Colin Pykett

This is a very interesting suggestion, which could easily be tried on a Hammond organ (a 'proper' vintage one or a digital clone). Perhaps an alternative, which also relates more closely to actual pipe sounds, would be to first play a piece on a principal stop and then on a claribel flute or similar with far fewer harmonics and see whether there is a substantial difference in the subjective result. Presumably different people, having different degrees of aural acuity and musical training, would experience different effects. In some ways it's analogous to something I bang on about with temperaments. The rough thirds in equal temperament, for example, sound (to my ears anyway) less rough when played on a flute stop than on principals. This is because the roughness largely originates as a consequence of the fast beats which occur between the 5th harmonic of the lower note and the 4th harmonic of the upper note a major third above (middle C and the E above beat at over 10 Hz for an 8 foot stop tuned to A440). However, these harmonics are getting quite high in the harmonic series, so they don't exist or are very weak in some flute stops. So if the harmonics aren't there to start with, the beat isn't either, so the roughness doesn't arise. But for a principal stop these harmonics are invariably strong, giving rise to the fast and assertive beats which have fuelled the general dislike of ET thirds going back far earlier than Bach's time. However the point is important to my mind, because it shows that the subjective effect of any temperament set up on the organ varies with the registration (more specifically, the timbres) used. This makes the organ unique since any other keyboard instrument, other than a large harpsichord perhaps, does not offer alternative registrations. It is therefore misguided in my view for writers on temperament to lump the organ in with all other keyboard instruments as though what is a good or bad temperament on, say, the harpsichord or clavichord will also be good or bad on the organ. It is an oversimplified view and simply not true. I can't recall ever having seen this mentioned, though of course that doesn't mean it hasn't been - I might have missed it. However I digress. CEP

This discussion reminds me of the striking unity which has occurred over the evolution of other major fields of human intellectual endeavour which at first sight appear to be diverse and unconnected. The Renaissance gave rise to the developments in harmony and counterpoint which have been discussed above, before music moved beyond them to embrace a broader range of techniques. The same happened in art (drawing and painting), with the rules of perspective appearing before subsequent schools appeared much later. And in physics, Galileo and Newton's classical mechanics held sway for centuries until c. 1900 when so-called 'modern' physics (relativity and quantum theory) took the subject in a different direction. An interesting point in each case is that today's young practitioners are generally given a grounding in the earlier techniques before being exposed to (and encouraged to run with) the more modern ones. One reason for this is, presumably, because the old methods can actually take one a long way even today. This is certainly true in physics, where not the slightest smidgeon of relativity or quantum theory was necessary to compute the trajectory of the spacecraft which got men onto the moon in 1969. The discussion in the previous posts suggests that much the same applies in music. There is also the striking qualitative similarity between the planar sound tapestry of a composition constructed only from the horizontals and verticals of strict harmony and counterpoint and the visual appearance of a painting using nothing beyond the Renaissance rules of perspective. In physics and art, the post-Renaissance understanding of perspective led directly in a mathematical sense to Einstein's general theory of relativity because he conceived of spacetime geometrically, i.e. in a quasi-visual manner. A psychologist or neuroscientist might be able to explain how this apparent unity in diversity relates to the wiring of the brain. CEP PS I would venture to add a rider concerning why late 19th/early 20th century developments in the physics of music have provided more background to account for the subjective exposure ('noticeability') of parallel fifths and octaves. It relates to the duplication of harmonics - for example, the octave of a note contains around half the number of harmonics already present in the unison voice. Being at identical frequencies, pairs of these therefore effectively 'overwrite' each other in an acoustic sense, and this can thereby degrade the ability of the ear and brain to retain separability of the voices and follow them. Such overwriting does not happen with intervals such as thirds to the same extent because there are fewer pairs of coincident harmonics. Earlier texts (e.g. Prout's pronouncements) were written before this was properly understood, but at least some later ones touch on it. This might possibly provide more ammunition (if that's the right word) for those who maintain that a proper understanding of the matter is necessary when deciding whether to include them or not in compositions.

