The primary purpose of the church organ is to lead and accompany congregational singing. This article argues that the highest priority in organ design and construction in churches should not be to produce an impressive organ for recitals, but rather to construct an organ to meet the unique needs of congregational singing.
The organ is not placed in the church for recitals, nice as they may be. The organ is not placed in the church as a tourist attraction, although some wonderful instruments have resulted from a desire to make a statement and attract people. And especially, the organ is not placed in the church for the amusement and delight of organist, builder, or enthusiast. I believe the pipe organ still finds a welcome place in the church because it remains the single best instrument at which one person can lead a variety of styles of congregational song.
Some of you reading this article may be a bit upset with me because you like to use other instruments to lead congregational songs. So do I. I have used guitar, synthesizer, piano (I like this one a lot), handbells, flutes, brass ensembles, even full orchestra and band for the leadership of congregational song. All of these possibilities work well if employed creatively and with a good understanding of their musical potential and limitations. But the organ remains as the best single musical resource capable of producing an ample quantity, quality, and variety of sound useful for leading many styles of song.
Others may be upset because my original statement implies that I consider the organ’s reason for being in a space for worship in relation to its role in leading the song of the assembly. They believe that I am not interested in the organ per se, its repertoire, its history, its lore. Of course, I am interested. The organ is my instrument of choice as a performer, and my degrees are all in organ performance. I’m intrigued by its history and perpetually amazed by the incredible variety of organs built over the years. Organs are like people; they come in all shapes and sizes and are fascinating to study. They are complex machines, and many individual examples are marvels of engineering and artistic excellence. But, all the lore, all the questions posed by enthusiasts when visiting a new organ (for example: What kind of key action does it have? Is it suspended? What kind of woods are used in the music rack? Does this organ have flexible winding? How much lead is in the principal pipes?) can obscure or distract us from the real issue. Organs, with few exceptions, are placed in churches for the purpose of leading the song of the assembly. Organs are servants to and energizers of this song. This mission is primary and all other considerations are secondary. With this basic affirmation in mind, let’s now look at concepts that should influence the design of organs for spaces where people gather for worship.
Physical and tonal properties need to be considered. Organs are large pieces of furniture, and care must be taken in placing them in a worship space. Since the church organ is not primarily a solo instrument, it must be designed in such a way that the organ and organist can interact well with other musicians. The musicians include instrumentalists and especially the choir and congregation. Both aural and visual concerns must be remembered when considering this interaction. Will the organist and other musicians be able to hear each other with some reasonable feel for balance? Will they be able to see each other? Frankly, this makes it difficult to propose attached-console, mechanical action instruments for any but the smallest instruments. (Please understand I appreciate and affirm such a style of building, but my responsibility as a church musician is to consider the organ not in isolation, but in relation to its servant role in the life of the parish. Citing European examples of such an approach to organ building is not all that helpful either since church music practice there is so different from American practice.) Of course, detached-console, mechanical-action instruments are an option, and I hope more work is done to perfect this style of building. Some fine instruments with wonderful, sensitive key actions have been done. Some horrible examples can be found as well. We need to cautiously and conservatively design and build more good ones.
Console design is another concern. Consider the question of the combination action and layout of stop controls. Small, two-manual instruments don’t require combination actions. Larger instruments do (say twenty to twenty-five or more stops). If one is to be free to utilize color possibilities inherent in larger instruments, one needs the flexibility provided by a reliable combination action. The larger the organ, the more efficient and practical the entire console design should be. A few large drawknobs can be placed conveniently close to the manual keys. Thirty or more of the large drawknobs to be found on some organs begin to present problems which are made worse by the use of nameplates for the stops placed adjacent to but separate from the knobs. It gets hard to find a single stop quickly in a forest of knobs, and since the addition of a single stop is less noticeable in the total ensemble of a larger instrument, the addition of three or four at once is not all that easy and disrupts one’s musical and rhythmical concentration. Simple stop tables placed above the top manual are easier to find and see. Of course, they don’t look as elegant, but they do the job more efficiently.
While good physical and visual design is important, good tonal design is vital. The ultimate usefulness of the organ depends primarily upon its aural qualities. So let’s consider some basic concepts in tonal design for church organs.
