Acoustics and Organs

An heretical view of acoustics

In the world of music at large the organ is often considered an outcast, a curiosity, or at best an antique. One reason is that much of the organ world is thought to be more concerned with sound for its own sake than with music. This characterization may be unfair, but it is partly our own fault. Organ builders and organists are notorious for demanding acoustics with exceptionally long reverberation times. True, much choral and organ music (often that written for the church) sounds best in a resonant environment, but this fact has often clouded our thinking . . . and the music! A great deal of music played on the organ is not served well by overly long reverberation because clarity is lost. Too much reverberation can blur form, harmonic structure, rhythm, articulation, and dynamic contrasts. Although it is hard for organ devotees to admit it, a resonant acoustic that is excellent for orchestral and other music can also serve the organ well.

There are two reasons for the dogmatic insistence on long reverberation times. First, it is a natural reaction to the discouraging trend toward studio-like acoustics in modern church architecture. In order to gain any reverberation at all, we have become used to asking for the moon. Ask for five seconds and be happy with one and a half is the usual formula. Unfortunately, however, this strategy often backfires, leaving organ advocates with little credibility among architects, acousticians and those who pay for buildings.

The second reason is that organs in highly reverberant rooms make a spectacular sonic effect. It is said that any kind of noise sounds well in a stone cathedral. But what does this mean? Does it mean that the overall result is musical? Or does it mean only that the sound itself is exciting, dramatic, rich with color? All too often the latter is the answer. Likewise, amateur singing sounds fine in the shower as does student trumpeting in an empty gymnasium. But these, of course, are illusions. What is being perceived as music is often nothing more than exaggerated sound. More is required of an acoustical environment to make satisfying music.

What is a good acoustic for the pipe organ?

It is commonly believed that all organs are enhanced by a very long reverberation time. We must differentiate among general types of organs (and the music played on them) and their acoustical environments. First, consider the cathedral organ. Although no music is successful when all clarity is lost through excessive reverberation, certain branches of the organ and choral repertoire--particularly that written for grand churches--require a reverberation time that is greater than that required for other forms of music.

At the other extreme is the high pressure theater organ. This type of instrument is far more successful in a studio or heavily draped theater. Otherwise the detail is lost. Their unique ability to create accent and to carry complex rhythmic patterns is partially defeated if reverberation is too great. Special purpose venues for these two extremes of the spectrum are not our concern here. This article deals instead with acoustical requirements for organs in the middle ground that are required to perform an eclectic repertoire in typical American churches and in multi-purpose concert halls.

Amount of reverberation

Too much is just as bad as too little. The lower limit of reverberation is easy to determine. It is the point at which music sounds dry, dull, and lifeless. This lower limit is higher for organ than for other instruments primarily because organ pipes are simply on or off. There is little that can be done to shape their tone. Some organ builders strive to improve the flexibility and responsiveness of the pipe organ; however, it seems unlikely that this can be achieved to the degree it is found in other instruments or in the human voice. Therefore a reasonably resonant acoustic is necessary for the church or concert pipe organ.

It is more difficult to determine the upper limit of reverberation. When does reverberation stop adding warmth and grandeur and start adding confusion? There are five determinants:

* When there is so much overlap of sequential sounds that musical line and structure lose definition despite the most careful articulation by the player; in other words, when the player's ideas get lost in the process of transmission to the audience. At that point the performance becomes an impression of sounds rather than a projection of musical ideas. (Those satisfied only with impressions of sounds are much like the early Hi-Fi enthusiasts who favored recordings of locomotives!)

* When the player loses control of rhythm.

* When it becomes impossible to create accent, which on the organ is accomplished more through durations of silence and sound than it is by increase of loudness.

* When sudden changes of dynamic level are obscured.

* When sharp contrast in tone color is clouded.

All of these musical situations, and others, caused by excessive reverberation are not tolerated by most musicians. Unfortunately, however, they are sadly disregarded by many in the organ profession, much to the detriment of their credibility in musical circles. We are sometimes willing to sacrifice ten minutes of music to get five seconds of sound at the end of the last chord!

Quality of reverberation

Frequently, the total amount of reverberation time is the only consideration in specifying ideal organ acoustics. But we should be far more interested in the quality of reverberation than in its duration. There are three qualitative elements that seem most important to me as an organ designer:

* The intensity (power curve) must be as high as possible. I was first made aware of this in visiting some of the great churches of France. There was a quality of reverberation there quite different from even the best reverberant rooms in this country. Why this is so must be the subject of another enquiry; however, the nature of this quality is vitally important. What I found was that the intensity of sound stayed quite high throughout the reverberation period and then trailed off rather quickly. This produced a most satisfying, rich, warm sound. In other buildings with an equal duration of reverberation, but with quickly decreasing intensity, the result is a disturbing confusion. I attribute this to the changing nature of the sound during the reverberation period. My conclusion, based upon much observation, is that it is far better to have a short, intense reverberation period than to have a long, weak one. The charts below show this concept.

      A measurement which may be more valuable than reverberation time (RT) in expressing this quality of intensity is early decay time (EDT). This is the time it takes a sound to decay by 15 decibels, whereas RT measures the sound until it decays by 60 decibels. Obviously EDT is measuring the first and most intense part of the reverberation. A high sound level during the first seconds and a total reverberation period extending very little longer than the EDT describes my ideal reverberation characteristic in a more precise way. Exact numbers, of course, vary with each situation; however, the idea of a           ratio of EDT to RT is true in all cases.

* The decay of sound should be smooth. A series of fast echos (much like clapping one's hands at the top of a deep well) are called flutter echos. These often occur in buildings with parallel walls located close together or with domes and barrel vaults which have a focal point at a sound source. These are extremely deleterious to musical effect. They can be so serious as to confuse performers while irritating the listeners. Sometimes they can be sensed throughout the room, but often they are localized. This characteristic of reverberation, a yodeler's delight, is ruinous to music, or for that matter, clarity of speech. The quality of reverberation that we seek is a sound dying away, not a sound being reiterated.

* The room should sound the way it looks. The eye leads the ear to expect a certain amount of reverberation. When it is either more or less, even the amateur listener detects that something is wrong.

Frequency response

Reverberation time is such an issue that other related characteristics are sometimes overlooked in specifying acoustical design. Frequency response is one of the most important of these. I find it far easier to work in a building with a smooth frequency response than one where there are peaks and valleys along the spectrum. The amount of reverberation should progress evenly through each frequency range. The bass should have slightly more reverberation than the mid range and the treble should have slightly less. One of the great faults of most buildings is the inability to support the deep bass of the organ. The unfortunate tendency of many buildings to also exaggerate treble makes bass seem even weaker. Bass is, after all, one of the characteristics that makes the organ the king of instruments. However, if low frequency reverberation is overemphasized, the heavy, often slightly slow speaking bass of the pipe organ becomes ill-defined. Similarly, if there is an overbalance on the high end, it is difficult to avoid shrillness.

Dispersion

The sound producing area of a pipe organ is large. Sounds of different color and intensity emanate from various places within the organ case or chamber. If a room is shaped in such a way that sounds coming from different points are focused to particular listening areas, it is impossible to achieve good ensemble. The ideal acoustic disperses sound evenly throughout a room. Acousticians and architects can achieve this through the application of various shaped dispersion elements.

Distribution

Sound should be distributed evenly throughout the listening area. Organ builders encounter many rooms which have hot spots and dead spots. Some of these may involve loudness, others may emphasize certain frequencies. The first concern in good distribution is correct placement of the organ. Whether free-standing or in a chamber, an organ must have adequate communication with the listeners. Once that is achieved, the architect and acoustician can eliminate sound traps and provide proper reflective surfaces.

Presence

Reverberation that appears to be happening at a distance is not very satisfying. The listener should be immersed in the reverberant field, otherwise the effect is similar to listening to music coming from the next room. It is most often desirable for the organ to sound as though it is located in the same room as the listener, even if it is in a chamber. Many points of organ design are involved in this issue but acoustical factors are important as well. The chamber opening to the listening room should be as large as possible. The chamber should not be overly deep nor wider or taller at the back than it is at the front. Finally, the organ should occupy enough space so that the chamber does not possess its own reverberant field. If the sound being projected into the listening room comes with a built-in echo or hollowness, the result is more confusion. It must be noted that in some liturgical settings the opposite of presence, a sense of mystery, is valued. It is much easier to produce this quality in a chamber than in a free-standing case. Thus, a chamber can, in some circumstances, be advantageous. 

Background Noise

Because the organ is a "sostenuto" instrument lacking the percussive attack possibility of most other instruments, control of background noise is especially important since most background noise is also of a sustained nature. I refer especially to air handling equipment. Many types of organs have as one of their great virtues an extremely wide dynamic range. If background noise is not under control, the softer end of the organ's range is lost.

Loudness

Obviously, all of the qualities listed above which contribute to a warm, resonant sound require adequate loudness. This is a question of organ design. If an organ does not have the sonic energy to excite the reverberant field of the room, all of the efforts of acousticians and architects will be to no avail. The organ builder must design the instrument to fit the acoustical size of the listening room without being overbearing. All too often acoustical size is confused with the number of stops. Sound output has a great deal more to do with stop selection, layout, scaling, wind pressure, voicing, and finishing. In most cases, it is best to keep the organ as small as possible to achieve the musical and acoustical results desired.

Placement of the Organ

Placement of organ pipes is a critical element in acoustical design. If sound is not projected properly from its source, even the finest acoustic will not save the instrument. Proper placement and the tonal design of organs to fit various placement situations should be the subjects of a lengthy article, however a few summary comments are in order here. Although high, side organ chambers are often very successful in churches where the organ's role is primarily accompanimental, it is generally true that the best placement for an organ is directly behind and above the other performing forces. The organ should speak down the central, long axis of the room. This often poses a problem especially when inserting a pipe organ into an existing space. Usually, the difficulty is finding height for the organ. The lowest point of the sound opening should start one to two feet above the heads of the farthest "upstage" row of choristers when standing. This is often as much as 15¢ above floor level. The top of the tone opening should be a minimum of 18¢ above that. For some types of organs it should be more. If adequate height is not available, there arises the challenge of how to present the organ visually. Traditionally, organs are narrow and tall. Short, squat ones tend to look ridiculous. Since the organ is known as the king of instruments and produces a fittingly noble sound, a "Punch & Judy" pipe display is inappropriate. There are no easy solutions. If a compromise must be made, the musical result must always be favored over the visual one. Sometimes it is best not to show pipes at all and let the instrument speak through grilles.  A smaller instrument is often the best solution. It will open far more options for good placement than a larger one. A well placed organ is an acoustically efficient organ.

