Colin Harvey

I'll conceed that my argument is built upon generalisations upon generalisations but I'm talking about trends I've experienced rather than specific examples. It's not a water-tight argument and neither is it intended to be so and I know it can be picked to bits. But I've always been big picture rather than small details... I'm not sure how you have picked up on underlying assumption that I feel all organs ought to be English Romantic. I don't have that in my head but I think certainly in many of our Victorian parish churches, the Victorian parish organ fits rather well where many other schools of organ are a bit out of place and don't quite do what the church musicians want them to do... I agree with you strongly about time spent on site finishing an organ - my experience of it is that it requires great patience and time to get it right and this shouldn't be squeezed by company directors looking at the profit margin (which it certainly wasn't at Twyford). However, I think time spent on site needs to be tempered with an element of pragmatism over dimishing returns, otherwise a feeling of the emporer's new clothes must come in after the 4th month of voicing a 20 stop organ, especially if it's been sounding about right since the end of month 2... And yes, is "Post-Neo-Classical" really a style? I don't feel it is, either - I've just used it as a term to categorise a group of instruments. Sorry. I think the great majority of organs built since the 1980s are compromises between providing an organ that does what the customers want and the remains of the last strong stylistic identity to hit this country, with enough of a nod towards traditions on paper to keep people happy. I think this has created many organs which, while capable of doing the job, lack conviction. From the shoots I've seen sprouting, I think the way forward is for organbuilders to allow themselves more personal identity with the organs they build (very few can be successful chamelions like H&H), the trend to improve quality needs to continue (there are still some very wobbly new organs out there with bits that fall off) and there needs to be a greater understanding and expression of beauty in what is created. But I think with sufficient funds, opportunities and understanding customers, this is quite possible...

:-) I'm so glad Dennis Thurlow broke the "rules" too. I'm looking forward to going back to the Netherlands later this month.

I think I do fully appreciate the sense of your post, even if I do not think I would put it in such terms myself. I will go off on a different tack from your points and try to draw out something more productive and insightful, overlooking issues which may occur because of poor (or interfering, before David jumps in) maintenance and tuning. With Ken's work, we see a personal expression of what I term "Post Neo-Classical", where we see a return to more romantic elements. Swell divisions have made a comeback, we have seen more acceptance of nicks and regulation at the toes of the pipes. The subject of choruses is an interesting one. Quite often what I find in post-neo-classical organs is a chorus with little treble ascendancy (treble ascendancy gives "melodic quality"), rather hoping that keeping the power the same through the compass will bring out the counterpoint in the middle parts. There is also a reliance on Toepfer normal scale as a basis for scaling so there is supposedly no variation of the quality of the sounds across the compass. Privately, I wish we could go back to Dom Bedos based scalings as I like the sound to develop its timbre across its compass. But I've learnt that scaling has a far more subtle effect that most people think - it's not the be-all and end-all that many think it is. The other thing I find with many modern choruses is that the upperwork is pushed harder than the foundation work. 8' principals tend to be quite relaxed in their power output and are generally very pretty played alone. Then the 4' is pushed harder, the 2' pushed harder still (there are rarely 2 2/3s in modern choruses) and as for the mixtures... Generally, I think that builders scale the upperwork a few pipes smaller each time they go up in pitch and try to compensate by making it sing more by voicing it more loudly. This is the way they get the mixtures and upperwork to generate the power in the chorus work - complete opposite school of thought to traditional Victorian choruses, with powerful Open Diapasons and gentle 15ths. The excuse given by many organ builders for doing this to a chorus is "to get the upperwork round the corner into the church" - especially so for an organ facing across a chancel - as we all know the bass notes get round the corner more easily. The other thing is there is still a reluctance for organ builders and voicers to go the full distance with nicking and other old tricks on voicing new organs - I feel it's still seen in some corners as an tool used towards the interests of romantic decadence. Actually, upto a point, nicking can make pipes speak quicker and smoother - come to Twyford to hear how really quite heavily nicked pipes can speak blindingly quickly and have very well developed "harmonic interest". It's also a lovely example of the "other type" of chorus. I feel there are a few problems with the "standard" post neo classical type of chorus. It's difficult to build a smooth crescendo through the chorus as each new pitch added is louder than the last and draws attention to itself with a crash. A seamless crescendo, so revered by Victorian romatic organ builders, is not possible by addition and subtraction of stops. Done badly, and the upperwork can stand apart from the foundation stops and not blend - the other way of chorus building lends itself so much better to blending. Also mixture breaks are more apparent and are more difficult to manage. The sound of the full chorus is wearing on the ears, especially in intimate environments, but it can be effective and sound impressive in more spacious environments, especially with half-decent reeds. Marlborough College, a fine organ which I think is a good example of "post-neo-classical" at its best, is a good example of the type of chorus I mean, with all the pros and cons. There are exceptions to this type of chorus in post neo-classical organs - the gorgeous Frobenius in Canongate Kirk, Edinburgh doesn't use these rules - the upperwork is more and more gently voiced. Like everything musical, it's a question of balance and bon gout and to my sensibilities Canongate is very much better thought out. I think this organ looks and sounds just right for the building and can do just about anything on its own terms. It is a very musical organ.