Oh yes - science. Pseudo-science abounds. UFOs, ESP, dowsing, crop circles - a full list would crash the forum. In medicine a good book was written by Ben Goldacre called 'Bad Science'. Within a circle of those who know little, someone who claims they do know can achieve an apotheosis very quickly. Music is just one example of many. On another of Vox Humana's points, I'm not sure I agree that the egocentric nature of today's church is new. When I was young, a good while ago now, I remember wondering even then why so many hymns were of the 'me' and 'I' variety. Subsequently I also wondered what it was about the church that attracted people who enjoyed preaching to, and often shouting at, a submissive audience who weren't supposed to answer back or have opinions of their own. I've since come to the conclusion that it's a form of narcissism, which today gets amplified even further by the rise of a secular self-obsession in society in general. So perhaps this has some connection with the trends in modern worship being discussed here. CEP

I'm not sure the God factor plays a strongly negative role, because if it did, presumably it would also work against organ concerts in continental Europe whereas the anecodotes mentioned in some of the above posts confirm that it does not. And as for the Huw Edwards story, that was indeed a shame considering that he himself plays the organ. Surely he could have bent the thrust of the interview back towards the organ if he had wanted to? He's skilled enough in front of a TV camera. But the 'standard' type of organ recital can often verge on the ridiculous. Later this month I'm planning to attend one which is free, given by a former cathedral organist on an instrument in an elevated west end gallery. The console is attached, though it need not have been because the organ has electric action. The upshot is that we (the audience) will be sitting with our backs to the instrument and the player, who also has his back towards us. How absurd! What other instrument is played like that? Other than the sound, it removes any vestige of bonding between the performer and listener. Would that a bit more money could have been raised to provide a detached console in view of the congregation, either instead of or in addition to the en fenetre one. And why does this extremely skilled player value his services and ability so low that we are allowed to get in free of charge? Looked at rationally, the whole thing is just plain ludicrous and I fully understand why any 'normal' music lover, wandering into the church and not previously exposed to an organ recital, would be turned off by the whole affair. So sad. Yet unless something extremely untoward happens, I know that I'll enjoy it nonetheless because, like everybody else here, I'm just used to it. I'll let you know how it went idc ... CEP

I think there is a broader issue underpinning the points made above and it concerns the dynamics of business. I can't call myself a businessman or accountant but have had sufficient exposure to those worlds to see that pipe organ builders are probably coming up against what I call a critical mass scenario. Basically this means that if their customer base continues to contract, they will go under, possibly quite suddenly. This is not unique to pipe organs of course as it affects all businesses which have to sell to survive (i.e. all of them outside government-funded organisations which simply rob the taxpayer regardless of their intrinsic efficiency), but for pipe organs there is an additional factor which comes into play. These instruments can only be built while the necessary craft-pool continues to exist. They are not mere commodities such as cars or toothbrushes which can be thrown together by large numbers of semi-skilled workers who need little training. The vast range of deep skills necessary to construct a pipe organ means that there is a sort of catch-22 situation in that the skills can only be nurtured within those firms which continue to survive, yet they cannot survive if the market gets too small (i.e. below the critical mass level). Once this happens the skills are in danger of being lost for ever, as you could not then just recruit off the street to build an organ whenever a customer just happened along from time to time - the necessary workers would simply not be around, and moreover it is doubtful whether their former skills could ever be resurrected once lost I have put some numbers into these arguments and played with them on spreadsheets to the extent I have become increasingly alarmed for the future of the instrument. Although there is currently a belief that some sort of long-term survival will exist within the ranks of a few well-heeled customers such as independent schools and some cathedrals, I am not convinced by this. Critical mass is critical mass and it is a sort of cliff-edge. To avoid it requires a much larger customer base maintained by large numbers of instruments needing tender loving care and maintenance, and it is this vital fiscal underpinning which is now disappearing rapidly. Not everyone will agree with this analysis and I won't bore you any longer, but some years ago I published an article containing a few basic numbers which might conceivably be of interest: http://www.pykett.org.uk/statusoforgan.htm CEP