Summary

Over the years I have found it most comfortable to work in buildings with a moderate acoustic. It is depressing to face a totally dry environment where the organ's tone is given no help at all; however, it is equally frustrating to deal with an overly live building where all of one's efforts in careful tone regulation are lost in a musical muddle. Approximately two and one-half to three seconds of intense, smooth reverberation (when the room is occupied) combined with even frequency response, good dispersion, distribution, and presence, as well as limited background noise yields the ideal atmosphere. A few examples from my experience that come quickly to mind are Old South Church in Boston, First-Plymouth Congregational Church in Lincoln, Nebraska, the University of Arizona (Holsclaw Hall) in Tucson, Severance Hall in Cleveland, the Boston Symphony Hall, and many of the famous 19th-century town halls throughout England. In other words, this writer's ideal for organ sound is the same as that for a first class symphony hall of the more reverberant type. Such an environment provides warmth for organ tone combined with clarity of musical line.

Jack Bethards is president and tonal director of Schoenstein & Co., Organ Builders of San Francisco. This article is based on a paper he presented in a forum with acoustical engineer Paul Scarbrough at the 136th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Norfolk, Virginia, in October, 1998.

Graphs by Paul Scarbrough, Acoustical Engineer, Norwalk, CT

Taylor & Boody Organbuilders, Staunton, Virginia

Goshen College, Goshen, Indiana

About the organ.

Designing an organ for Rieth Hall at Goshen College was a
pleasure. The opportunity to place the organ in the traditional location, high
in the rear gallery, was ideal both visually and aurally. The form and
proportions of the hall, with its austere yet warm and inviting interior,
called the organbuilder to respond with similar clarity and restraint. The
ample height of the room suggested a plain, vertical configuration of the
instrument, on which natural light from the clerestory windows would fall
gently. Everything about the hall spoke of its solid construction and honesty
of materials, qualities that we strive to reflect in our organs. Likewise the
acoustical properties of the hall, so warm and reverberant and at the same time
intimate and clear, allowed the organ’s tone to develop freely without
being forced. The result is an endearing musical instrument that is
aesthetically inseparable from the space in which it stands.

Initial inspiration for the Goshen case came from the organ
built by David Tannenberg in 1774 for Trinity Lutheran Church in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania. While only the case and façade pipes of that lovely
instrument have survived, they constitute the finest example we have in our
country of south German case architecture from the 18th century.
Tannenberg’s use of the double impost, with its Oberwerk division
gracefully placed as a reflection of the Hauptwerk below, was typical of organs
in his native Saxony and Thuringia. Other exterior influences from that time
and place include the two swags that bracket the center tower, and the broad
lower case that supports the full width of the impost and omits the spandrels
common to earlier styles. Apart from its simple springboard moldings, the
Goshen case is relatively flat and plain by comparison with its historical
counterparts. Its only bold three-dimensional element is the polygonal center
tower. The small pointed towers in Tannenberg’s design are here merely
implied by the V-shaped arrangement of foot lengths in the tenor fields. The
use of six auxiliary panels to raise the smaller pipe feet above the impost
moldings adds interest to the design. The considerable height of the lower case
was determined by the need for a passageway over the 2-foot concrete riser
behind the organ. This height gave space between the console and impost for the
eventual inclusion of a small Brustwerk with several stops for continuo
accompaniment. Cabinets for music storage are built into the back on both sides
of the lower case.

Another aspect of the design reminiscent of 18th-century
south German traditions is the position of the windchests in relation to the
action. The two windchests of the Hauptwerk are spaced apart from the center of
the case by the width of the keyboards. This leaves room for trackers of the
Oberwerk to reach their rollerboard without blocking access to the Hauptwerk
action and its pallets. It also provides optimum space for 8’ bass pipes
at the sides and leaves room for tuning the tenor pipes of the Hauptwerk with
only minimal obstruction by the Oberwerk rollerboard. The windchests for the
Pedal are located behind the case at the level of the impost, a placement that
Tannenberg could also have used.

Both the playing action and stop action are mechanical. The
manual keys are hinged at the tail and suspended from their trackers. There are
no thumper rails to hold the keys down, so they are free to overshoot slightly
when released, as is the case in traditional suspended actions. Trackers,
squares and rollers are all made of wood. There is no felt in the action. Keys
are guided by pins at the sides. Together these details combine to give a
feeling of buoyancy and liveliness reminiscent of antique instruments. The aim
is not so much to provide a light action as to arrive at one having the mass
and friction appropriate to the size and character of the organ. Such an action
may need occasional minor adjustment of key levels with changes in humidity,
but this is a small price to pay for the advantages gained over more sterile
modern alternatives. 

Wind is supplied by two single-fold wedge bellows (3’ x
6’) fed by a blower located in a small room below the organ. Natural
fluctuations of the wind pressure in response to the playing contribute to the
lively, singing quality of the organ’s sound. A wind stabilizer can be
engaged when unusually heavy demands on the wind system call for damping of
these fluctuations. The organ’s single tremulant is made in the old-fashioned
beater form. On seeing a tremulant puffing away in one of our organs, a
Japanese friend remarked that the organ was laughing! It is useful to think of
an organ’s wind as its breath and the bellows as lungs, for the
instrument’s appeal is closely tied to our perception of its lifelike
qualities. 

The tonal character of an organ is rarely revealed by its
stoplist. This is particularly true in an instrument of only twenty-four stops.
Once the builder accepts the constraints of a given style and the essential
registers have been chosen, there is usually little room or money left to
include stops that would make a modest design appear unique on paper.
Fortunately for the art, the musicality of the organ is not bound by its
stoplist; rather, it is determined by a host of other complex factors. These
can be partially defined in the technical data of pipe scaling and
construction, general design parameters, materials and the like, but in reality
much more rests on the elusive criteria of experience, skill and taste of the
builder. Taken together this means that each new organ, albeit small, presents
fresh opportunities for artistic expression. It is important that all the pipes
speak promptly, be they reeds or flues, except in the case of strings, which
gain charm from their halting speech. It is less important that the pipes
produce precisely the same vowel sounds from note to note, for here variety
adds refreshing character and interest to the organ.

At Goshen we chose to voice the 8’ Principal to be
somewhat brighter and richer in overtones than has been our wont. This was
achieved by giving the pipes lower cutups than was customary in German and
Dutch organs of the 17th century and before. The five distinctly different
8’ flue stops on the manuals deserve special mention. Although all
followed scaling patterns we have used frequently in the past, when voiced they
proved to be unusually satisfying, particularly in combination with each other.
Whenever the 16’ Bordun is used with them a magical new dimension is added
to the sound. If, for example, one draws the Bordun with the Viol da Gamba, the
effect is that of a quiet 16’ Principal. Used with the Spillpfeife the
Bordun reverts to its role as a flute. In an organ of this size it is crucial
that every stop work as well as possible with every other. Following south
German practice, both 8’ and 4’ flutes on the Hauptwerk are made in
the same form. This duplication of flutes within the same family was not the
custom in the north, where lower pitched flutes were usually stopped and those
above them progressively more open. The Oberwerk configuration at Goshen with
its two stopped 8’ registers and partially open 4’ Rohrflöte is
typical of the northern tradition. We look forward to the day that the 16’
Violonbass with its cello-like speech can be added to the Pedal.
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 

The distinctive musical effect of the Goshen organ is
strongly colored by the use of the recently released Bach-Lehman temperament
described in the accompanying article. Because the completion of the organ in
February coincided with the publication in Early Music of Bradley
Lehman’s treatise on J. S. Bach’s temperament, we chose to tune the
organ according to his plan. Here was the ideal opportunity to try the
temperament on an organ built in Germanic style and at the same time to honor
Dr. Lehman as a distinguished Goshen alumnus for his work in this field. The
experiment has been a fascinating one. It has provided a place to hear
Bach’s organ music as we have not heard it before. We are honored to have
played a part in translating the dry mathematical numbers of this temperament
into the vibrant sound of the organ. 

With few exceptions the many parts of the organ were
constructed from raw materials in our Virginia workshop. Through the skills of
each craftsman the design moved from an idea to paper and then through raw wood
and metal into a large and impressive object. Note by note the tonal picture
has been filled in by voicing and tuning until in the end we experience a new
instrument with an identity all its own. We hope that it will give pleasure to
those who play and hear it far into the future.

--George Taylor

The organ project at Goshen College

“Dienlich, Ordentlich, Schicklich, Dauerlich”

In 1999 we were asked by the organ consultant for Goshen
College, Roseann Penner Kaufman, to make a proposal for the new Goshen College
Music Center. As with any new project, I went to Goshen full of excitement at
the promise of participating in what was to be a spectacular project. My
enthusiasm was short-lived when I saw the design for the recital hall. It was a
standard fan-shaped, sloped-floor, small college recital hall, with theatre
seats and carpet in the aisles. The space for the organ was planned in a niche
at the back of the stage. The design would have been fine for small chamber
recitals, but it was not a proper home for an organ. The prospects for the
organ looked bleak. We would not have felt productive or inspired. We always
say that the room is more than half the organ. I took a deep breath and told
the Goshen committee what I thought of the plan. The committee listened and
asked us to offer suggestions on how the recital hall might be designed to work
best with the musical programs envisioned for this space.

I returned to Staunton eager to develop a plan. One of the
first things I did was to research the Mennonite Quarterly Review for articles
describing historical Anabaptist worship spaces. I hoped that the essence of
these rooms would lead me to an aesthetic that would tie the new hall to the
old tradition, which would, in turn, also be good for music, especially the
organ. My research acquainted me with four German words used to express the
qualities of the historical spaces: dienlich, ordentlich, schicklich and
dauerlich--serviceable, orderly, fitting and lasting. I also found prints
of the interiors of some of these churches. Rectangular in shape with open
truss timber roof framing, clear glass windows, galleries on several sides,
rough stone floors, moveable chairs, unadorned, honest and powerful, these
spaces had all the qualities that I was looking for. They also had enduring
musical-acoustical qualities and so many are used today for concerts.