Isn't it a bit early to decide what are the great organs of the past 27 years yet? I don't agree about Honiton - I think it is an excellent organ, very capable and versatile and it has awe and wonder for me. I certainly wouldn't describe it as rough or unattrative. Dulwich is similarly excellent and capable. However, I do know what pcnd is getting at - there's a certain restraint in Ken's organs, which is difficult to put one's finger on. It's almost as if they're too well disciplined and well balenced to allow themselves to produce really beautiful sounds. But it's a subjective thing and I'm talking b*****s. Abergavenny is highly unlikely to see the light of day. The sources of funding became fatigued after a series of large fund raising efforts for various very expensive projects. There's also a new organist and DoM, who I'm led to belive is more interested in buttons than beautiful organs so that organ won't see the light of day in its original guise...

Buxtehude is composer of the week this week on Radio 3, very appropriate for his tercentenary. Monday is strongly recommended as it has the hour long interview with Ton Koopman. I caught it just by accident as I was driving home and continued to listen to it when I got back home, so I must have thought it was good. It can be caught on Listen Again: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio3_aod....radio3/cotw_mon Ton has some fantastic insights and there's a lot of Butehude's relatively unknown choral music, too. It is beautiful - currently re-listening to Andreas Scholl singing Jubilate Domino. Buxtehude has a skill with grace and grandeur without confusing it with prettiness and ostentation. And, yes, I too don't think organists give themselves enough credit for their scholarship and skill, where it is justified. Now just listening to Piet Kee playing Nimm vos uns on the wonderful organ at Roskilde Cathedral. If only every organist could play with that skill and musical sense. I recommend the CD - it also has works by Bruhns, all played to that standard.

Thank you!! I think you raise some good points here: Professional Fundraiser - the idea of getting a professional fundraiser was floated in our project and I thought the suggestion a good one. Certainly with a larger project, especially when you haven't got a close relationship with a clear "target market" you are going to ask for funds, I would have thought a professional fundraiser would be invaluable. Organ Advisor/consultant & tender process - yes, absolutely! We were blessed with a brilliant organ advisor, which gave a lot clout that we were doing the right thing and confirmed all the advice we had received until then. Thankfully, the organ advisor and I agreed on the way forward and the various aspects of the instrument. He quickly gained my respect and confidence, we worked together well and enjoyed (and still enjoy) a close and friendly relationship. The advisor was instrumental making the church take the right steps through the project and led us through a tender for the work. Our Priest-in-Charge and PCC are very wise and realised they were out of their depth with an organ project so took the advice of the consultant. Our advisor was very experienced and professional and quickly gained the trust and respect of our Priest-in-Charge and PCC. The tender process cemented the advice from our advisor as the organ builders invited to tender agreed about what should be done. I would have been happy with either builder invited to tender - we had already managed to eliminate those I didn't feel would produce an organ I would be happy with. Thankfully, the proposal we got from the eventual builder really demostrated they had the same vision as the advisor and I for the organ and being the cheaper of the quotes, it became a no-brainer decision. The agreement of consultant, builder and organist on all aspects of the organ and the happy relationship we all enjoyed has produced an organ with which we (organbuilder, consultant, church and organist) are especially proud of.