Another idea - how about the 'Wedding Processional' from 'The Sound of Music'? The brief appearance and sound of the organ seems to be well remembered by many people all these years (nay, decades) after the movie first appeared. The sheet music (by Richard Rodgers of course) is still readily available in various editions from sources on the web, but I use a rather musically-thin arrangement of the 'all-organ' vintage which I saw in a second hand bookshop many years ago. It has often been chosen by couples for whom I have played over the years. An additional advantage (?!) is that you can segway into various other numbers from the same musical if so desired, and I have them in a vocal selection album which was similarly purchased serendipitously. Incidentally, the organ shown on-screen was almost certainly not the one used for recording the accompanying sound track. If one searches the internet one comes across various suggestions for the organ case and church used for filming the action, most if not all of which centre around Salzburg. However the instrument used for the sound recording was probably the large Morton theatre organ formerly in the Whitney Studios in Glendale California, which no longer exists. Further information can be gleaned from a fairly recent (September 2017) post on another discussion forum. See: http://www.organforum.com/forums/showthread.php?1578-Organ-in-the-Sound-of-Music/page2 I was prompted to post this having seen a letter to the editor on the subject in the recent Organists' Review (June 2018), and have already replied privately to the writer along similar lines. CEP

Usually I find wedding couples planning to use the average church of any denomination have no idea of what they want, they and their supporters (i.e. those who make up the congregation) are more often than not unfamiliar with a church setting, and on the day the occasion can become anarchic and almost run out of control owing to the absence of a hint of a devotional attitude and the frankly bad and often loutish behaviour of those involved. So before even attempting to help them choose the music I make sure they do actually want the organ to start with in any shape or form, rather than playing their own choice of recorded music throughout or importing Little Johnny on his guitar/keyboard, etc, etc. I also encourage the couple to bring others along to this original discussion, such as future mums-in-law, etc. Once the decision about using the organ at all has been established the way ahead is then usually a little clearer. Incidentally, the discussion always takes place around the organ in the church itself so that they can hear what they might get. Some couples even like to do a 'practice' of walking down the aisle together to their chosen piece! As an amateur musician I am not qualified in any way other than, perhaps, long experience of these occasions to answer the original question in detail. However over many years I have found commercial compilations of suitable wedding-like music generally fits the bill and complements the specific suggestions already made above. I have found a particularly useful book to be Mayhew's 'The Essential Organist - sixty pieces for weddings, funerals and everyday use'. I don't know whether it is still in print, but my copy is now well-thumbed and its contents seem to go down well. Apart from anything else it contains a fair number of transcriptions and compositions by Noel Rawsthorne, one of which is his prelude on the Londonderry Air which I find often quietens things down a bit as the bridal entry draws near. On occasion it has been chosen for the bridal procession itself. There are also quite a few trumpet tune-type things which are potential candidates as well as many other possibles. Unfortunately though, there are rather too many misprints which should not have got past a good editor, and the ubiquitous 'perfect binding' is of course anything but. CEP

As Paul implied, there is a lot to be said about Rutt. Information is fairly easy to assemble from the internet (for starters just do a Google search for 'Spurden Rutt' without the quotes) and sundry print sources (such as Elvin's rather scattily-organised 'Pipes and Actions' book), but it would indeed be nice to have it all in one place considering the firm's overall impact on the British organ scene. I don't know whether such a book has been written, but if it has I've never come across it or heard of it, though that doesn't mean it doesn't exist of course. Regarding their reeds, they forged a relationship with the celebrated reed voicer W C (Billy) Jones which started early in the 20th century (or possibly even before that) and it lasted for several decades. The NPOR throws up a reasonably comprehensive list of their work and it also gives a fair amount of information about the firm itself. They even built a few cinema organs and one of them is in the care of the St Albans music museum, its console sitting on stage next to their Wurlitzer. It has the most beautiful Tibias, quite different to those on the Wurli, though I have a dim recollection that the late Bill Walker (then the museum's curator) once told me that they were not Rutt pipes. Be that as it may, it is a delightful and rare organ to explore tonally, and I 'sampled' its individual pipe sounds some years ago when I was doing the same for the Wurlitzer. Like Paul, I was impressed by my first acquaintance with a Rutt organ, many years ago now. This was the substantial three manual at the large Methodist church at Southfields, near Wimbledon south of London. The building was of the 'central hall' type common in the first half of the 20th century, an invention of J Arthur Rank I believe, who integrated the church premises with money-making enterprises such as shops. I was organist and choir trainer there for a time while a student. The instrument had a detached horseshoe stop key console and the organ spoke very well indeed into the building, spread horizontally on one level across the entire platform inside a shallow case. The minister was very supportive of and interested in church music, and in his sermons he would often incorporate something about one of the hymns sung at the service. (He was a young and dynamic chap, the Rev David Sixsmith - I wonder where his career subsequently led him?). At that time I was also fortunate to have unrestricted access to another fine 3 manual instrument, the Willis III in the chapel at King's College in the Strand thanks to the kindness of the late E H Warrell, and although the two were not the same in concept or execution, the Rutt certainly acquitted itself well against such august competition in my humble opinion. Unfortunately though, it needed quite a lot of action work even then. Neither organ nor building now exists. See: http://www.npor.org.uk/NPORView.html?RI=N05504 I'm not convinced that some details of this stop list are quite correct. For example, I'm pretty sure those stops marked Trumpet were in fact called Tromba at the console, though with the passage of time I wouldn't argue the point with someone who knows better. CEP