The simple sketch that I made went first to the Goshen organ
committee who, led by Doyle Preheim and Chris Thogersen, embraced the plan.
Then the concept went to Rick Talaske and his team of acousticians. They
transformed the plan into practical geometry and surface treatments to make the
space an acoustical success. Mathes Brierre Architects took the acoustical plan
and translated it into a visual design that evokes the warehouse or
brewery-turned-church concept of the early Dutch Mennonite spaces. Schmidt
Associates worked through the technical details with Casteel Construction to
conceive the simple pre-cast concrete panels and graceful curved steel arches
that make the hall appealing in its architecture, superior in acoustical
performance and straightforward and durable in construction. There was creative
and sensitive work done by a Goshen group concerned with decor and furnishings.
The result is successful beyond our expectations. The collaboration of all the
partners made the project exceed the ability of any one of us.

Once the hall was underway, we scheduled a meeting at St.
Thomas Fifth Avenue in New York with a group from Goshen and Calvin and Janet
High from Lancaster, Pennsylvania. We had a great day in New York showing
everyone our organ in the gallery of St. Thomas. The Highs’ enthusiasm
for the St. Thomas organ and the Goshen Music Center paved the way for their
generous gift that underwrote the cost of the organ.

We realized that the floor area of Rieth Hall was small in
relation to the height. We saw that if there could be the addition of one more
bay to the length there would be significant improvement in the proportions of
the space and at least 50 more seats could be added. Again, the Goshen design
group supported our suggestion. At a time in the project when the building
committee was attempting to control costs and squeeze performance out of every
dime, they found the funds for this most important late addition.
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 

I predicted at the time we were creating the designs for
Rieth Hall, that the unique qualities of this space would have something to say
to the Goshen students about music and worship. This prediction has been
realized. First, there is genuine enthusiasm for a cappella singing in Rieth
Hall, encouraging this wonderful Mennonite tradition. Second, there has been a
spontaneous seizing of the space by the students for their own student-directed
Sunday worship. In this age of searching for the right path in worship and
liturgy, of debating the influence and appropriateness of mass media and
popular music for worship, we have built something at Goshen College that
reaches across the span of time to those Mennonite roots. Led by the seemingly
old-fashioned qualities of dienlich, ordentlich, schicklich and dauerlich, we
have made a  music space and organ
that inspire and excite us to make music and to celebrate and serve our God and
Creator.

Wood and the Goshen organ

The traditional pipe organ is a wooden machine. Early on in
our careers as organ builders we realized that getting control over our
materials in both an aesthetic and technical sense was essential to our success
as organ makers. Our first path was to make friends with our neighborhood
sawmillers. One of these was an octogenarian whose experience reached back to
horse logging and steam power. He taught us the value of long, slow, air-drying
of lumber. He also knew the old traditions of sawing, how to take the tension
out of a log, how to saw through the middle of the log and keep the boards in
order so that the cabinetmaker could match the grain. He remembered the methods
of quarter sawing that impart the most dimensional stability to the boards and
in oak bring out the beautiful fleck of the medullary rays. We have built our
own sawmill based on a portable band saw. For quarter sawing, we have built a
double-ended chain saw that can split logs up to 60 inches in diameter. The
half logs (or quarters in extremely large timber) are then aligned on our band
saw and sawn in a radial fashion into boards. This lumber is then air-dried for
a number of years. At the end, we put the wood in our dry kiln and gently warm
it up to stabilize the moisture content at 8% to 10%.

Oak is the traditional wood of Northern European organ
building so it was natural for us to choose white oak for the Goshen organ. We
have long admired the Dutch and German organs dating back to the 16th century.
The earliest organs show only the natural patina of age and no finish; the
concept of finishing wood as in varnishing or oiling came well into the 18th
century. We followed this earlier practice for the Goshen organ. The oak has
been hand-planed to a smooth polish, much smoother than can ordinarily be
produced with sanding. The hand-planed wood will resist dirt. We feel there are
also musical benefits from using wood in its natural state. The case and
carvings together with all the interior parts transmit sound energy and reflect
and focus the sound of the pipes. Also, the open pores and surface
imperfections of the natural wood have an effect on the sound reflection.

Another aspect of wood use in historic organs is how
efficiently the old builders utilized their wood. Before the age of machinery,
cutting, transporting and converting timber to sawn, dried lumber ready for use
was costly. The best wood was always used for the keyboards, playing action,
wind chests and pipes. The next selection went to the most visible parts of the
case, especially the front of the organ. The rest was used for carvings, heavy
structural members, walkways, bellows framework and back panels. Some of this
wood shows knots, cracks and other defects that might offend our modern sense
of perfection. However, in addition to demonstrating good wood utilization, the
varying density and differences in surface texture of these so-called defects
may indeed benefit the music. How we perceive the sound of an organ is a very
complex and subtle equation. This is one of the wonderful aspects of the real
pipe organ that differentiates it from the sterile sound of the electronic
substitute. We feel it is good stewardship to apply the hierarchy of selection
as practiced by the old masters. We try to use all the wood, through careful
selection, with thoughtful conservation of a vanishing resource.

--John Boody

Acoustic design of Rieth Recital Hall at Goshen College

In 1998, the design team of design architect Mathes Group
(now Mathes Brierre Architects), architect of record Schmidt Associates and
acoustician The Talaske Group (now Talaske) began preliminary work on a new
music education and performance building for Goshen College’s campus.
This project was the College’s greatest building investment to date and
they were determined to do things right . . . with a very modest budget. The
Recital Hall (now Rieth Recital Hall) was slated to house a new tracker organ
of exceptional quality. As acousticians, we offered some general planning
recommendations--not the least of which was a 50-foot ceiling
height--and recommended that the organ builder be hired as soon as
possible.

Enter John Boody of Taylor & Boody, organ builders from
Virginia. John energized the subsequent meetings with some profound advice that
proved to set the final direction for the space. He moved our thinking from a
“fixed” seating configuration to a flexible arrangement based on a
flat floor where seats can face either end of the room. This unique concept
facilitated the accommodation of a conventional “recital hall” or
assembly arrangement with musicians or presenters on a small stage. The cleverness
of the concept is the seats can be turned to face the opposite direction in the
room, offering a classic organ recital arrangement. Furthermore, John
recommended that the proportions of the room would be better served if
lengthened by adding another bay of structure. These fundamental planning ideas
changed the direction of the design in perpetuity.

We embraced these new directions yes">  and identified the many other room acoustics design features
that would support the client’s needs. The 50-foot ceiling height remained,
and we worked with the architects and construction manager to render the room
as a sound-reflective concrete enclosure, embellished with wood. The goal was
to maintain the warmth of sound created by the organ. Within the “theatre
planning” process, we guided and exploited naturally occurring
opportunities for introducing sound diffusing shaping to reflect low- and
mid-pitched sound in all directions--by introducing one side balcony and a
rear balcony, recesses from circulation paths and recesses created by
deeply-set windows. We recommended deliberate articulation of the walls to
diffuse mid- and high-pitched sound. Wood surfaces were detailed to minimize
absorption of low-pitched sound. Retractable velour curtains and banners were
recommended in abundance and specified by Bob Davis, theatre consultant.
Architecturally, curtain and banner pockets were created so the sound-absorbing
materials could be retracted completely on demand. These features make possible
a broad “swing” of the sound of the room from very reverberant for
choral and organ performance to articulate for assembly events or amplified
music performance. Fundamental to the acoustic design was the need for silence.
This was accomplished by structural discontinuities in the building (acoustic
isolation joints) and the proper placement and design of heating and air
conditioning systems.

Within their mission statement, Goshen College states:
“Musical expression is a human manifestation of the divine impulse and,
as such, serves as a window into the individual soul, a bridge between human
beings and a means of corporate religious experience.” In light of the
students adopting the Rieth Recital Hall for their weekly convocations and the
many other uses, we are pleased to say the happy story continues!

--Rick Talaske

Bach temperament

This organ is the first since the 18th century to use Johann
Sebastian Bach’s tuning, as notated by him in 1722 on the title page of
the Well-Tempered Clavier. This tuning method is a 2004 discovery by Bradley
Lehman. The article about this discovery is published in the February and May
2005 issues of Early Music (Oxford University Press), and further details are
at <www.larips.com&gt;.

The layout, dividing the Pythagorean comma, is:

F-C-G-D-A-E = 1/6 comma narrow 5ths;

E-B-F#-C# = pure 5ths;

C#-G#-D#-A# = 1/12 comma narrow 5ths;

A#-F = a residual wide 1/12 comma 5th.

In this tuning, every major scale and minor scale sounds
different from every other, due to the subtle differences of size among the
tones and semitones. This allows music to project a different mood or character
in each melodic and harmonic context, with a pleasing range of expressive
variety as it goes along. It builds drama into musical modulations.
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 

The result sounds almost like equal temperament, and it similarly
allows all keys to be used without problem, but it has much more personality
and color. In scales and triads it sounds plain and gentle around C major (most
like regular 1/6 comma temperament), mellower and warmer in the flat keys such
as A-flat major (most like equal temperament), and especially bright and
exciting in the sharp keys around E major (like Pythagorean tuning, with pure
fifths). Everything is smoothly blended from these three competing systems,
emerging with an emphasis on melodic suavity.

The following chart shows the relative size of each major
third, resulting from each series of the intervening four fifths. This system
of analysis is from the 1770s, published in the theoretical work of G. A. Sorge
who was a former colleague of Bach’s. The intervals having higher numbers
sound spicier, more restless. In this measurement, a value of 11 would indicate
a major third that is one syntonic comma too sharp (a “Pythagorean major
third,” having been generated by four pure fifths).
style="mso-spacerun: yes">  A pure major third would be represented
here as 0.

Bb-D    6
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             D-F#
    7
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             F#-A#
8

Eb-G    7
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             G-B
      5
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             B-D#
   9

Ab-C    8
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             C-E
       3
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             E-G#
   10

Db-F     9
             F-A
       3
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             A-C#
   9

Equal temperament, as opposed to the variety shown here, has
a constant size of 7 in all twelve of the major thirds.