Good, warm singing sounds are the ideal. The assembly sings best when it is invited to join and blend with the organ in song. This invitation is not by a gesture or the singing into a mike by the organist or cantor, but by the very nature of the organ’s sound—a sound which inspires participation. This sound requires adequate amplitude (loudness), character, and warmth. It needs a good bottom to lead, support, and undergird the assembly’s song (the bass voice is the primary energizer of rhythmic pulse in music). It needs to be clear with some brilliance to communicate the melodic line. The sound must not be so forced or distinctive that the amateur singer is frightened or awed into silence. Aural assault is not the preferred way to encourage congregational song! Rather, the singer must feel surrounded and supported by the sound of the organ, drawn into participation by the very quality and personality of the organ tone.
As the stoplist is determined, certain concepts must be remembered. The organ is an ensemble instrument, not a collection of favorite solo stops gathered willy-nilly into an instrument. A “buffet table” approach to organ tonal design never results in a good organ. Rather, a concern for blend and cohesion of stops, an ensemble approach, is essential, especially in smaller instruments. A large instrument can afford to have a few unique, solo stops that are rarely used. If an organ has only twenty stops, all must work well together. Fortunately, blending and ensemble stops can have character and distinction. Please understand, I’m not arguing for a tonal palate akin to the cream of rice cereal. Rather, I am proposing that the ensemble concept in organ tonal design works somewhat like the blend of a choir or congregation in song. All are group activities that work best when no single performer stands apart from the ensemble.
This ensemble concept is at work both within each organ division (say great, swell, and pedal) as well as in the relationship between divisions. First, let’s look at the concept at work within a division. Most organ ensembles are created by combining stops of different pitches much like rungs on a ladder—8´, 4´, 2´, and so on. And like a ladder, it is better—and safer—not to omit a rung along the way. Within a reasonably complete manual division may be found more than one ensemble: a principal chorus, a flute chorus, and perhaps even a reed chorus. The most important of these ensemble combinations is the principal chorus which, when complete, is “crowned” by a mixture. This ensemble is the backbone of the organ and the critical ingredient in good hymn combinations.
Not every principal chorus begins with a principal at 8´ pitch. It is possible to have a “principal chorus” using flute (usually stopped) registers as long as the combination has a principal on top. The well-designed two manuals are likely to have such a hybrid ensemble in the swell with its principal chorus being built upon a Rohrflote or Gedackt 8´ and the principal register being at 4´. Such a chorus will not be quite as broad in tone as one which includes a principal 8´. Flute and reed choruses are often less complete and not as important to hymn playing, although a chorus trumpet on the great and a reed chorus (16´ and 8´ with perhaps a 4´) on the swell is especially useful in hymn combinations.
Each division should have its own principal chorus with secondary flute and reed components. (For service playing, a complete, independent principal chorus in the pedal is not essential, although desirable.) These divisions should be designed to sound good and complete alone but also work well when coupled together. Divisions should complement and enhance each other as they are combined. Since an organ crescendo works best as an increase of brilliance and not just loudness, it is best that secondary divisions have choruses that add brilliance to the primary (great) division. Thus the mixture, or crown, of the swell would be higher than the great so that an increase in brilliance is noted when the swell chorus is added to a great chorus. While it is true that a crescendo works through an increase of brilliance, not the addition of more and more 8´ and 4´ stops, it is important to remember that as the sound grows brighter, more 16´ and 8´ foundation (especially pedal foundation) must be provided as well. Brilliance does not imply screaming, harsh sounds! No one likes to hear people or instruments shouting for very long.
Now, this discussion of organ tonal design could go on longer, and I could become more specific about choice of appropriate registers for individual divisions. But specific choice of stops is secondary to the primary consideration that basic, good organ design is built upon each division as a complete ensemble working alone or in combination with other divisions. Since congregational song is an ensemble activity, the organ interacts with and leads ensemble singing best when its individual divisions are used together. Thus, my hymn combinations always begin by engaging the couplers. Ensembles in each division are then selected. A more gentle hymn might be played upon a combination of great 8´ and 4´ with swell 8´, 4´, and 2´. A more majestic text might call for complete principal choruses from both manual divisions. The opening hymn on Easter Day would call for chorus reeds added to the ensemble. In each case, a pedal ensemble to support and undergird the manual ensemble would be important, although from time to time it is good to give the feet a rest and lead a stanza with manuals alone. But no matter what the specific combination may be, the goal is always warm, blending sounds from the organ.
A delightful by-product of such a design approach is an organ well suited for the classic core of its own repertoire. Thus good church organ design is not at all in conflict with good organ design for the repertoire, provided one is interested in a reasonably eclectic, middle-of-the-road approach to an instrument for the literature. Good news! We can have our cake and eat it too.