Agreed! But then, I'm one of the worst serial offenders, so I would say that wouldn't I ...

Quite. With only three bears plus Goldilocks, surely one of them would be just right? But wouldn't the additional complication of the mechanism also become relevant in these circumstances? I am reminded of the hymn I was introduced to in Sunday School (what's that?) as a small child which included the phrase "my chains fell off". It wasn't until later that I realised this did not relate to an inadequately-maintained bicycle, and one wouldn't want such a catastrophe to befall an over-conflated bear stop. Though as John Furse rightly said, (oh please!), enough, enough ... But as he also asked more seriously, are any recordings available of the instrument, if only on youtube? (I couldn't find any). CEP

I have been following this discussion with interest, and there is one aspect which doesn't yet seem to have been mentioned. This concerns the career which one eventually follows in order to earn one's daily bread. I have some personal experience of this because, a long time ago when still at school, I was being pulled in two directions by two equally determined 'camps' (if that's the right word). One was music (in particular the organ though I also played and enjoyed the oboe) and the other was science (physics), each with their associated set of teachers and other protagonists. It might be immodest to say so, but I was an above-average achiever in both if what my teachers/tutors said was true. So which career was I to choose? The music camp insisted I was potential organ scholar material with a standard organ-loft career in front of me, whereas the science camp was equally vociferous about the prospects of getting into what are now known as the Russell Group universities. Oxbridge was an option, but I wasn't enthused about the prospect of having to spend an extra year in the sixth form. I wanted to get out into the world so I ended up in London. What eventually swayed me to science was the insistence of the science camp that earning a decent living (aka income) in music would be far more difficult than in science. In science with a good degree (I eventually got two) it would be me that made the running, with potential employers lining up to get me. This turned out to be true, and although the profession does not necessarily make one an overnight millionaire, I have never been anywhere remotely near the breadline, nor have I had to work all hours the deity sends just to keep my head above water by keeping too many plates spinning simultaneously. Unfortunately, even the music camp reluctantly admitted that music would be more precarious, and I would probably need to put in more hours for less return. So I opted for science. Of course, I could have done both as others have done, including some polymathic members of this forum. Freed from the need to scramble for organ scholarships and a succession of diplomas while still a teenager, I could have done these things at a more leisurely pace more for pleasure than anything else. In fact I did not do this, having taken an early decision that I would leave that as one of the nice things to do when I eventually retired. This was a mistake, because when I did retire I discovered that my brain simply did not work as well as it did several decades earlier, and I was never able to master certain elements of the art (particularly transposition at sight) which would have been necessary for the diploma exams. Of course, all this would have been irrelevant had I possessed independent means, a factor which I suspect plays more than a small role in the careers of some musicians. But such was not the case. I don't know whether this is of interest to the original poster of this topic or anyone else, but for what it's worth, there it is. CEP