In functional harmony, the Bach tuning sets up especially
interesting contrasts within minor-key music. The key of A minor has the
plainest tonic juxtaposed with the most restless dominant. F minor, a major
third away, has the opposite relationship: troubled tonic, calm dominant. And
C# minor has the average character between these behaviors, where the tonic and
dominant are both moderately energetic. 

In major-key music, the tonics and dominants have characters
similar to one another. The sizes of major thirds change by only 1, 2, or 3
units from each key to its neighbors, moving by the circle of fifths (through
typical subdominant/tonic/dominant progressions). Any change of Affekt is
therefore gradual and subtle, as if we never really leave the home key
altogether but it feels a little more or less tense as we go along.

In any music that modulates more quickly by bypassing such a
normal circle-of-fifths cycle, the contrasts are momentarily startling. That
is, the music’s dramatic harmonic gestures become immediately noticeable,
where the major thirds have changed size suddenly from one harmony to the next.
This comes up for example in the Fantasia in G Minor (BWV 542), Gelobet seist
du, Jesu Christ (BWV 722), and the fourth Duetto (BWV 805), and especially in
music by the Bach sons.

This system turns out to be an excellent tuning solution to
play all music, both before and after Bach’s. It is moderate enough for
complete enharmonic freedom, but also unequal enough to sound directional and
exciting in the tensions and resolutions of tonal music.

A recording will be ready for release this summer, including
music by Bach, Fischer, Brahms, et al.

--Bradley Lehman

A brief history of the organ in the Mennonite Church

Some people might find it unusual to find such a remarkable
organ in a Mennonite college. Aren’t the Mennonites those folks with the
buggies and suspenders? It is true that some Mennonite congregations still take
literally founder Menno Simons’ caution against the organ as a
“worldly” invention, but most, especially in the last fifty years,
have embraced it as a vital contributor to the musical and worship life of the
community. 

The Mennonite Church has its beginnings in the 16th-century
Protestant Reformation. Because of persecution, most of the early worship
services were held secretly, in homes or out-of-the-way places. Mennonites also
believed that the true church existed in small, simple gatherings; therefore,
it was uncommon for early Mennonites to even set aside a separate building for
worship. 

Two hundred years after the beginning of the movement,
churches in Germany and the Netherlands had grown to the point of meeting in
dedicated buildings, and by the 1760s several in urban areas had installed pipe
organs. It was another two hundred years, however, before organs became common
in the Mennonite conference that supported Goshen College. Even now, the organ
is not necessarily assumed to support congregational singing, but contributes
other service music. Organ study is now offered at all of the Mennonite Church
USA-affiliated colleges, and the new Taylor & Boody organ at Goshen will
certainly have a profound impact on the future of worship and organ study
throughout the denomination.

--Roseann Penner Kaufman

Roseann Penner Kaufman, DMA, is adjunct instructor in organ
at Bethel College, N. Newton, Kansas, a four-year liberal arts college
affiliated with the Mennonite Church USA. She also serves as director of music
for Rainbow Mennonite Church in Kansas City, Kansas. Dr. Kaufman served as the
consultant to Goshen College for their organ project.

Specifications for Opus 41

Hauptwerk

16' Bordun (C-D# wood, rest metal*)

8' Principal (77% tin)

8' Spillpfeife

8' Viol da Gamba (77% tin)

4' Octave

4' Spitzflöte

3' Quinte

3' Nasat

2' Superoctave

IV-V Mixtur

8' Trompet

Oberwerk

8' Gedackt (99% lead)

8' Quintadena

4' Principal (77% tin)

4' Rohrflöte

2' Waldflöte

II Sesquialtera

IV Scharff

8' Dulcian

Pedal

16' Subbass (wood)

(16' Violonbass) space prepared

8' Octave

4' Octave

16' Posaune (C-B wood, rest 99% lead)

8' Trompet (99% lead)

Couplers

Oberwerk / Hauptwerk

Hauptwerk / Pedal

Oberwerk / Pedal

Tremulant to entire organ

Mechanical key and stop action

Compass: manual 56 notes C-g''', pedal 30 notes C-f'

Lehman-Bach temperament

Interior metal pipes of hammered alloys

*All unmarked metal alloys of 28% tin, 72% lead

Case of solid white oak

Windchests of solid oak, pine & poplar

Number of pipes: 1604

Wind pressure: 75mm

Wind stabilizer

The builders

George K. Taylor

John H. Boody

Bruce Shull

Emerson Willard

Christopher A. Bono

Kelley Blanton

Chris A. Peterson

Sarah Grove-Humphries

Robbie Lawson

Jeffrey M. Peterson

Larry J. Damico

Holly Regi

Thomas M. Karaffa

Bob Harris

Katie Masincup

Ryan M. Albashian

Kristin E. Boo

Acoustic excellence is derived from wise design planning and decision-making regarding elements that are already “givens” within a project and budget

Acoustics in the Worship Space I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX have appeared in The Diapason, May 1983, May 1984, January 1986, May 1987, April 1988, April 1990, July 1991, May 1992, and April 2009 issues respectively.

In today’s world and economy, costs and budgets loom large in almost all activities and endeavors. During discussions of new church building or renovation projects, it might not be uncommon to hear the following ideas expressed: “Good acoustics aren’t really worth it for the average worshipper who won’t notice or appreciate it—that’s just for the elite ‘Carnegie Hall crowd;’” or, “It will cost too much to have good acoustics, and we cannot afford it.” When these notions surface they can sometimes be the cause for a church being doomed to a less than excellent acoustic environment.

Scientifically and experientially, it can be proven that good acoustic settings are indeed noticeable and appreciated by many, and not only by the “Carnegie Hall crowd”! In fact, acoustic qualities such as speech intelligibility, musical balance, and rhythmic and tuning accuracy can be scientifically tested and documented as being perceived and valued by a cross section of the population. The notion that “regular folks” won’t notice good acoustics is just scientifically false!

Economic issues are often the most difficult to resolve in many projects. Reduced availability of funds, lack of confidence in the economy, and the fear of future economic conditions are often governing factors. Indeed, when constructing a new worship facility or remodeling an existing one, many important matters tug at the purse strings, and budgeting can often be a stressor to a project. That said, it would still be eminently beneficial to consider acoustic issues seriously, and not simply dismiss acoustic excellence as being unaffordable or unattainable. Acoustic excellence does not necessarily mean purchasing “extra” or expensive features. Often, acoustic excellence can be realized from wise decisions and design choices regarding elements that are already a given part of a project.  

The primary architectural factors that affect the acoustic environment include the geometric form of a room (does the structure’s cubic air volume and shape enhance or detract from good sound?), the interior materials of a room (to what extent do selected interior finishes reflect, absorb, or transmit sound energy in a structure?), and the location of key elements (do the relative proximities of things such as microphones, speakers, singers, organ pipes, instruments, and even potentially noise-generating equipment help or hinder sound perception?). Wise or poor design choices regarding any of these factors can result in acoustic excellence or disaster.  

Geometric form of a room

Geometric room forms can distribute and project sound evenly through a space, or can generate unwanted tonal focusing, echoes, and standing waves. Successful worship space geometries typically have generous cubic air volumes, longer and shorter axes, and unobstructed “line of sight” sound projection paths. Sound-diffusing wall and ceiling surface profiles and features will also contribute to even distribution and dispersing of sound energy. Alternatively, low ceilings, flat and parallel surfaces, concave forms, deep transepts, etc., typically limit acoustical potential and create echoes, “hot spots,” “dead spots,” flutters, trapping, and other unwanted and disturbing acoustical anomalies.

Interior materials of a room

Appropriate ratios of sound-reflective to sound-absorbing materials in a room can result in a vibrant and reverberative space that enlivens music and liturgical participation, and produces 

authoritative speech. Alternatively, excessive amounts of carpeting, draperies, and other sound-absorbing features can deliver a dull, dead effect that suffocates worship participation and leaves music and speech uninspiring. Having a carefully selected ratio of sound-reflecting to sound-absorbing materials, which results in an appropriate reverberation period, is essential to a worthwhile acoustic setting.  

Location of key elements

Then there is location! The relative placement of organ pipes and choir singers together will allow choristers to hear accompaniments and each other clearly and facilitate accurate rhythm and tuning. For example, positioning singers in an ensemble format, forward and below organ cases or chambers, can maximize musical potential. If singers are placed far from organ pipes, within restrictive alcoves, behind obstructions, or strung out in long lines, the entire musical ensemble will suffer from being disengaged. Similarly, the correct location of loudspeakers relative to both microphones and the listening congregation can assure speech intelligibility for all, while inappropriate placement of sound system components can result in frustration and lost clarity for all; if loudspeakers are placed with direct “line of sight” access to all listeners, they can deliver sound with clarity. Ultimately, it is not enough to have all of the sound sources and listeners “somewhere” in the room.  Relational locations and proximities are critical to success.

Finally, even if all of the beneficial acoustic design features for room geometry, material selections, and functional proximities are adopted, all can still be ruined if unwanted and interrupting noises invade the worship space. Techniques such as placing noise-generating equipment and functions away from the worship space, and using resilient mountings and discontinuous structures can mitigate “noise to listener” pathways.  

Acoustic excellence

In all of these examples, acoustic success is not derived from expensive treatments or extra apparatus. Acoustic excellence is instead derived from wise design planning and decision-making regarding elements that are already “givens” within a project and budget. It may cost no more or less to place organ pipes in good or poor proximity to choir singers! It may cost no more or less to place noise-generating air-conditioning compressors near or far from the worship space! It may cost no more or less to angle a wall profile to avoid or create an echo! In many instances, the good acoustic choice can indeed be the least costly choice. For example, a hard surface floor that reinforces sound energy will last a lifetime, while a carpeted floor that removes sound energy from an environment will wear over time and eventually require replacement.  