Hi Shaun, Firstly, congratulations getting this far!! The most difficult thing to do is get the ball rolling in the first place for a major organ project. From now on, the project should pick up its own momentum. The next thing I would say is get somebody else to do the fund raising. It's a lot of work, a lot of stress and requires a great deal of perseverance. With a teaching job, plus your duties as an organist, you simply won't have the time required. Our church has raised £270,000 for our organ project since 2004 and I've just had a look through at the statistics at how it was raised: 70% came from private donations (including gift aid returns) 20% came from events 10% came from grants It took us 2 years - by the end of 2006, it was pretty much complete. This is pretty typical - in fact I would say we did exceptionally well with the events and the grants, more on which later. But the clear thing is that the majority of the funds came from private donations and this is the usual case with organ projects - you'll never fund one from events or grants. We did not have any major private donors who gave a greater proportion of the funds. The largest donor probably gave something in the region 3-5% of the total cost. This, again, is pretty normal when one isn't in the rare but fortunate position of having a major donor willing to give the majority of the funds. Most of the donors were members of the church or the village community. Some of them don't come to church that often but the church is still important to them because they were married there or their children were in the choir there years ago or it's their family's church. There were a few outside the church or village but they are generally exceptions. So how did we get them to part with major amounts of money for a new organ? Well, simple, really. Firstly, we were very democratic and included the entire church on the decision to go ahead with the organ project - we gave them the options, the pros and cons and likely costs of each option (including the electronic simulation option, which got no votes) and let the church take a vote at the Annual Church Parish Meeting, with them full in the knowledge that most of the funds would have to come from the church community. After we'd got the go-ahead, we were soon in a position to select our builder and agree a specification and price with them. From this, we could set the final budget for the project and the target for the fundraising. This helped, as we were able to give people a clear idea of the organ we were getting and the fund raising target was a stationary one. The fundraising project started with a launch event (actually, a presentation, a short free organ concert and a reception) to which everyone was invited. We then wrote to everyone on the electoral role and people to whom the church was important (i.e. anyone recently married in the church, for example), with information about the project and inviting them to give a donation - either a lump sum or a regular amount each month, quarter or year. We then followed this up with a personal visit from someone in the church to their home. One of the fundraising team drew up a list of who was to visit who and we were able to monitor progress. You might think this was very forward but in actual fact, nobody minded people from the church arriving on their front door stop asking for money for the organ. Some people had a cheque ready to give, others wrote out a cheque then and there. Very few turned us away empty handed and if they did, it was because they weren't in favour of the organ project. I would stress that I think the visit in person by someone was very important and without it, I think this strategy wouldn't have been as successful. The other thing was to get the message right - it was not about a new flashy toy for the charming new Director of Music, it was about custodianship of what our forbearers had passed to us and a long term investment to maintain an excellent standard of music and maintain an important part of our church. In the first parse, this raised about £160,000 from just over 200 people - so about £800 per person. This was really very generous but still left us £110,000 short of our target, which could have given us a bit of a headache. But the solution was simple - we just repeated the exercise a year later saying "we've raised xxx so far, all we need is xyz, are you able to give a bit more?" It worked. The other thing to remember is Gift Aid - with this sort of money Gift Aid ends up adding tens of thousands of pounds... Events OK, a word or two about events. In actual fact, most events were offered by members of the church, who were often very keen to help with the organ fundraising in other ways than giving money. They would put together a team and get the event organised. Usually, at concerts the performers were friends of members of the church, so fees were waived, etc. We even got Sir Thomas Allen for an evening just covering his expenses, being a close old school friend of the treasurer's wife. That concert was a sell-out 2 weeks before the event, at £20 per head and brought in £3,500. How we got David Gower for a desert island disk evening, I'll never know but that event raised well over £2,000. We did lots of events and had a rolling programme, which included concerts, evening talks, sponsored dog walks (surprisingly lucrative) and hijacked events like the village fete (which was good for a solid £3000 each year). Our most lucrative event was an evening of collectables and promises, which was a dinner in the village hall followed by an auction of items donated by people (everything from a sack of horse manure to a 3 week holiday in a villa on the Greek Islands). This event, beautifully organised, managed, publicised and executed, raised over £9,000 in one evening. It was like The Village Church meets a Beckingham Palace party with Elton John and Robbie Williams... But that's the way to raise the money required at these events!! The key points I'd make about events are: Make sure someone is in charge of the events calendar. We found pretty early on we couldn't have more than 1 event in every 2 months and it's quite easy to get