No apology needed, S_L, as far as I'm concerned! What can ever be wrong about a bit of enthusiasm? And thank you for sharing the extraordinary story about your father. I am envious of your Porsche though. Continuing with the connection between cars and organs, I'll mention again Willis III's speed and gradation swell mechanism - in the original patent of c. 1935 there is mention of "acceleration", "deceleration", "neutral", "braking" and one or two other words (including "speed" of course) common to the two areas. Bonavia-Hunt also uses them quite independently in one of his contemporaneous books when describing the system from a player's viewpoint. I wonder if Aubrey Thompson-Allen, who invented the mechanism and wrote the patent specification, was a motoring enthusiast? Yet another link springs to mind in that somebody (can't immediately remember who - might have been Stephen Bicknell) likened the Hope-Jones organ at Worcester cathedral to a Ferrari when compared with the "family saloon" type of organ that was then being built by all other builders! But I'm getting a long way away from York Minster now. My turn to apologise - sorry. CEP

S_L said: "And, like a Porsche, being built by Germans using German technology, German skills and the usual high quality materials that the Germans employ to build their cars it will do the job it is designed to do absolutely superbly! " Not sure that I fully concur with these effusions concerning all things German, given the scandals that VW has recently been involved in. And they and Porsche are not exactly disconnected. But never mind. I think it's difficult to judge any organ unless I've at least heard it in the flesh (i.e. not on a recording), and preferably played it. I wonder what all the dials and gauges do? It puts me in mind of those Willis III consoles which used car dashboard fuel gauges to indicate the position of the swell shutters in some of the instruments which used the infinite speed and gradation system (though I believe Liverpool Anglican now uses LED displays). I wonder if those organs also used the corresponding fuel tank sender units as well - minus the float of course? Plus ca change and all that ... CEP

Does anyone have a view on the books by Abdy Williams (1855-1923)? I have sometimes come across them in second hand bookshops both real and online, and he seems to have written on a number of organ-related topics. Currently I'm re-reading 'The Story of Organ Music' published in 1905. He writes in a generally entertaining manner, though the book reflects his time and his own predilections perhaps excessively, and some of it might provoke a response (such as annoyance I suspect!) today. Examples: " ... those works which we call classical are bound in course of time to become antiquated, and to find no response except for those few persons who, possessing a feeling of antiquarianism, can project themselves mentally into a distant past". " We are living in a period with regard to organ music which may be said to have commenced in the first half of the eighteenth century". " ... there has nearly always existed a "high" school of organ-playing, contemporaneously with a commonplace, ad captandum style, against which musicians and churchmen have inveighed in vain". And this gem: "The organ is heard by the majority of civilised mankind once or twice a week through the whole year. No other instrument is heard so much by so many, and it is only in accordance with human nature that organists should frequently yield to the temptation to please the uncultured majority rather than the cultivated minority, even if their natural taste is that of the minority, which is not always the case". So it's good fun, and to be fair one can learn things from it more easily than from many a drier text. However his books' low prices suggest that they are not held in much regard today, so maybe this answers my own question. He puts me in mind to some extent of Laurence Elvin, whose rather scattily-organised and opinionated works nevertheless contain useful stuff. CEP

It certainly is of interest, and when I went on Amazon just now there was one seller offering it at just over £6 incl postage (new). Can't go wrong at that price. The demo clips sounded very good so I've ordered it. Many thanks for the tip. CEP

The various youtube clips of the Weingarten organ provide a great service because there don't seem to be many CDs of it around at present, at least at reasonable prices (some were being advertised on Amazon at over £300 when I looked recently). However there is a good one by Piet Kee available at 'normal' CD prices of around £12 or so, including on Amazon (Chandos CHAN 0520). Recorded in 1991, I have it and it is wonderful. It demonstrates all the 'fancy' stops to which David alluded, though not the Vox Humana to the extent some of the youtube clips do. Both this disc and the youtube recordings suggest that this incredible creation is still in fine fettle considering its unbelievable mechanical complexity. I alluded above to a study I'm doing of the acoustical physics of this Vox stop, and have made a little more progress in the last few weeks. If it's of any interest, I'm reaching a point where I think it's misguided to try to explain its tonal character in terms of the phonetic formants of the human speaking voice as some other researchers have done. In my view it is better explained in terms of the character of the human singing voice, which is quite a different thing, especially the voice of a trained adult male singer (i.e. not a child or a female). When you do this there are some features identifiable in the sound of the Weingarten Vox which also appear in the voice of a trained tenor. This might explain the extraordinary humanoid quality of this stop, at least over part of its compass. But the most remarkable thing of all is that Gabler was able to capture it in organ pipes at a time when he could not have possibly known about any of the physics stuff which I have been drawing on in this study. Listening to (and looking at) this instrument has brought a lump to my throat more than once, and I sometimes wonder why we have bothered to build any other sort of organ since when such miracles were around at that time. For all our knowledge and technology, the only improvement we have been able to provide to Gabler's masterpiece is to have given it a decent, or at least more convenient, wind supply. CEP

