User talk:Andrewa/Pipe vs electric organ

Why this page

See Talk:Electronic organ#Are some pipe organs electric organs too. Andrewa (talk) 19:38, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My view

Pipe organ is one that makes its sounds principally by means of pipes.
Electric organ is one that makes its sound principally by electronics. It includes both the Hammond and all electronic organs, but electronic organs are more commonly described as electronic.
Electronic organ is one in which the sound is generated purely electronically. The first such were frequency divider organs, and these commonly used discrete transistor circuitry (some may have used valves but the number would have been prohibitive). Later examples used ICs and continue to do so. Most recent examples use sampling and are microprocessor controlled. Although technically these are electric organs they are more commonly called electronic organs.

Watch this space! And other views appreciated. Signed comments belong here; Links without signed comments on User:Andrewa/Pipe vs electric organ. TIA Andrewa (talk) 19:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded a little (and I've probably missed some, and many instruments cross categories but these are the main ones):

Pipe organ
- Hybrid pipe and digital
  - Notably the Rodgers church organs, using up to four extended flue pipe ranks as the foundational sounds and resolving borrowing collisions digitally as well as providing many other ranks
  - See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDP5HPdnvGc for an add-on expander unit to "enhance" (that may be in the ears of the beholder) a pipe organ digitally
- Mainly pipe with some electronic sounds
  - Notably some large Wurlitzer theatre organs
- Tracker action
- Electro-pneumatic and other assisted actions
  - For example the Sydney Opera House Grand Organ
Electric organ
- Tone wheel
  - Notably the Hammond
- Electronic organ
  - Frequency divider organ
  - Synthesiser-based organ
  - Digital organ (typically using sampled sounds)
    - Hybrid pipe and digital as above

Comments? Andrewa (talk) 22:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some questions

Do those who wish to include some pipe organs as electric regard the Sydney Opera House Grand Organ as an electric organ? I have trouble taking this seriously, frankly. Andrewa (talk) 23:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And in this I turn out to have been hopelessly naive, see #Hornbostel–Sachs below. But the querstion is still relevant! Andrewa (talk) 22:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hornbostel–Sachs

This may be more controversial than I thought. Our article on Hornbostel–Sachs currently reads in part:

Present-day ethnomusicologists, such as Margaret Kartomi (page 173), and Ellingson (PhD dissertation, 1979, p. 544) suggest that, in keeping with the spirit of the original Hornbostel Sachs classification scheme, of categorization by what first produces the initial sound in the instrument, that only subcategory 53 should remain in the electrophones category. Thus it has been more recently proposed that, for example, the pipe organ (even if it uses electric key action to control solenoid valves) remain in the aerophones category, and that the electric guitar remain in the chordophones category, etc.. [1]

This is exactly the issue here.

Although Hornbostel–Sachs (popularly H-S) was originally designed for ethnomusicology it has found wide acceptance in organology (follow that link, it may not mean what you first thought) generally.

And it has by consensus been adopted by Wikipedia in this general role, see template:Infobox Instrument for example. The H-S classification appears prominently on all but the stubbiest musical instrument articles (that is, articles on a musical instrument such as guitar rather than a model such as Fender VI). Andrewa (talk) 23:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]