Miscellaneous desk
< November 4	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 5

Technical question

Hello, if Al Gore had won the election in 2000, would his VP Joe Lieberman as an observant Orthodox Jew normally have been sworn in the following January 20, 2001? I ask this question because that day fell on the Sabbath, was it the Jewish Sabbath? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.96.198 (talk) 17:05, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We can't make projections or predictions based on counterfactuals (see instructions at the top of the page which says "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." However, we can direct you to facts about things that did happen in the past. The first day of Zachary Taylor's presidential term was scheduled to begin on March 4, 1849, a Sunday. Because of his faith, his inauguration was moved back to March 5. This led to the (apocryphal legend) that David Rice Atchison served as President for one day. This was the second time it occurred, the first time was the Second inauguration of James Monroe, however being that Monroe was the sitting president who had been re-elected, this delay was inconsequential. There was also the Inauguration of Rutherford B. Hayes, the Second inauguration of Woodrow Wilson, the Second inauguration of Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Second inauguration of Ronald Reagan, and the Second inauguration of Barack Obama all of which were held one day late for religious reasons. There's also the special case of the Second inauguration of Franklin D. Roosevelt, which was held technically almost 2 months early due to the moving of the start of the Presidential term pursuant to the Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution. --Jayron 32 17:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Er, in what way does that constitute being "technically almost 2 months early"? The event was on the constitutionally specified date. --184.145.50.17 (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, it was just 2 months earlier than all the prior inauguration dates. --Jayron 32 22:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect some reasonably well sourced answers to this question can be found with some web searches if anyone wants to bother (I don't). I do remember a joke campaign slogan of Gore-Lieberman that went "We'll work for you 24/6!". 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:D4A (talk) 22:39, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~There is no constitutional requirement for the Vice President to be sworn in; it is merely a convention, and postponing the ceremony by a day has no constitutional implications.~~ The issue is more interesting if the President-elect observes a religion that prohibits their taking an oath on the day of the week on which their term begins. I do not think a written or unwritten law can override the rules specified in the US Constitution. Section 1 of the Twentieth Amendment states: The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January [...]; and the terms of their successors shall then begin. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the Constitution states: Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:— [...]. So the term of the President-elect begins at noon on January 20, whether sworn in or nor, but they cannot execute (the powers of) the office before having been administered the oath. Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment states: If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President-elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President-elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified. Here we get room for interpretation: does "fail to qualify" include failure to take the constitutionally required oath? If it does, the VP is, for the time, acting President. Jehovah's Witnesses are not allowed to take an oath on any day. However, an affirmation may be substituted, replacing "I do solemnly swear that ..." by "I do solemnly affirm that ...". --Lambiam 09:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The VP is an executive officer of the US; therefore Article 6, Clause 3, of the US constitution requires him/her to take an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution. It just doesn't require an oath or affirmation that's specific to the vice-presidency, analogous to the presidential one. --184.145.50.17 (talk) 04:45, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Technical info concerning electronic organs

OP seeking debate

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

After binging the archives of this fine reference desk, I have seen items about electronic organs, their technical capabilities and their costs. However, I didn’t see anything that gave me the right info. At least one question was poorly worded and a bit unclear. Therefore, I would like to ask what I wish to ask clearly and carefully. I do not wish for economic or business information, as that will be of no use to me. I know there is a temptation to talk about pricing strategy and the laws of consumer demand, but what I seek is technical specifications and other such matters of a mechanical and computational variety. Obviously there will be underlying technical factors for price, for such would cause people, whether they realise it, to consider such prices to be reasonable.

What I would like to know is: from a mechanical and computational point of view, what is that makes a Lowrey or a Wersi organ so expansive to purchase even second hand? It is to be noted that a Lowrey instrument will be around £3,000 to £18,000, and a Wersi instrument will be about £7,000 to £35,000.

It is my understanding, as a technical student, that these organs will use a fairly normal CPU and operating system such as Windows XP or a Linux version. The computational power is not unreasonable for these instruments, but unlikely to surpass that which my £750 gaming laptop can put out. In terms of mechanics, I see that the instruments have ornate wood or metal casework, with pedalboards and benches, and this will add to the costs, but do see that a piano bench or organ bench can be had for perhaps £150.

The features that these instruments boast are most likely quite impressive, but I do find that I can get a £600 musical keyboard that has most of them. I therefore wonder what I am missing here, and why it is that two musical instruments with roughly the same feature set can have vastly different prices? I do appreciate the likelihood that Lowrey and Wersi are possibly the organ equivalent of luxury brands such as Rolls Royce or Rolex, but why price out poorer folks like me, who would like to get a foothold in the organ market?