In my admittedly limited experience, both of accompanying trumpeters at weddings and of hearing them in a broader church music setting while others were playing, the problem has not been one of tuning but of dynamics. More often than not I have to say that they seemed to have little conception of the sheer deafening loudness of their instrument, which consequently drowned out everything else. And on the occasions when they decided to mount the pulpit it was even worse. One of the performances in question was Messiah, and a press report the following day remarked on how good it was except for "the trumpeter's lack of aural judgement" (the phrase they used) ... CEP

There's this one on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYcW11TIeWU Similar title but I don't think it's the same as the one David mentioned.

Found it! I knew there was a youtube somewhere of the Weingarten Vox. I'm very envious of David as he's actually played it. How wonderful it must have been. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cHwsMWksSw Enjoy. CEP

The Vox Humana is one of the most interesting, I'd almost say lifelike, that I've heard. I was so fascinated by it after a first hearing that I'm analysing its harmonic structure to see how closely its resonant formant bands might correspond (or not) to those of the human vocal tract, and will post a link to the results in due course if anyone is interested. (I did this for a Wurlitzer vox rank some while ago and the results explained to some extent why it sounded 'humanoid'). According to legend Gabler sold his soul to the devil in return for the secrets of making this stop. I don't think the pipes are ivory though - I've seen a photo of this stop and it has conventional-looking metal pipes from what I could see. Was not the ivory stop a Flageolet? Apparently Gabler had major problems in getting enough wind to the Kronwerk, so had to reduce his original ambitions regarding the size of this department. It certainly is an incredible instrument. CEP

The trouble with Conacher's is that they were not just one firm but several, so you can't really ask how good 'a Conacher organ' is (or not) as this topic heading does, without saying which of the various forenames is on its nameplate and when it was built. David Drinkell's earlier summary is useful to help sort their pedigree out. Laurence Elvin in 'Pipes and Actions' also goes into it. He mentions Peter, James, James & Sons, Joseph and Philip - to name but some - and draws out to some extent how they were intertwined. It's some time since I last read the book so I can't summarise it here from memory, but will try to do so if requested by those who might not have it to hand. As well as their average-to-bad work which previous posters have described, there were also some apparently well-regarded examples left by Peter at least, if contemporary accounts are to be believed. I think it was the firm of that name which built four large 4 manual 22 rank cinema organs - correct me if I've got the wrong branch of the dynasty somebody. One was in the Odeon (formerly the Ritz) in Nottingham. It was a terrific thing and highly regarded by W L Sumner in the mid-20th century, and I had the privilege of a private play on it as a schoolboy thanks to the kindness of Gerald Shaw. This was not long before bits of the organ were dispersed to the four winds just prior to the cinema being bulldozed. CEP

Falsely claiming any qualification is not only dishonest but blatantly fraudulent. As for the lesser crime of exaggerated claims, one that I find particularly irritating is the frequency with which universities hand out honorary doctorates, which debases the whole currency and meaning of academia. But this practice as well as everything else mentioned in this thread occurs in all professions, not just music. It's regrettable, but as Vox Humana said, one can take some comfort from the fact that those who are properly qualified treat the whole business with wry smiles and quiet ridicule. CEP

For what it's worth, my two cents' opinion is that players who earn both reputation and income from travelling around the world rather than being predominantly associated in the public's mind with a particular cathedral or whatever can reasonably describe themselves as international concert organists. It might be an 'overblown title' as Zimbelstern suggested, but if so, that's accepted as allowable practice in almost any walk of life isn't it? The term is perhaps no more than 'puffery' at worst, which seems to be part and parcel of the publicity game. CEP