While significant acoustic success can be realized from informed design and decision-making, it should not be inferred, however, that all acoustic matters are free and easy! There are some acoustic benefits worth paying for. Hard, dense walls that reinforce and balance low frequency tone near organ pipes and choir singers are indeed more expensive than thin gypsum board, but the price of the thin walls can be perpetually brittle and “tinny” music. It may cost more to hoist heavy loudspeakers to a high ceiling location than to wall-mount smaller units, but the price of poor speaker placement is a missed opportunity to proclaim the word with clarity and intelligibility. It may cost more to line air-conditioning ducts to prevent noise transmission, but constant HVAC noise interrupting speech and music during worship ruins the experience for all. While these and similarly important acoustic details do have an initial price tag, the cost of remedying these details later is even greater. As a wise observer once said, “If you don’t have the funds to do it right the first time, where are you going to find the additional funds to do it over again?” So, the functional value of design decisions must also be considered along with cost.

Substantial and significant acoustic benefits can result from making wise choices about already-fixed costs. A building will have floors, walls, and ceiling; these can be designed to work in favor of a good acoustic environment through careful detailing, and not necessarily through additional expense. A good acoustical environment can be defeated through uninformed and unwise design, and not necessarily because of lack of spending! Great acoustical worship environments are indeed achievable, even on a budget. Careful overall planning that maximizes the acoustic potential of a design, combined with reasonable spending on priority features, can result in architectural, functional, and inspirational value for generations.

Photo credit: Scott R. Riedel & Associates.

John-Paul Buzard Pipe Organ Builders, Champaign, Illinois, Opus 34

Mt. Pleasant Lutheran Church (ELCA), Racine, Wisconsin

From the designer and builder

Did you know that the Jetsons are parishioners of Mt. Pleasant Lutheran Church, Racine, Wisconsin? You know them: George, Jane (his wife), daughter Judy, and his boy, Elroy. Outside the world of futuristic fiction, they must have had an influence in the design of this church building, which is locally known as “The Space Ship Church.” Built in 1975, it is a dish with an inverted saucer as its roof; large plate glass windows surround its perimeter, filling in the space at which the two join.

This building’s unique shape determines how it is accessed and used—functionally and liturgically. Ahead of its time in terms of accessibility, upon entering at ground level, one enters the lower level fellowship areas and upper level worship area by a series of switch-back ramps that wind around the building’s diameter. Liturgically, this is a church in “three-quarter round,” which presents its own challenges for communion and processional traffic flow.

The building’s shape also determines its acoustical environment, and therefore the limits of a pipe organ’s physical and tonal design. Consultant Scott Riedel guided the church in improving the acoustics and creating a better area for music-making, by altering the shape of the walls facing the congregation, filling in gaps between ceiling beams, and replacing the carpeting in the choir’s seating area with hardwood flooring. And, in fact, sound is now heard more clearly and evenly through the room, especially in the outer ring of seating at the edge of the room’s diameter. But, the remaining carpet and pew coverings do their work too well, absorbing bass frequencies.

We were able to observe this phenomenon clearly before the church’s former organ was removed. The 16¢ pedal sounds were weak in the church, but in the lower level fellowship hall, the tone boomed to overtake normal conversation.

The organ chamber, while perfectly sited across the front of the worship area, is horizontal in nature, with a maximum ceiling height of 14'. Congregational seating comes to within four feet of the organ’s left side; the choral singers are about eight feet from the right side. The wide layout, and very present location of the organ, demanded that the design be practical, and required a very gentle touch in its scaling and voicing. Since the pipes could not be elevated above the congregation’s heads, the sound is produced directly at the level of people’s ears, requiring very refined voicing. The enclosed accompanimental divisions of the organ needed to be located to the right, nearer the choir, which meant that the Great needed to be on the left. People on the left side of the organ would be only four feet away from the Great Mixture. Oh, yes, there were also four steel roof support columns in the organ chamber, which could not be moved, and had to be worked around.

Those of you who have followed our work, or played our instruments, know that our organs have a smooth, warm, pervading, and significantly grand tone. They can be bright when they need to be, but the various stops are not inherently so. (The last thing we want to do is voice the high pitches in the mixtures to be bright!) Our organs are not crowned by high-pitched mixture-work (as in neo-classic organs), but by the heroic blend that results from mixtures and reeds singing together, reinforcing unison pitch. In the case of this church, we needed to fill the entire building (basement included) with bass frequencies, and gradually decrease the intensity of tone as the pitches rose, in order to have the organ sound smooth, balanced in the tonal spectrum, and consonant with our artistic style. To have achieved the balance it has—whether one is sitting next to the Great Mixture, or in the outside ring—is a testament to the organ’s solid construction, painstaking attention to scaling, and countless hours of listening and adjusting the sounds in the church. Our head voicer, Brian Davis, was promoted to the position of tonal director as a result of this organ’s success in the face of such overwhelming challenges.

The visual design’s “prime directives” were to bring order to random asymmetry, lead the eye toward the center of the worship area, emphasize what little verticality the space actually has, and give a dignified prominence to a steel sculpture in front of the organ—the base of the church’s three-bladed steeple, which pierces the roof and ascends to a needle point in the sky.

The three arms of the steeple are of unequal width, connected by horizontal welded rods, and form a sculpture in the nature of a cross. Original descriptions of the sculpture allude to the Trinitarian symbolism of its three blades. The organ chamber is located immediately behind the sculpture, the center portion curved in the outline of the stone font, the sides on a slightly reverse curve as the chamber returns to the side walls. Aside from the planned asymmetry of the steel sculpture, the exact dimensions and precise placement of the organ chamber behind the sculpture could not be ascertained until the old organ was removed and the chamber developed by moving offices and closets previously flanking the former instrument. The chamber space itself was asymmetrical as registered to the centrally located sculpture.

We decided to design the organ’s façade in three sections, not only to emphasize the Trinitarian symbolism, but to give us some practical constructional flexibility in reconciling the many dimensional variables. Even though everything was accurately constructed in the shop to careful measurements taken once the organ chamber was constructed, we still needed to do more woodworking on-site than we would have liked, or than other situations have ever required.

The center section, being behind the flat-black steel sculpture, needed some visual grounding, but not heaviness. The former organ was basically dark, with lots of black grille-cloth, which made the steel sculpture disappear. We therefore displayed the centrally located large wood pipes in a light, natural finish in the center section, with the horizontal bright polished copper reed resonators wrapping themselves around the sculpture from above and behind. This central display is symmetrical, and acts as a perfect backdrop to gently soften the tension created by the wide-versus-narrow blades of the sculpture in front. The low octave of the 8¢ Pedal Principal flanks this display of the wood pipes, the pipes being mounted on toeboards that follow the curve of the font, to act as a transition to the façade’s side elements.

In order to provide motion, rhythm, and verticality to this horizontal instrument, the left and right sides feature the largest of the polished tin Principal pipes, mounted on casework with a toeboard “sill” lower than that of the center section. The façade pipes’ feet are significantly lower than the windchests in the organ, so we had to hide the chests and reservoirs behind them with black felt to eliminate potential visual confusion. The pipes on the outside edges are supported by arched toeboards, rising above the façade’s sill (or impost if this were an organ case), which we enameled blue to relate to other colors in the room. The largest Pedal Principal pipes we could fit in the façade are from 16¢ FFF, which sit on the floor, to break the horizontal line of the sill and challenge the height of the central steel sculpture. As the compass of this stop ascends, the smaller pipes are racked up on the sill, but the mouth line forms one continuous rising arch, leading the eye inward. Subtle touches of pipe spacing from the edges of the upright casework members were added to subtly influence one’s viewing of the “symmetrically asymmetrical organ.”

The tonal design of this instrument is fairly typical of what we do, with the exception of the four-stop Solo Organ, which is at home on the bottom manual keyboard. The Great, Swell, and Pedal are full and well developed, consonant with our style. The Solo offers some evocative coloristic sounds and the flexibility of a third keyboard in a situation in which there was neither room nor money for a full Choir Organ. Usually our organs’ solo reeds are Tubas. But, in this close acoustic, we were extremely concerned that the high volume, located so close to the listeners, would drive them all out onto Green Bay Road and us out of town on a rail! We therefore opted to make these Trombas, on lower pressure with slightly more open shallots for a relatively dark tone, but at a solo volume in balance with the rest of the organ. The Great 8' Trumpet is truly a luxury. This Trumpet is a beautifully blending chorus reed and also very useful for solo work. The Swell reed battery, though, is what’s worth writing home about! Here’s the power in the organ, beautifully tailored for its uses in a wide variety of contexts, but it is never too loud in the room. The Swell 16' Bassoon, which plays in the Pedal as well, perfectly balances not only the Swell battery, but also the Great full chorus for those many times when it is used as a “pointed” pedal reed and the darker, heavier Trombone would be too much.

It has been a pleasure to work with the people of Mt. Pleasant Lutheran Church, and consultant Scott Riedel, on this new instrument. Pastor Stephen Samuelson, music director Joshua Brown, and the organ committee fell in love with our instruments after hearing the organ we built at St. David’s Episcopal Church, Glenview, Illinois. Their vision for how the new organ would transform their unique worship space was inspiring. It was our privilege to be given the challenges and create something truly beautiful.

—John-Paul Buzard



From the organist and director of music

Like any good Lutheran, I must start with a confession. Five years ago, when I pulled up to Mt. Pleasant Lutheran Church for my first interview, I thought “Who designed this thing, Frank Lloyd Wrong? It embodies disappointing American church architecture with its wide squat room, plenty of carpet and more wasted space than the inside of an SUV!”

Fortunately, like any good Lutheran, I put my trust in God’s abiding grace, and returned to Mt. Pleasant as their organist and director of music to discover the beauty of this building. A ribbon of windows keeps the outside world in plain sight, and the roof line surrounds the building with a crown of thorns. The triune tower rises up from the baptismal font, punctuating this architectural statement, which has served as the church’s very best evangelism tool since its completion 30 years ago!

The church’s former small organ had been assembled in an ad hoc manner through the years, and suffered from the oppressive acoustical environment and poor chamber layout. With the able guidance of Scott Riedel and Associates, the church crafted a plan to remodel the sanctuary, double its reverberation time, and replace the aging organ. The organ committee considered many fine builders. John-Paul Buzard’s warmth of tone, quality of workmanship, and, to quote the Senior Pastor Stephen Samuelson, “bang for the buck,” all contributed to the church’s final selection of his firm.