events clashing or too close together without someone managing the diary. Events also help to raise the profile of the organ project in the church community's mind. OK, they don't know much about the organ but having an event really helps to cement the church behind the organ project - and also help to cement the church community together (which is an important point to make when managing the clergy). People who might not want to give money will quite often be willing to help organise an event or help out at an event - even if they are dead set against the organ project! Make sure that you, as organist or Director of the Music, are seen to support these events and are positive about them, even if you don't think they're quite your cup of tea. I am not someone you would immediately think of being interested in the gardens of Getrude Jeykell and the chances of finding me walking a dog are remote but now I am a convert. Organ Concerts - of any sort - rarely bring in more than a few hundred pounds net profit. Yes, great to do when you've got the new organ and we now have one or two recitals a year but I wouldn't bother that much with them to generate revenue. Don't rely on events to raise all the money for the organ project or you'll be waiting a very long time for your organ!! Please bear in mind that many of our events were amazingly successful and were probably about twice as lucrative as the norm. Grants We spent a lot of time applying for grants and it was a Herculean effort for not much gain. There is a book of grant giving bodies, which I suggest you look through to find all the organisations which give money to organ projects. Many have strings attached to them - none more so than the Heritage Lottery Fund. Many of our applications were unsuccessful but those rare ones we did get, we normally had a contact in the organisation on the board who was able to help us through. We managed £5,000 from the Mercer's company and a similar amount from the Ilife foundation but it's rare for these organisations to give money for organ projects. One Grant well worth going for is the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme. It's something to do with tax relief if you live within a certain distance of a landfill site - which about 90% of the UK does! It quite often gives funds for churches - I know of one church in the area which received £60,000 to restore its peal of bells and we were able to get £10,000 from this scheme for the organ project. We had entertained thoughts that it might cover the remainder of the fund raising when we applied for it but in the end we were very pleased with the outcome - it was certainly the most lucrative grant we received!! Lots of people in the church seemed to think that much of the money would come from grants and I spent a lot of time explaining that this wasn't the case and indeed, the 10% we raised was really very good going from grants. Fundraising Team We had a separate fundraising team to the rest of the organ steering group (who were involved with the tender for the organ, acted as clients on behalf of the church for the organ and managed the schedule of works to complete the organ). This was very necessary as raising the funds is a big job and requires a committee all of its own. The fundraising team needs to be composed of do-ers - people who actually do work. It's good to give them their own areas to look after - the clear ones being: Treasurer - monitoring the funds, doing the banking, etc Press contact - building up a relationship with the local papers so we get space in the press about the project Events co-ordinator - keeping the calendar of events running Grant bodies - someone putting together the applications for the grant bodies. Donations co-ordinator - the person who organises people to ask members of the church and community for donations. That'll help take the load off the chairman of the fundraising group, which is otherwise a massive job. I think the best people on the fund raising team are those that have retired fairly recently, when they have time on their hands and want something to keep them going. They also have a great deal of experience and wisdom, which was invaluable. We also had a couple of people who were on both committees so there was a conduit between the 2 groups on the organ project. Summing it up, I think it's vital that the organ project is not seen as "getting a new toy for the organist". It really isn't. Talking to people, we raised the point that we had a sense of custodianship for our organ, which, despite some beautiful works of art in our church, is still the single most expensive item in the building. We wanted to respect what our forbearers had given us and do justice to their legacy by restoring the organ to a suitably high standard. We also took time to reflect what the organ gives everyone in the church, in regular worship, in music and at events like weddings and funerals. It is an important part of the church and the community and now we have this beautiful embellishment to our church, which delights and pleases all who look at it and hear it. While organists come and organists go, the organ is very much part of the church first and foremost and we hope that our organ will last another 100 years. Another thing is that it's important that the church is confident financially. Not rich but just confident in its ability to raise enough money. Our church is, founded on a project in the 1990s which raised a similar amount for a gallery and new church rooms. It is necessary to convince people that it is possible for the church to raise the necessary funds but if they've given the green light already, you've already half won that battle. Once you've won that battle, go for the scheme you like and don't feel you have to go for the cheapest quote. Go for the best organ you can get. The church can afford it, with faith and confidence. I feel I'm very lucky. I am organist for a wonderful church which voted with its pockets for a quality musical instrument. I now have this beautiful organ to pretty much whenever I like and an appreciative and encouraging church community to work for. I really couldn't have it any better. Good Luck!!

