In the 1970's Schlicker came in and built a two manual and pedal neo-Classic organ, but didn't remove the Austin. Apparently the organist found control over the whole instrument (the now Austin/Schlicker) wanting, so in the mid 90's, the church hired Southfield organ builders of Springfield, Mass. to rebuild and redesign the organ. Southfield moved around existing stops and put in new choruses (Flute, Reed, Principal), and a new console. As far as I'm aware, no one calls this an Austin/Schlicker/Southfield. Most people would call this organ an Austin.

2) The organ at First Church of Christ, Scientist; Cleveland.
This organ, is perhaps my favorite organ, and the most mysterious of all the three I'll talk about. This organ was originally a 1947 3/23 Holtkamp. In 1968, the church hired Hillgreen-Lane to rebuild the organ. Why is this organ mysterious, well, I have no idea how this organ came to be in this church, since Walter Holtkamp never built an organ for a Christian Scientist church in the Cleveland area. That means that the core of this organ was never intended for this church, and it wasn't put in there by Walter Holtkamp, but yet, there it is. Now, most organists aren't sure when they sit down at the console who built this organ, but I tell them it was built by Holtkamp, and rebuilt by Hillgreen-Lane. When I post about it on the forum I usually call it "the Holtkamp/Hillgreen-Lane."

3) The Norton Memorial Organ
This organ is Skinner op.816, built in 1930, and installed in Severance Hall in 1931. The original installation was basically put up in the attic above the stage, and it didn't really meet the needs of the orchestra. then came George Szell and in 1958 the acoustical shell, famously known as the Szell shell, which further impeded the organ's speech. During the sixties and seventies the organ was used only on occasion, and funally in 1976 fell silent. In the late '90's Christoph von Dohnányi, pushed for an organ renovation to accompany the renovation of the whole building. Schantz removed the organ, cleaned it, and put it in new location in the main hall, where it now speaks marvelously. Even though the organ does have a Schantz opus number, nobody would ever call it a Schantz organ, since all Scahntz did was a restoration job that also involved moving the organ to new chambers.

So, my point, after such a long post is that, generally people will refer to the original builder. In your case, it would be Johnson.

[Jay999]

Re: What do I call our organ?



Hillgreen & Lane redoing a Holtkamp? :o (!)

What you have is a Ford mechanic rebuilding a royal state coach pulled by horses. Or perhaps, the other way around...."Her Majesty's Royal horses trampled and killed a Ford mechanic, wilst he was reupholstering the Royal State Coach in Nauga Hide."

In my years of organ work, I have rebuilt61 organs. It has always been tempting in some of my best work, to throw away the original builders plate and take credit for the organ. Fortunately, there are many organists and builders who could visit the instrument and immediately recognize the original builder.(Quote!) "To actually do such a thingleaves a "cloud" hanging overthetechnician who claims it to be his own. To obliterate the original builder's plate, andnot mention it in the rebuilder's plate, smacks of trying to mislead future buyers and students. It's a form of stealing, and is highly unethical in the professional organbuilding world." (Unquote!)

Having said that, (while sitting here in the ivory tower that professional organbuilders have taught me to speak from,) there is,..... never-the-less,.....right here in Atlanta, Georgia,..... in a very prominent place of worship; .....an old Roosevelt that was rebuilt and revoiced by Aeolian-Skinner. The last time I saw the console (about 10 years ago) the only builder's plate on it was the Aeolian-Skinner plate. No mention of Roosevelt. Over to one side was a second plate with the signature of G. Donald Harrison! That leaves the impression forthe un-educated visitor..."Oh Wow! It's a Donald Harrison signature organ!"..... (Gee Dad! It's a Wurlitzer!")

When I have a new builder plate made up, I always incorporatethe original builders name, the original opus number of the organ, and if there is some interesting history tobriefly mention, I will include that also. Finally, I will give my name, and the year of the rebuild. Here's an example of one of my instruments.....(the opus has been changed to protect the innocents, and my guilt!)

Austin Organs, Inc.

Opus 2375 1960

Originally installed West End U. M. C.

Rebuilt and moved to this church

February 1999 by

Jay Mitchell & Associates

Kennesaw, Georgia

When a detailed plate like this is made of brass, and screwed down to the inside of the console, you've respectfully recognized the original builder, and described your work, and for the (hopefully) decades to come, people will see the plate and appreciate it for it's accuracy, and history. In most of the organs I have rebuilt, it's enough of an ego trip for me to have my name linked to the original builder's name, through that new plate. While I personally save theold, original plate, (I bring itto the shop and attach itto one of several mahogany panels hanging in the office), it would probably be better for history if I attached that plate to the inside of the organ structure for future generations to see.I think it a bit too much to include my address or phone number on the rebuilder's plate. If this instrument has been exhaulted in performance by the magic of your hands, then you will be respected enough for your work that the church will know how to get in touch with you, should a prospective client want to do that. The rebuilder's plate should have more to do about history, than about advertising.

Going back to the subject of Her Majesty's Royal Coach, it's curious to see a Holtkamp organ rebuilt by Hillgreen & Lane. I would sincerely hope that H&G didn't do any tonal work there. As a matter offact I would hope H&G only releathered the instrument, and left the rest of it alone. In the case of the Johnson organ being rebuilt by Marr & Colton, my first thoughts are 1. High pressure? 2. Mixtures and soft stops replaced? etc. etc.

In conclusion, I would suggest you refer to a rebuild as: "It's a 1930's Holtkamp releathered by Hillgreen & Lane". OR, ........"It's a 1928 Wurlitzer tonally enhanced by Aeolian-Skinner"! Either way, it's just about as ridiculoussounding,isn't it?

Best wishes,

Jay Mitchell