This unique American church required an equally unique American organbuilder. John-Paul Buzard and his team tackled the church’s twin challenges of odd architecture and unforgiving acoustics with great aplomb. In the process they demonstrated that the best organbuilders, particularly for American churches, need a flexible approach to fit a wide range of applications. From high gothic architecture with grand acoustics to restrained “prairie style” architecture with limited acoustics, John-Paul Buzard has adapted and delivered stunning results while maintaining his tonal style and uncompromising quality.

Opus 34, the result of three years’ careful planning and execution, has both matched and enhanced the sanctuary’s architectural style. More importantly, it has brought an entirely new dynamic to the worship life of the congregation. With a tonal scheme based on a wide array of 8¢ pitches, the organ fully supports the congregation’s singing and easily fills the room with sound. The two complete principal choruses allow the organ to lead congregations of varying sizes, from 10 to 600. The wide selection of reed and flute stops offers ample color and variety for responding to hymn texts and playing repertoire.
The organ was first played for worship on Reformation Sunday 2006, and Mary Preston will play the inaugural recital this month. I am grateful to all of the Buzard staff who worked at a strenuous pace to deliver and install our organ, and to Scott Riedel for his insight and guidance throughout the project. Finally, a special thanks to the staff, worship and music and organ committees, and members of Mt. Pleasant Lutheran Church who had the long-term vision required to undertake this project.

—Joshua Brown

Buzard Opus 34
33 stops, 40 ranks

GREAT (4" wind)

16' Lieblich Gedeckt

8' Open Diapason

8' Flûte à Bibéron (wide chimneys)

8' Viola da Gamba

4' Principal

4' Spire Flute

22⁄3' Nazard

2 Fifteenth

13⁄5' Tierce

11⁄3' Mixture IV

8' Trompete

Tremulant

Cymbalstern

8' Festival Trumpet (Solo)

Great to Great 16', UO, 4'

Swell to Great 16', 8', 4'

Solo to Great 16', 8', 4'

SWELL (4" wind)

8' Violin Diapason

8' Stopped Diapason

8' Salicional

8' Voix Celeste (gg)

4' Principal

4' Harmonic Flute

2' Recorder

2' Full Mixture IV

16' Bassoon

8' Trompette

8' Oboe

4' Clarion

Tremulant

8' Festival Trumpet (Solo)

Swell to Swell 16', UO, 4'

Solo to Swell 8'

SOLO (4" wind)

8' Harmonic Flute

8' Flute Cœlestis II (Ludwigtone)

4' Open Flute

8' Clarinet

8' Festival Trumpet (horizontal)

Tremulant

Chimes

Solo to Solo 16', UO, 4'

Swell to Solo 16', 8', 4'

PEDAL (4" wind)

32' Subbass (1–12 digital)

32' Lieblich Gedeckt (1–12 digital) (Gt)

16' Open Diapason (in façade from FFF)

16' Bourdon (stoppered wood)

16' Gedeckt (Gt)

8' Principal

8' Bass Flute (ext 16')

8' Spire Flute

4' Choral Bass (ext 8')

4' Open Flute (ext 16')

16' Trombone

16' Bassoon (Sw)

8' Trumpet (ext 16')

8' Festival Trumpet (Solo)

Great to Pedal 8', 4'

Swell to Pedal 8', 4'

Solo to Pedal 8', 4'

Part I appeared in the February issue, pp. 16-18.

The "art" of sound recording consists of selecting the proper microphones for a given situation and placing them in the most advantageous position. We will look at three basic techniques--coincident, near coincident and spaced omnidirectional--and then discuss which might be more beneficial given the specifics of organ layout and room acoustics.

Coincident Microphone Placement

We've probably all been to a concert where a professional recording engineer has set up one very large and impressive microphone on an equally large and impressive stand with which to make a stereo recording. Within that large microphone were actually two directional microphones which the engineer, with an amazing amount of flexibility, can select, position and modify by remote control. Coincident means "to occupy the same area in space," and that's what a stereo microphone has: two mono mikes occupying the same space within the microphone housing. One of the characteristics of all coincident techniques is that the sound arrives at the left and right microphones completely "in phase."28

Figure 10 shows how you can position two cardioid (unidirectional) microphones in a coincident position. The strength of this technique is that it gives a fairly realistic stereo image when played back through speakers (i.e., the first violins seem to be on the left, and the double basses seem to be on the right). The weakness is that the stereo image seems to lack a "sense of space."29 Since cardioid microphones are directional, they accept sound from the source in front of them and reject sound, such as reverberation, coming from the room behind the microphones. This may be a plus in an extremely reverberant room.

Professionals may also choose to use two "figure of eight" directional microphones30 set in an "X" pattern at 90° to one another, each of which picks up not only sound from in front but some from behind as well. This coincident technique, invented by British scientist Alan Blumlein in the 1930s, can give very natural sound in some circumstances.

Another coincident technique favored by some professionals is the "M-S" system31, which requires a special processing network to resolve the recorded sound into left and right stereo signals. An advantage here is that it gives the mixing engineer greater control of the stereo image from the mixing desk than is available with any other technique.32

Near-Coincident Techniques

In a successful attempt to improve the stereo illusion, sound engineers began to separate the coincident microphones ever so slightly so the sound arrives at the microphones just slightly out of phase, thus contributing additional information which enhances the stereo image.33

We'll discuss two similar setups, the ORTF system from the French National Broadcasting Organization and the NOS system from Dutch Broadcasting. Both of these use cardioid (unidirectional) microphones. The ORTF system splays the microphones out at a 110° angle and separates the recording capsules by 17 cm (63/4"), whereas the NOS has the mikes at a 90° angle with a 30 cm (113/4") separation.34 These near-coincident techniques are superior to two strictly coincident cardioid microphones. Professional audio stores sell inexpensive adjustable rigs to hold two cardioid microphones on one mike stand in a near-coincident configuration similar to NOS (see Fig. 11). A near-coincident variation of the Blumlein technique places two figure of eight mikes at 90° to each other in an "X" configuration, but separated by about 7".

Spaced Omnidirectional Mikes

In many of the coincident or near-coincident configurations we just discussed, you are recording primarily the sound of the organ alone. With a spaced pair of omnidirectional microphones, however, you are recording not only the direct sound from the source, but also the room's response to the sound--reverberation--which is a big plus in organ recording. Under the best circumstances, the sound of spaced omnis can be very open and sensual indeed.35

How far apart should the microphones be spaced? The minimum is about 4'--that is, 2' on each side of the centerline drawn between the sound source and the microphones. Omni mikes are typically spaced 1/3 of the way in from the edges of the sound source. For example, if the organ is 18' wide the microphones could be placed 6' apart--3' on either side of the centerline (see Fig. 12).

If the sound source is very wide, however, two omnidirectional microphones may be spread so far apart that an aural "hole in the middle" becomes apparent. This is alleviated by placing a third omnidirectional microphone directly in the center, and then with a mixer adding just a bit of its sound to the left and right channels.26 If the volume of the center mike isn't kept quite soft compared to the left and right mikes, however, you will kill the stereo effect. A variation of this "center channel" technique provides a third mike to accent a soloist.

Spaced Pair of PZMs

Spaced PZM microphones behave very much like a spaced pair of omnidirectional mikes. The bass response of PZM mikes is enhanced when they are resting on a surface at least 4x4'--thus the floor is an excellent place for them. However, you don't want to bury them in the shadow of a pew or other obstructions, as this will modify their hemispherical pickup pattern. The author's favorite PZM setup uses two 4x4' pieces of masonite37 which are stored at the church and placed on top of the pews as needed. For flattest frequency response, place the PZM 1/3 of the way off center--8" off center on a 4x4' panel38 (see Fig. 13). For personal analysis recordings, you may be able to position the mikes on the console (see Fig. 14).

Which Is Better?

There is a spirited debate in the audio world between the proponents of coincident or near-coincident techniques versus the advocates of a spaced pair of omnidirectional mikes. The coincident techniques--which ensure that the left and right channels are in phase--used to solve problems that no longer exist today: the difficulties of cutting the master from which LP recordings (remember LPs?) were stamped, the difficulties of phono cartridges (remember them?) tracking low frequency sounds on LPs, and the problem of sound cancellation on mono radio stations (a rare breed) as out-of-phase stereo signals were summed to mono.

Further, as Edward Tatnall Canby observed in Audio, the bureaucracy at National Public Radio mandates coincident recording techniques (especially M-S) and gives them a hard sell in spite of the fact that many listeners find something important missing in the resulting recordings.39 Agreeing with Mr. Canby, Christopher Czeh, Technical Director of WNYC Public Radio in New York wrote:

The phase differences between spaced omnidirectional microphones help the listener in mentally recreating the spatial acoustics of the original performance. I have used spaced omnis for classical recordings for six years and have obtained excellent results. The major reason I prefer spaced omnis over coincident mikes is that they sound better in most circumstances.40

David Wilson of Wilson Audiophile Recordings, agrees and notes the crucial difference between the ears and microphones:

Microphones "hear" very differently than ears do. The microphone is very literal in what it picks up. There is no neurological ear-brain system that compensates for ambiance and perspective. For most recording, I prefer omnidirectional microphones because they are more natural sounding. That is, they more naturally integrate the sound of the instrument with room acoustics, and that's very important with pipe organs. In almost every organ recording I've made, however, I've experimented with a coincident pair of directional microphones, almost out of a sense of technical duty. After listening to the test results, I've almost always gone back to a spaced pair of omnis.

Frederick Hohman of Pro Organo has a different view:

My personal preference is for good directional microphones--not omnidirectional. A pair of these can be placed in any conventional pattern and configuration one desires. A single stereo mike could be the easiest way to do a quick setup, since this eliminates the factor of microphone spacing.

Jack Renner of Telarc, who has recorded Michael Murray in many diverse situations, looks at the broad picture:

The thing about coincident or near-coincident microphone techniques such as the ORTF configuration with directional mikes, or the crossed figure of eights, or the M-S systems, is that while they may not be everyone's cup of tea in terms of finished sound--I myself like the sound of a pair of spaced omnis--the coincident techniques will give you a perfectly acceptable recording and are a very safe way to approach a recording of anything.

How Far from the Organ?

