Hello all,  I totally agree with the sentiments expressed in the letter
raising issues related to the ethics of certain fair organ restorations
that was originally published in 'Worlds Fair', and am pleased that a
number of respected organ builders have chosen to publicly speak out on
the issue.

In response to some of the comments made in reply to the original
posting:

Mathew Caulfield wrote:

> I would sooner wrestle with a pit bull than tell the owner of the one
> remaining original cobblestone building in our community that he cannot
> tear it down to build a gas station on the site. But that is what is
> likely to happen, unless our town or the local historical society steps
> in to buy the building and have it moved to a safe location.
>
> Lacking government ordinances controlling and restricting owner
> rights -- and what government is brave enough to enact the necessary
> legislation? --there isn't much an organization can do except: educate
> insensitive owners to their responsibilities as guardians; use moral
> authority to dissuade builders from agreeing to undertake butcher jobs;
> and encourage public outcry and protest against such butcher jobs as do
> take place in spite of the organization's efforts.

Well, here in the UK there is legislation controlling what can and can
not be done to specific buildings that have been 'listed' due to their
historical significance, and this importance is not determined by age
and history alone.  Also, if I understand things correctly (and I am
sure that I will be corrected if I am wrong), in the Netherlands there
is legislation preventing alterations being carried out to certain
street organs.

I agree, though, that education on the responsibility of guardianship
and the encouragement of public outcry is required to stop the butchering
of historic instruments on the whims of the current owner/restorer.

Ingmar Krause wrote:

> Pipe-replacements of like one whole register, which is in most parts
> in a bad or not existing condition, I find personally okay.  The point
> is, to do things like these _reasonably_ ... <snip>
>
> I would be interested to know what "mass-produced new pipework" is
> supposed to be.  I would need to see that first.

The issue that is causing concern amongst enthusiasts is not so much
that pipe replacement is taking place when required, but that in a
number of cases whole ranks of pipework are being replaced by ones that
are voiced differently to that used by the original builders, and
little attempt, if any, is made to replicate ranks.  Recent 'restoration'
of one historic organ has resulted in it sounding almost identical to a
new organ that had been built by the 'restorer' several years earlier.

Adam Ramet wrote:

> ... though no-one has yet dared say so, the organ causing all the
> stir is most probably the recently rebuilt Jonas Gavioli converted
> from 98- to its original 110-keys.

I have heard little criticism of the alterations to the Jonas Gavioli.
However I would be most interested in hearing how much of the current
organ is new.

What has particularly upset a number of enthusiasts is Couldwell's
'Marenghi' which went into restoration as a 105-key instrument, with
(apparently) dance organ voicing, and came out with double the number
of pipes and very much louder 'fairground' voicing.  Another alteration
that has caused upset to many enthusiasts is that which has been
undertaken to Atkinsons' 'Southsea' Gavioli.  I do not know the details
of what changes have been made to this organ, other than much of the
pipework is said to be new.  When I saw this organ prior to 'restoration'
two (or possibly three) years ago, it was in fine voice as a 98-key
instrument.

Incidentally, all three of these organs were playing at this years
Great Dorset Steam Fair and are listed in the catalogue for the event.

It should be said that there have been recent major alterations to
organs other than those mentioned above, and it would be wrong to focus
discussion purely on one or two specific cases.  It should also be
noted that I can not speak on behalf of the authors of the 'Worlds
Fair' letter as to what has sparked their concerns.

Adam continues:

> The top half of the original organ is no longer present so enthusiasts
> probably wonder how all the extra stuff originally behind a 110-key
> facade is crammed into the bottom half that remains.

It was (and is) often the case that on large organs the top of the
prosceniums often had no, or very little, pipework behind them.  There
is much more to the issues being raised than a lack of understanding on
behalf of concerned enthusiasts.  The opposite is probably true in that
the concern results from having a detailed understanding of, and interest
in, the issues involved.  Many general enthusiasts are probably unaware
of what is going on with some of the organs that they are enjoying.

> Whilst there is much to be said for organs having some books
> of recent melodies, listeners can only fully appreciate what the
> instrument was all about by hearing it playing music it was designed
> to play, and this will easily make up for the unfamiliarity of the
> older tunes.

To my mind fairground organs were built to play one type of music: that
which is popular.  The music libraries should not be constrained to the
tunes of the era in which the instrument was built.  There is no reason
why an organ should not be playing tunes of any vintage.  Would anyone
suggest that the only music suitable for playing on a (manual) piano is
that which dates from around the time of its invention?

What is important is the _way_ in which music is arranged to take into
account the style of the organ on which it is to be played.  There has
been a tendency for some music suppliers to simply reorder the holes in
the book music to take account of differing keyframe layouts, but to
pay little regard to the way different types of organ sound.

For example, consider rock and roll as it may be heard on a Belgian
dance organ.  Quite often, the middle of the tune will contain a
variation of the main theme played on the saxophone counter melody
register, with long chords playing on the melody unda maris register.
Very effective.  A large French organ playing the same basic musical
arrangement, still using, say, a saxophone counter melody register, but
playing the melody chords on 8 ranks of violins, does not have the same
effect.  This is not to say that French organs should not be playing
rock and roll with variations, but just that the music must be arranged
differently to reflect the general characteristics of the organ.

> Owners should buy an organ suited to their expectations or leave
> well enough alone.

Exactly.

Regards,

Douglas Bush
UK