Sorry, this is a long reply which won't help much about Copperwheat, but it does illustrate what can be found about apparently 'unknown' people-who-might-be-organists if you search long enough, and if you manage to get to the end of this post ... So here goes. On sheet music repair, I do so agree about Sellotape. The music master at school many years ago was the first to demonstrate its horrors and he insisted on the use of what was then called 'gumstrip', rolls of brown paper strip coated with what tasted like fish glue on one side. But it worked jolly well and was kind to the paper, not besmirching the copy if it later dried out and came off, although if put on properly it seldom did. It can still be obtained easily today - I have a sizeable roll of it - but the label has disappeared so I can't remember whether it's now called something different Can't help with Copperwheat, though if you only have an initial rather than style and/or full first name, might the previous owner of the music have been female rather than 'Mr'? Could this factor assist your search? It's funny, but only the other day I had a similar problem. I was wondering why that prolific and well known writer on organs and other historical matters, Laurence Elvin, apparently attracts so little attention on the web (apart from the titles of his books). For instance, I've looked in vain for a decent bio which goes beyond the little he himself discloses in his publications. Much the same goes for Rollin Smith - in view of the amount and reasonably high profile of their respective outputs, you'd at least think they would have a Wikipedia page especially in view of that vast army of utter nonentities who seem to qualify for one. Sometimes, as with them and Copperwheat, the internet does inexplicably seem to let us down, though perhaps a factor with Elvin and Smith is that much of their work seems to have been published privately. Mind you, I'm not all that bothered about either of them so didn't search desperately hard - it was just something to do while we were snowed up. More info might be out there somewhere - as it might be for Copperwheat. While on the subject, I've had a similar problem which I still crack on with. Some years ago my wife bought me a gorgeous 1870 edition of Hopkins and Rimbault (though when she saw what arrived I think she was even more than usually mystified by the things which elicit such joy ... ). I had been looking for this edition for a long time because, among other things, it's the first of theirs which describes early Victorian electric actions (pre-Hope-Jones) and it's nice to have the original material to hand. Water engines ditto. It's interesting in another and quite unexpected way as well. On the flyleaf one can just discern the name and address of the original owner. Written in almost completely faded but beautiful copper plate handwriting, he was "Matthew Dickie Junior, Brook House, Offerton Road, Stockport near Manchester, December 1871". (Put in quotes because that's what he wrote). Though very neat, the writing is large and has a slightly laboured and juvenile appearance about it. This suggests he was not much more than a lad at the time and that he probably received the book as a Christmas present, given the date, but twenty years or so later the web plus genealogy records have revealed he was apparently a wealthy mill owner (Litton Mill) which he had perhaps inherited from his father. Readily-available records have a lot to say about him from about that time onwards, yet he seems to have stuck with his "Matthew Dickie, Junior" appellation for a long time, even using it as his telegraphic address. I find provenance such as this adds immeasurably to the fascination of the actual books themselves, even though they are purchased for their contents rather than simply as collectors' items. In this case, as Matthew Junior the mill owner was possibly (probably?) a local organist, I wonder whether he took a trip across the Mersey c. 1890 when Hope-Jones's first and famous organ at St John's, Birkenhead was bruited abroad in the Stockport area where he lived? As the number who flocked to see it was apparently measured by the thousand, the assumption might be warranted. So I completely understand Martin's fascination for tracking down organists. Very best of luck Martin. CEP

Thank you for this, MM. Most interesting, especially the J Martin White aspect of the story. Forgive my making a perhaps picky remark, but although Stephen Bicknell thought Compton "was experimenting with extreme harmonics" early on, it's worth bearing in mind that 'experimenting' costs money, generally a lot of it, which might not always be appreciated by those who haven't tried it themselves. So I wonder about the source of funds that the young Compton was able to draw on so early in his career without the problem dragging him down as it did for some others. This was one of the hurdles which helped to bring Hope-Jones down, because although he was initially probably bankrolled with venture capital from the likes of Thomas Threlfall and White, eventually they would have expected their money back with a return. Doing research into novel technologies means you have to first set up the necessary facilities which cost money, the facilities require space somewhere to house them which adds to the total, additional staff costs might be involved, and then there is the time involved in doing the research which to a businessman inflates the total still further (time equals money). I'm not saying anything you won't know, but maybe not everyone will be comparably aware of the realities. CEP