How far the microphone(s) are placed from the sound-producing elements of the organ is one of the critical decisions in any recording setup, and it won't be the same for all circumstances. If an organist is making personal "analysis" recordings, a relatively close microphone position will give increased clarity, especially in a reverberant room. If the goal of the recording is to show the organ/room combination to its best advantage, a more distant position will increase the proportion of room (reflected) sound. Pipedreams' Michael Barone, who has probably listened to more organ recordings than anyone and who has made quite a few organ recordings as well, has some definite opinions:

A lot of people think that to get a sense of space they need to record from the back of the hall, and so many organ recordings are made miserable by this "gray tunnel" effect. But you don't want to put the microphones within two or three feet of the chamber either. You want to place the microphones where there is an obvious focus of the sound, but where the sound has begun to excite the room and participate in the acoustics of the space.

John Eargle of Delos agrees that most people tend to place the microphones too far from the organ, and describes how he decides where to place the microphones:

First I walk around the room while listening to the instrument. The best place for the mikes is within a zone where the direct sound of the organ and the reverberant sound coalesce. What you have at this magic point is a very natural blend of room sound, plus good articulation from the instrument.

David Wilson is a firm believer in recording some "tests" to determine the best place for the microphones:

Generally I will start testing with a very close placement, say perhaps 10 or 12', which is closer than I believe is ideal. We will record 30 seconds or so of music and move the microphones back--generally I move them back in 3' increments--and record another test. We repeat this procedure five times. I also vary the height, starting with a height which is less than ideal--I believe 8' or so is the minimum satisfactory height--and go up from there to perhaps 20' or higher. I also vary the spacing between microphones. I start with the microphones closer together than I think they should be, say 4', and separate them further. By listening to the playback of these tests, we discover the best distance from the organ, height and between-mike spacing.

Jack Renner also stresses listening:

In placing the microphones, a lot of it is experience and a lot is listening. I have the organist play with various combinations of stops and I walk around the room listening until I find a place that sounds focused and blended--a place where all the registers seem to come together and where the bass pipes especially sound good and solid. You will find a point where there is good balance between the direct sound from the pipes themselves and the reverberant sound of the room, where you have a pleasing mix and where you don't hear various voices "popping" in and out, which is one of the biggest pitfalls in organ recording.

Aesthetics and Mike Distance

Crucial factors in deciding how far the microphones should be placed from the organ may well be the type of organ, the type of room and the type of music to be recorded. You might expect one type of presence, articulation, clarity and room sound for an all-Bach program on a tracker organ in a moderate-sized church, and have completely different expectations for a program of Romantic music on a large Romantic organ in a reverberant cathedral. Personally, I think a good number of recordings of the latter type have been ruined because the engineer was striving for too much clarity. These misguided attempts often have harsh, close-up organ tone and inadequate reverberation from mike positions that were too close. In this context it is very educational to listen to the same organ played by various artists and recorded by different engineers.41 Despite what the "experts" say, only you can decide if you like cathedral music to wash over you in a sea of reverberation.42

More than two Mikes?

When the sound source is very wide, for example a symphony orchestra or an organ that is quite spread out from left to right, you may have to spread a pair of omnis so far apart that you begin to lose sound from the middle--giving rise to the expression "the hole in the middle." Some recording engineers solve this problem by placing a third omni mike directly on the center axis of the sound source and mixing it on site into the left and right channels at a much softer level. This is Telarc's standard three-mike setup for symphony orchestras, although for concertos they will use additional mikes if necessary to highlight the soloist. Telarc's standard organ setup is two spaced omnis. However, they used a three-mike setup to record the wide organ at Methuen Music Hall, with the mikes about 35-40' back from the organ. When John Eargle recorded Robert Noehren on the large Rieger which sits front and center in the chancel of the Pacific Union College Church in Angwin, California:

We used three spaced omni mikes, 15-18' from the organ case. This case, like most trackers, is fairly shallow--eight feet deep at most. If there is a magic zone for mike placement that seems to work with this type of instrument, it is in the 17-20' range.

Other recording engineers, David Wilson included, do not use this technique because they feel that mixing a centrally-positioned monophonic mike into the left and right channels dilutes the stereo effect.

Recording the Reverberation

In order to capture the way an organ really sounds in a room, it is sometimes necessary to add additional microphones to record the reverberation. Few American churches have an excess of reverberation, but many have more than would be captured by the setups we have described thus far--two or three microphones placed relatively close to the organ. So a pair of microphones at some distance from the organ, with a small amount of the output of the left "reverb" mike mixed into the left channel and vice versa, does the trick. One might think that a single mike placed at a distance with the output shared between the channels--a variation on the "hole in the middle" technique--would suffice, but this is not usually done:

Reverberation from a single [distant] source divided between the left and right channels is unsatisfactory because the resulting sound, which, to give a natural effect, should be distributed across the space between the two loudspeakers, appears in this case to emanate from a single point.43

When John Eargle recorded Robert Noehren playing the organ he had built in 1967 for The First Unitarian Church in San Francisco:

I wanted to accurately portray the physical layout of the organ--which is arranged left to right in the rear gallery--so the primary mikes were a pair of directional cardioids splayed in a near-coincident configuration. The room is not reverberant, but there is enough room sound to give a nice glow and enhance the music. So we used an additional coincident pair of directional mikes, aimed more or less at the side walls, to capture this glow.

When Michael Barone recorded the Fisk organ at House of Hope in St. Paul, Minnesota, he encountered a similar situation:

The organ, which has a Rückpositiv, is located in the rear gallery. It generates a lot of bass energy, but that is not apparent in all areas of the room and generally not along the center aisle as the bass energy tends to hug the walls. So we placed a single stereo mike in the center aisle on a stand tall enough to get it well above the Rückpositiv. We also placed a pair of omni mikes a little further back from the organ closer to the side aisles, and then mixed the four inputs together until it sounded good--it's a little like cooking!

John Eargle describes his technique recording the large encased Rosales tracker organ at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral in Portland, Oregon:

The organ is located at the back of a rather deep chancel. Two omnidirectional microphones were used for direct pickup of the instrument in the chancel area, while a coincident pair of directional mikes was placed out in the church for reverberant pickup.

Improving the Room

There are basically two things you can physically do to the room before recording: decrease the noise and increase the reverberation. Potential noise sources that you may be able to do something about include: ventilation and heating systems, buzzing fluorescent lights, open doors or windows, etc. You may have to work around other noise sources like vehicular and air traffic, school children, and even expansion sounds from the roof as the sun heats it up mid-morning and it cools down in the evening.

It will increase the reverberation in an empty church significantly if the pew cushions can be removed. This is John Eargle's standard practice and he gets a lot of benefit for a reasonable effort. If the church is large and storage of the cushions is a problem, try stacking the cushions from two pews on top of the third, etc., etc. This will expose two-thirds of the hard pew surfaces (see Fig. 15). Or if the church has theater-type chairs with plush cushions, flip all the bottoms upright to minimize the absorptive surfaces.

Some Typical Solutions

The following are some microphone selection and placement solutions for various types of rooms:

Excessive reverberation--Use a pair of cardioid (unidirectional) microphones in a near-coincident configuration such as ORTF or NOS.

Minimal or average reverberation in a large room--Start with a pair of spaced omnis or PZM mikes and then, if you have mixer capabilities,44 try an additional coincident pair of directional microphones further back in the room mixed very subtly into the main pair (left into left and right into right).

Very wide sound source--Use a pair of spaced omnis or PZMs 1/3 in from the edges of the sound source. If necessary, a third omni in the center can be very subtly mixed in if there is an audible "hole in the middle." Alternatively, experiment with a splayed pair of directional cardioid mikes in the ORTF or NOS configuration.

Divided organ on the left and right sides of chancel or gallery--Try a pair of spaced omnis or PZMs. At Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, David Wilson recorded the huge Aeolian-Skinner which is divided in left and right chambers in the chancel plus a Bombarde Division at the rear center of the chancel. He used just two omnis spaced 8' apart, on stands about 20' high placed in the nave about 15' from the organ.

Rear gallery placement or organ high in the chancel--Unless the rear gallery is very deep (potentially allowing microphone placement within the gallery), you will need stands that allow you to get the microphones well up in the air.

Gallery placement with a Rückpositiv--The mike stands must enable placing the mikes well above the Rückpositiv if the correct balance between divisions is to be recorded (review the section on mike stand safety).

Organ is in a chamber on one side of a large chancel--The "standard" placement of a pair of spaced omnis on either side of the center aisle or a pair of coincident mikes in the center aisle pointed toward the rear of the chancel will pick up too much sound in one channel and not enough in the other. If the chancel is big enough, you might try a pair of spaced omnis within the chancel, each of which is the same distance from the organ.45 Alternatively, you might try a pair of cardioid directional mikes in the ORTF or NOS configuration within the chancel placed opposite the organ chamber and pointing at it. A third possibility is a pair of PZM mikes taped to the chancel wall opposite the organ.  With these solutions, the reverberation component will likely be nil, calling for reverberation mikes further back in the nave.

Organ is in a chamber on one side of a small chancel--If the chancel is not that large, try to adapt either of the above alternatives through placement within the nave. For example, if the pipes are on the left of the chancel, place a near coincident pair of cardioids on the right side of the nave pointing towards the organ. Or if using a spaced pair of omnis, keep the left and right microphones approximately equidistant from the pipes. Always avoid placing an omni mike too close to a wall to prevent hard reflections.

Modifying Registrations

If the purpose of the recording is to hear the effect of a piece you're learning or to document a recital performance, then the registrations are chosen for the live performance and the recording is secondary. But if the primary purpose is to create a recording which shows the music, artist, organ and room off to best advantage, the question of modifying registrations to serve that end is legitimate. English recording engineer Michael Smythe offers this advice:

One must keep a keen ear open for stops that do not record well. What may sound fine in the church may come through the loudspeaker as an opaque noise, for example, the booming sound which 16' pipes quite often produce on certain notes. Therefore the organist has to rethink his registration for recording, which may be totally different from a recital. Sometimes one can do nothing about it, however, there being no suitable alternate stops.46

The late Michael Nemo of Towerhill, who made numerous recordings of John Rose on the huge Austin at St. Joseph Cathedral in Hartford, concurred:

From a technical point of view, there are some problem stops. For example, 32' flues like a Bourdon or Open Wood can be quite pleasing in person. As most stereo systems won't reproduce anything at all from the bottom range of a 32' stop, however, it doesn't mean much on a recording. And by virtue of strong, low-frequency fundamental, these stops often create enormous standing wave problems in the room. No two 32' stops are alike in the way they record, however--some can be quite delicious and others only cause problems.