I've found lots of slightly bizzare but effective registrations on my organ. The most recent is Swell oboe + Gt harmonic flute = cor anglais (which, yes, I have been able to use in a real piece of music). Also Gt Dulciana + harmonic flute is good, reminiscent of those cranky little stringy sounds on baroque South German and Austrian organs. It sometimes gets wheeled out for a quiet choral prelude or particularly limpid solo And yes, Gt Open Diapason + (very blending) Mixture works beautifully

Very briefly and simply, I think the "orgelbewebung" did do a great deal of good for organ building in this country. It helped re-establish the advantage of a mechnical action organ, in a well designed and disciplined instrument. In turn, it helped to re-establish the need for high quality craftsmanship and led the way for us to better appreciate and understand our organs of the past. years. I think in the 1950s or 60s, it would have been rarer to appreciate a small Victorian Hill, G&D or Walker but now, with the tenants of mechanical action, logical design, good chorus structure and a degree of discipline in the back of our minds, we now appreciate them for what they are, rather than as a source of parts for our meglomanic dreams. It also helped turn the organ from an item on technical innovation and marvel back into a musical instrument. One now takes it for granted that the key action will be light enough and responsive, it will be well designed for easy maintenance and it won't be trying to show off with mechnical ingenuity as its first aim. So now we focus on the musical aspects of the organ much more. There may be many reasons why the organs haven't been that successful tonally. There is no need for high mixtures in our small and intimate parish churches and the voicing of the foundation stops didn't really encourage smooth blend in our unforgiving acoustics. Interesting though many of the experiments were, the tonal aspects of these organs were revoluationary and frequently studiously avoided any reference to tonal developments in this country in preference for assumptions about the tonal make-up of organs designed for very different requirements in very different buildings. While it was a big mistake tonally, I think that the influence of the orgelbewebung has taught us important lessons. In the hands of less musical builders, the organ had become stereotyped into this thick and dull sound. We are still reaping the benefits of mechnical action and tidy design, the view of the organ building industry as a craft industry and I think the evagelising zeal helped inject some interest in the organ as it re-invented itself. In some enlightened areas we have thrown out the much re-built, electrocuted and unhappy organs in many of our parish churches for something much more disciplined, asthetically much more attractive and a much better proposition long-term. But I think we've still got a long way to go. We still need to throw off the last shackles of the organ reform before we can start to build really successful organs tonally while remembering the important lessons it taught us in other areas. I occasionally worry that organbuilding is beginning to stagnate again - privately, I feel there's not much creativity and originality out there right now but for a few pockets. Did it teach us the lessons Ralph Downes wanted us to learn? Did he really know what lessons he wanted us to learn?

Transcript would be interesting - how would I go about getting hold of one? PM me if easier... Many thanks

We all know that this piece probably wasn't written for the organ, or in the key of D minor, or by J.S.Bach. Present wisdom seems to be of the opinion it was written for the violin. Does anybody know of any attempts at a reconstruction of the original piece or any recording of the piece on Violin? I know of Vanessa Mae's recording but I wondered whether there were any others.

yes

The bearings were set by ear. I would not care to patronise Mr Hopps or Mr Bicknell with how to tune an organ...

Yes, exactly...

Probably not - unless the bearings have gone seriously astray... I really don't know who tunes on behalf of Nicholsons (and don't really care, either)

I like "On Eagles wings" too. But it's not easy for a congregation to sing and many will find it a little swine to play on the organ as every verse is different.

