Janner

The operative word here is indeed 'contribute'. As Katherine and her friends have probably found out by now, if your church is insured with Ecclesiastical they only contribute a relatively limited amount to the replacement, and then only provided you have followed all their advice regarding the use of Smartwater etc.

Thank you Colin, yes, two posts just four minutes apart.

What sort of voltages might we be talking about please? For solid-state logic presumably very low; older systems?

There are three photos in the eBay advert, (see the small icons beneath the main picture). One of them is of a pedalboard, albeit apparently standing on the edge normally against the piano. If you click on any of the photos they should be enlarged. There seems to be some sort of board resting across the middle of the pedals which, if it is standing on edge, must be fixed in some way. It looks as though it has had a good deal of wear, from feet maybe? Perhaps it was put there as a foot rest by someone who didn't use the pedals? Just above the board, (in the photo, but behind it if the pedal board were laid flat), are what appear to be two small raised pedals, an octave apart between notes B and C. Expression pedals perhaps? Pure speculation of course.

I agree with David. There are a couple of points to consider though, so PM sent.

Thank you for posting that extremely helpful information. I note also that it specifies "Pipe organs." Surely something to think about for those contemplating the alternative?

Yes, thank you. I had not taken that in because I don't post very often so seldom use the other options. It seems you have to use BBCode Mode to enter the text, then click the icon again to get the other options back.

It is still possible: But it doesn't seem so easy. If you click the "Quote" button, in the top left hand corner below "Reply to this topic" is a small square icon which, if you hover over it, says "BBCode Mode." If you click on that the various tags appear. It's then a matter of copying and editing, and typing in your own comments in between. It doesn't seem quite so straightforward as before though. I used the "More Reply Options" to open the enhanced editor to practise with. Perhaps someone else knows a better way? Best, J.

The answer probably lies in this post MM: http://mander-organs...morgan-retires/ Post #4 down the page.

PM Sent. J.

PCND, PM sent. J.

The things you can learn on this forum. Fascinating.

Two Yorkshiremen; and no mention of cricket? Amazing!

An excellent starter for ten. Now, potatoes may be planted in the ground or in the soil, whereas many London trains run underground, (but not in the molten core, where severe cooling problems may be expected). Oh dear. Perhaps the moderators should bury it instead.

John Herbert Cowin (Bert) was a former employee of Willis, who set up his own business in the mid 1950s. I have copies of correspondence from the firm to a customer, in 1959, which is headed with two addresses, both in Liverpool. One in Mayville Road, which would appear to be an office or home address, the other, noted as "Works," is in Lucknow Street. However these may not be the only addresses associated with the firm. It appears that J. H. Cowin had quite a few employees, but he died while in his mid 50s, in or around 1965. The firm is no longer in existence, but his nephew, Keith Edwards, is an organ builder based in Cheshire. Thanks to Quentin, and Keith Edwards, for their help.

Helpful information from member Quentinbellamy has enabled me to follow up a lead which has at least partly answered my question. Many thanks Quentin. PM sent.

Does anyone know anything about the above named organ builder please? A complete lack of any mention on the internet suggests they no longer exist. If not, were they taken over by another firm, or did they just disappear? My reason for asking is that I am trying to trace the origins of an organ which they sold second hand to a church in what is now Merseyside, back in the 1950s. I am wondering if their records may have been preserved somewhere, even if the firm is no longer around. Any information would be appreciated. Thanks.

It's amazing, the diverse things one can learn on this forum. Do we know where this group is gathered MM? For example, on the ground we can have a "Gaggle" of geese, whereas in flight they become a "Skein." In a similar vein might we have a "Bench" of organists (playing) or, gathered somewhere else, dare I suggest a "Bar" of organists?

An excellent answer to the question. Thanks for posting that link.

You may doubt, but if you have no stats you don't know. Of course it would be very difficult to obtain meaningful stats anyway, because part of the debate would have to include those who no longer attend, or attend elsewhere, because of the new style of worship, which in any case varies from place to place. In any discussion on this subject it's not just the churchgoers that count, it's also the past, or potential, congregation who don't attend, and they are very difficult to assess. You may well be correct, but that doesn't mean that the majority of those who could or would attend prefer the alternative(s). It simply means that someone in authority, e.g. the parish priest, or a vociferous individual or group with influence on the latter, has decided to impose change. When our last priest arrived some years ago, he introduced Common Worship for morning services, and stated that he didn't 'do' Evensong. When I suggested to him that our congregation generally preferred BCP, his reply was "If they don't like my services they can go elsewhere." Some did just that and others just stopped going. The complaint now is that the congregation is dwindling.