Excessive Dynamic Range

In addition to eliminating problem stops, there is the question of the dynamic range of large, Romantic organs. Consider Dupré's Cortège et Litanie, which begins very quietly on a solitary Choir Dulciana (sans pedal) and ends fff with a page of crashing chords over an octave pedal point. While this enormous dynamic range can sound glorious in person, if the recording level is set as it should be for the fff climax, the pp sections on tape will recede into inaudibility. If you turn up the playback volume so you can actually hear some detail in the pp sections--which you certainly can in a live performance--when the piece gets to the ff and fff sections you will be blasted into the next county unless you turn the volume back down again.

In the analog days when recording was done on magnetic tape, you would have a good bit of tape hiss competing with the Dulciana and thus there was motivation to avoid excessively soft sounds. But now that professional recording is done on hiss-free DAT,47 many engineers--reveling in the huge dynamic range of DAT recordings released on CD--are creating recordings of large, Romantic organs that virtually force listeners to keep their fingers on the volume control, especially when using headphones.

There are two ways around this. One is for the organist to compress the dynamic range of the organ by, in the Cortège et Litanie, for example, leaving the sub and super couplers off48 for the climax and substituting the Geigen Diapason for the Dulciana at the beginning--at that volume level the Geigen will sound like a Dulciana and the climax will be good and loud nonetheless. Another option is for a recording engineer who reads music and can follow the score to increase the volume level of the very quiet parts at the mastering stage.49 The final recording should not simply enshrine the technical capabilities of the DAT/CD medium but should be a reasonable facsimile of the way the performer's artistry actually sounds in the room.

Conclusion

Making recordings can be a useful tool for self study, a means of communicating with potential employers and professional competitions, a satisfying hobby, a part-time career, or the means to artistic fulfillment. We have endeavored to explain the bare minimum required for an understanding of the process. We have given some "quick and easy" prescriptions for personal recording. And finally, we have explored professional recording techniques used by some of the top pros in the field, whom we sincerely thank for their time and generosity.               

What happens when the pastor and organ committee in an active rural church challenge their congregation to support the purchase of a world-class pipe organ? Members at Zion Lutheran Church in Mascoutah, Illinois (adjacent to Scott Air Force Base and some thirty minutes outside St. Louis, Missouri) began by asking how the organ might enrich their worship experience, whether the organ would encourage member participation, and how the organ could be relied upon to expand the church’s reach into the community. In other words, how would investing in a pipe organ aid in the mission of the church? As a matter of faith, while concerns about costs and logistics were seen as important issues, Zion chose to assign a higher value to their conviction that the organ would significantly enhance their experience and provide a springboard for greater community involvement. 

The history of this organ project really began in the late 1990s when the congregation decided to build a new sanctuary. The new building was finished in 2000, but funds for a new or improved organ were not available, so the congregation moved their mid-1950s two-manual, 14-rank Schlicker pipe organ from the much smaller, more reverberant space of the old church building into the new, larger sanctuary, which was plagued with relatively dry acoustics. Once in the new space, the sound produced by the organ was, at best, diminutive and lacked the attributes of foundation, expression, and color. Given its new surroundings and the fact that the congregation follows the Lutheran tradition of “Singing forth with great conviction,” the organ proved to be incapable of leading the congregation. 

Rather than conclude that a more substantial pipe organ was outside the realm of possibility, the newly formed organ committee went to their list of preferred builders and asked that each devise options to provide the church with a workable proposal. Like many churches, Zion Lutheran considered that, while there are advantages to an entirely new organ, costs would be such that the resulting instrument would likely be inadequate and would not materially improve their current situation. The congregation also felt that it was important to respect the role played by the 1950s Schlicker and sought to preserve their musical heritage by incorporating resources from the Schlicker into the new organ.

While our firm is primarily involved with building new organs, we find that an increasing number of clients are coming to us with requests similar to that of Zion Lutheran. In these situations we are asked to commit our expertise to locate and adapt existing resources. Not surprisingly, whether with pipes or the organ infrastructure itself, re-tasking such materials to build an organ that is artistically credible and able to stand on its own merits (much less bear our name) is considerably more difficult than having the luxury of specifying every aspect of a new organ. Regardless, this process is becoming a part of the “new normal” and is something that many organ builders are embracing as they strive to meet the needs of their clients.

The question associated with these endeavors is always one of determining the extent to which the proposed organ represents the artistic signature of the original builder, or begins to reflect characteristics typically found in one’s own work. While every situation is different, much depends on whether the proposed resource is an intact instrument deemed worthy of restoration, or whether components from multiple organs are to be refurbished and combined with new construction. When restoring and relocating a noteworthy organ, unless there are significant tonal anomalies, we prefer that the organ continue to represent the intent of the original builder. On the other hand, when working with individual components (primarily pipework), we have the opportunity to elicit modifications that better reflect our own preferences. 

Regarding Zion Lutheran, after selecting Parsons, a significant amount of time was spent outlining requirements and refining options. Having previously removed a large Schlicker from Grace Episcopal Church, New York City, Parsons suggested combining portions of the Grace gallery installation with the original Mascoutah Schlicker to form a cohesive three-manual and pedal organ. While the edifice at Grace bears no resemblance to Zion, Mascoutah (in terms of architecture or size), the organ at Grace was known to be underpowered. Wind pressures approaching three inches combined with relatively small-scale pipes proved to be inadequate at Grace. For Zion Lutheran, however, the opposite would be true. 

After carefully selecting stops from both organs, ideas began to form that offered exciting possibilities. Further discussions regarding organ infrastructure solidified the concept of rebuilding Grace Episcopal’s Heissler electric-slider windchests and three-manual console, while stipulating the construction of a new wedge-bellows winding system. The resulting specification also called for incorporating a Peterson ICS-4000 solid-state switching system. As the engineering process unfolded, it was determined that volunteer contractors at the church had the credentials to build the Swell enclosure and develop a simple façade. While these are not aspects of the process that Parsons typically relinquishes to its clients, in this instance it was felt to be appropriate.

With the design of the organ taking shape, discussions shifted to acoustics and environmental concerns. Great care was taken during the planning of the new sanctuary to insure that the space was appropriate and welcoming. However, as a trade-off to what was seen as warm and welcoming, the acoustics of the room suffered and resulted in a drier acoustical environment. The wide shape of the room, combined with an unsealed, multi-faceted wood ceiling, single-layer drywall construction, and carpeted floors, created a lackluster acoustic. In addition, because the organ would occupy a large area at the rear of the choir loft, concerns were raised that temperature stratification would cause tuning problems. Noting the critical nature of these issues, the church wisely organized a group of highly skilled individuals to work with Parsons and manage whatever construction processes might be required. With regard to acoustics, it was determined that the walls of the surrounding organ chamber should be hardened, a protruding closet removed, and ceiling areas over the chamber and choir loft be thoroughly sealed. In addition, plans were made to modify choir risers and replace sound-absorbing carpet in the loft and chancel areas with hard-surface flooring. The church agreed to deal with temperature stratification by installing a micro-climate circulation system designed by Parsons to pull air from the bottom of the organ chamber and distribute it across the top of the organ. Following the installation, the various “fixes” proved to be successful. The organ projects nicely into the room, and tuning is extremely stable. The acoustics, while still not “live,” have improved noticeably. It is important to mention that work associated with acoustical remediation, installation of the micro-climate system, and general site preparation (electrical work, flooring, and painting) was carried out in a thoroughly professional manner by Zion volunteers. 

Whereas the gallery installation at Grace Episcopal included 61 ranks distributed over Great, Swell, Positiv and Pedal divisions, the organ at Zion Lutheran comprises 36 ranks, distributed over the same divisional configuration. Given the abundant resources from Grace, and the original pipework from Mascoutah, Duane Prill, tonal director at Parsons, was able to recast the organ so that while it remains classically oriented, it possesses a broader, more cohesive sound, with well-developed bass and tenor registers, and improved blending capabilities. As with most projects that incorporate recycled pipes, this project involved a labor-intensive process that included major pipe repairs, initiating and reversing miters, rescaling, and a substantial amount of revoicing, regulation, and tonal finishing. In addition, because Schlicker reeds are characteristically unstable, each rank was completely rebuilt to insure optimal performance. From the perspective of the pipe department, when compared with the process of working with new pipes, achieving excellent results with recycled pipes requires as much, if not more effort. Yet, the result of this effort speaks for itself. The new organ features a warm, rich tone with ample power to lead a congregation in vigorous singing, yet also has the delicate nuance to lead choirs or soloists or to shine in solo work. As the congregation at Zion has become accustomed to the new organ, they have responded enthusiastically, with congregational singing increasing noticeably in the months since the organ was installed. The organ is now fulfilling its role of leading the congregation in song. 

It must be said that the successful outcome at Zion Lutheran is truly the result of a collaborative process involving a full range of participants. Pastor Kirk Clayton, with his great passion for liturgy and music, served as an advisor on the project along with members of the organ committee, including Lisa Segelhorst (committee chair and organist), Nancy Peterson (principal organist), Pinky Ahner (organist), David Abuya (choir member), and Karl Bretz (interested layman), with great support and advice provided to the committee by Norbert Krausz. The physical work done in Zion’s building was coordinated by the sanctuary remodeling and acoustics committee, consisting of Mark Krausz (chair), Alan Kneschke, Jennifer Lara, Josh Peterson (choir director), Andy Sax, and Donna Wiesen. Buzz Kandler served as a point of contact between the congregation and Parsons to make sure communication was clear and smooth. 

The committees at Zion and the willing volunteers who put in countless hours of study, consideration, and physical labor joined their efforts with the skilled staff at Parsons Pipe Organ Builders, who devoted their skills wholeheartedly to the height of the organ building art to bring this project to fulfillment. All worked together as partners to create an exceptional pipe organ that has already shown itself to be a great blessing to the congregation’s worship life and is becoming a significant part of the arts and music community in Southern Illinois. And yet, despite the work of many people on the project, perhaps the words ascribed to J. S. Bach summarize the process best: Soli Deo Gloria.