As a guide, the cost of a new pipe organ is currently around the £15,000 per stop mark, excluding VAT. I have heard one builder mention about £18,000 per stop recently but I - and many of you - will know of all-new organs which have been considerably cheaper. I rather agree with Cynic that there's a lot of excellent "pre-owned" material out there that could and should be re-used. I remember one job where we used some Henry Jones pipework in an otherwise new organ and I felt that it sounded considerably better than the equivalent new pipes. The obvious pipes that get reused are large wooden ones, which are currently expensive to make from scratch due to high labour costs. At Twyford, we re-used all the existing Walker material, supplimented with further period Walker material and this body of pipework led the way for the new pipework to be scaled and manufactured as near-replicas of the old. I think about 40% of the pipework is old. The result is remarkably homogenous and beautifully musical organ which once again has impressed me all over again this morning and yes, it did come in quite a bit under £15,000 per stop. However, using old pipes in an otherwise new organ doesn't save as much money as some people are suggesting. The cost of the pipes is really a small fraction of the cost of an organ - think of soundboards, action, wind system, frame, casework, etc. Old pipework will still need regulating and tuning on site for its new position and potentially restoration before it can be re-used. While an old rank of pipes can be picked up for £0-£200 pounds, it will still need money spending on it before the work is complete. Bear in mind that the cost of all-new pipes only comprises about 10-20% of the £15,000 price guide of a stop. One thing to bear in mind is that there are risks - unless you really know what you're doing and know exactly what you're looking at, the chances of ending up with a mongrel are high. I'm always concered that if it's done as a cost-saving exercise, it is a slippery slope to a return of Husskinson-Stubbington syndrome, re-using any part of an organ whch comes up, negelecting disciplined design and quality craftsmanship in an effort to keep costs down. However, if the organ is carefully designed and well made, using the old material sensitively and intelligently, the results can be exceptionally good and easily a match for "all new". One final point: The re-use of old material, forming part of the heritage of music in our church was an important factor for getting the go-ahead for our project - otherwise the work might not have happened and I may have been playing this morning on the dreadful old mongrel I had before - which also contained a great deal of "pre-owned" material.

How will we know if it's been voiced on French lines? However, looks like an exciting project at Worcester - Good luck!!

ooo, I feel sorry for you. If it's causing a real issue, I would take it up with the church wardens and PCC - you might find they're on your side and you can form a powerful alliance... I remember talking to Cynic at the weekend about a church who successfully commissioned and fund raised for a new pipe organ, despite the PinC being dead set against it. I heard the P-in-C was not at all popular and the organ was a bit of a protest against him... so anything is possible!

The real question you need to answer is why you've gone for a terraced console. If there's a good reason for it, then people will just have to accept it. You'll never please everyone and it's not really worth worrying what people think of it (but it's very nice to find out if they do like it). Most organists will cope and those that complain... well, a bad workman and all that...

Sunday Mornings: 9:30 Sung Eucharist twice a month (middle of the road C of E, organ, occasionally wave hands at ad-hoc choir), one Sunday of the month a family service (piano/organ), and I take one sunday off every month. Some Thursday evenings - choir practice for the ad-hoc choir (7:45-9pm) Saturday before family service (i.e. once a month) - practice band (5- 5:45pm) and family choir (6:00-6:30). We get some weddings at the church - I think I've got about 14 this year, which is quite a lot by my standards. The rest of the time - 9 to 5 as an IT consultant! I try to get a bit of practice in most evenings (preparing for ARCO) but this week is quite normal: the last time I did any meaningful practice was Monday night (it's Friday today)... I'm also getting back into having singing lessons after a year off...

Jerusalem is becoming as popular as "Sing Hosanna" round my way. I really don't think this hymn is appropriate for weddings - lines like "I shall not cease from mental strife, nor shall my sword sleep in my hand" - probably true in both cases in some marriages but it's much more about nationlism than marriage. At the last wedding I played at, we had Jerusalem followed immediately by "I was Glad" by Parry. Yes, I finished flat out on Jerusalem in D major, pushed in a mixture or two and started straight off in Bb. It gave me musical indigestion for a fortnight afterwards. Probably fine at a coronation but it didn't quite hit the spot for me as wedding music.

I haven't actually seen or heard any organs in the US in the flesh, but I've heard from good authority that the top end of the organbuilding craft in the US is unbelievably good. The quality is absolutely stunning and hardly ever been rivalled. It is also said that some of the latest American offerings are unprecidentedly loud but it is clear that if you want the very best, the states is definately the place to go!! I liked the sound clip: some wonderful sounds, as you say. Can you enlighten us which organ it is? Many thanks for posting it.

Nah, definately not Christchurch Oxford. I thought it might be a Hope-Jones, with that tremulant and funny sounds and wind supply. Christchurch has more chiff, more gedacts and less strings - oh, and it's a musical instrument... However, this american reed organ is definately perfect for the works of Caleb Simper... I take it that if this organ were a chorister it would have perfect head-tone?

Do we really want to know?