This question is prompted following a recent discussion about fees, which strayed into gift aid territory. The scenario is this: An organist is asked to play for a funeral. We assume that he or she is either the in-house organist, or has been brought in because there is no resident available. The fees are handled by the undertaker and the organist receives the going rate. As it happens the deceased is a close acquaintance or someone for whom the organist does not wish to charge a fee. However because the undertaker has already collected the fee and passed it on, the only option is for the organist to return it to the family. The problem is that now, presumably, it is regarded as taxable income, on which the organist must pay a sum of tax. So instead of the organist just playing for no fee, he or she is actually paying to do so. It seems to me that the situation is very similar to the one with gift aid, except that in that instance the Revenue pass the collected tax to the nominated charity, whereas in this case they retain it. Either way, the person who is handing back their fee will ultimately pay for the privilege of doing so, unless they deduct the tax first, before they donate it to the charity, or hand it back to the deceased’s family. Not perhaps something which is quite in keeping with the original spirit of the gesture, especially when it concerns a friend's family. Thoughts anyone?

I am a little confused here as well. Could I just 'think out loud' for a moment? Fine, so the recipients now have to declare that as income. Assuming they are all taxpayers, they collectively pay a sum in tax, say £20, so in fact they receive only £80. Now, they gift aid back £100 and the church claims back £20. Does it not run something like this: Sunday: Church:- minus £100, Recipients:- plus £100. Monday: Recipients:- minus £100, Church:- plus £100. Susequently 1: Customs:- plus £20, Recipients:- minus another £20 = £120 total. Susequently 2: Customs:- minus £20, Church:- plus another £20 = £120 total. So to sum up the final totals: Church:- Plus £20, Customs:- Plus or minus £0, Recipients:- Minus £20. I accept that I may well be wrong and am probably over simplifying things, but at the moment it seems to me that the net result is that the Church has gained £20, the recipients have lost £20, and the Customs are at square one, no one has defrauded them of anything. For them, the situation is no different to if the money had been gift-aided to any other charity. ...... Except of course that the Revenue have all the administration. Now, does someone care to hazard a guess at how much that is likely to cost? As a starting point, dare I suggest more than £20?

While entirely agreeing that the resident organist is entitled to the fee, may I suggest that a family asking if their own organist can play for what is, to them, an important family service, does not necessarily imply that they consider the in-house organist to be incompetent. There are still some families for whom weddings and funerals have deep meaning and significance. There are still some who may find great pleasure in playing for the wedding of a close family member, maybe a son or daughter, or possibly comfort in paying their respects by playing for the funeral of a relative or close friend. Remember this is a fellow organist. Likewise, it may also have meaning for the family, or at least the central members of it. Would you deprive them of the additional 'icing on the cake' on their happy day, or the possible comfort at a difficult time? A little harsh, perhaps? If you said "......would have reminded the family that the resident organist may still entitled to a fee" I would agree with you. I also accept that there may be an issue regarding the (probably unknown) abilities of the visiting organist, but surely the form of service chosen, the manner in which the affair is approached, and a few well chosen questions and enquiries, would do much to enlighten in that respect? Colin, have you never been asked to play for a service like this? If you were, do you not think that, depending on the circumstances, you may derive some pride, pleasure or comfort in being able to do so? What would be your thoughts, if the priest and resident organist at a small village church were to say to you, without any further discussion or enquiry, "Oh, we don't know you or anything about you, so we are assuming that you are not competent to play for this service?" If the motive were simply to save money, or disrespect for the resident organist, then I would agree with you, but dare I suggest that, even in these 'modern' times, there are still many occasions when that is not the case?

Never mind MM. At least it shows that someone is reading it. I for one greatly enjoy reading your posts, and I'm sure there must be many others. Please keep up the good work.

PM sent.