I say this because, I feel that these organ builders are a bit too elitist and are therefore robbing themselves of potential income and business that could occur if bargain basement prices were to be used. I note that many more potential organists could arise if they could afford instruments, for I have a desire for our breed to be significantly enlarged. Yes, I am aware of the facts that these builders may have advantageous warranty and repair systems, but everyone has that these days.

I will now close by saying that I want to justify such organs, and I want to see why they would be considered more expensive that my patented alternative of stacking two £600 keyboards on top of one another, connecting to a £750 laptop containing midi software and organ sound banks, and also running the whole thing through a amplifier and loudspeakers of some sort. I reckon this setup could be had for as little as £5,000. Yes the organ has the convenience of taking all those things and placing them in one unit, but that shouldn’t make that much of a difference to the price of it all. Yes, the Wersi and Lowrey are artistic, and only use the best materials, and design fancy casework, but I can’t see £30,000 of material value here.

I hope to get insight in this post, I await your input, 2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:5019:6B33:2AF6:E1DD (talk) 23:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You wish to exclude consideration of pricing strategy and the influence of consumer demand, but do you have a good reason to assume that these are not major factors determining these market prices, perhaps even the major factors? Similar questions may be asked about excessive auction prices paid for works of art of famous artists. They may be a thousand times as high as that of a less famous fellow artist, while the inherent quality of the work is perhaps not actually higher – as can be seen by the steep drop of the market price when doubts arise regarding the ascription. --Lambiam 09:59, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that these are not major factors, because more people would be attracted to the organs if they were much cheaper. I doubt Wersi and Lowrey are stupid enough to fail to realise this. Remember, the cheaper the item, the more people can afford it, and therefore the more people who will consider buying it. Also these organs are not like your works of art, they are a mass produced product that isn’t one of a kind. Believe me, they would make them cheaper if they could to get more customers, so there must be a good reason why not, and I am trying to figure out that reason. 2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:C96B:AF99:2427:1B0A (talk) 10:20, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if they were cheaper, more people would buy them - but then maybe their total sales revenue (unit selling price multiplied by number of units sold) might be less. Or they could put the price up, and the same thing would happen, because while they'd be getting more revenue per unit, the number of units sold would be less. The point is, it really is all about pricing, not technical or computational features. They're not using a simple cost-plus pricing strategy in which they look at their unit costs and decide how much profit to add on top. That's not how profit is maximised. These companies are not stupid. They have done their homework and they have concluded that the price at which these things are sold is the price at which their profit is maximised. --Viennese Waltz 10:53, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I said not to talk about economics. Also, I still haven’t got the technical info I wanted. I want to know why the unit cost is so high? Why can’t these organs be sold for around £3,000, say? Is it not possible to build one with no more than £2,000 of electronics? I still don’t get why they don’t maximise sales by using bargain basement prices? I bet they could increase their customer base tenfold or more if they did that, hence invalidating your claim entirely. If they did make them £3,000, they would be as common as pianos or Yamaha or Casio keyboards and they would be all the rage everywhere. Then, Wersi and Lowrey will be a thousand times larger than at present and they would possibly surpass Yamaha in terms of global sales. And they wouldn’t be so bloody rare. I say this, as I have never seen one in person but I have seen hundreds of pianos and Yamaha instruments.2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:C96B:AF99:2427:1B0A (talk) 14:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the notion of a huge market appetite resulting from bargain prices is not based on available data. --Lambiam 17:34, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am still waiting for info, doesn’t anyone have technical knowledge here? 2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:F481:6F6:FF8F:E42E (talk) 20:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the company does. Have you tried writing to them? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, you would do well to read Price discrimination and its various links to related economics topics. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:31, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You appear stuck on the notion that the expensiveness of these brands can be explained by intrinsic qualities of their products. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that this assumption is unwarranted, in which case no such "technical" info will be forthcoming. --Lambiam 23:04, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A hamburger at a place like McD's costs much less than it does at a place like TGI Friday's. What do you suppose the "technical" reason is for that? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:38, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any sane person will see clearly that the TGI Friday’s burger is bigger and meatier than a McDonald’s one. The meat is probably higher grade and the other ingredients are also a bit higher quality. Clearly, the prices of those organs still don’t make sense to me. I cannot see why these companies would willingly reduce their sales in this way. It’s simple; if those organs are sold for a tenth of their price, as they should be, sales will be dramatically higher and the companies will be much, much bigger and richer, and I would also own one of their instruments, rather than my current £500 single manual keyboard.

I don’t know what the profit margins are here, but they must be in a position where lessening the price is made a little bit trickier than it should be. Therefore, there must be technical considerations. I simply can’t see why my £500 keyboard and a £35,000 organ can have such vastly different prices, enough though the built-in instruments are near-bloody identical. If you have a look at this, you will see some impressive features, but I don’t see it adding up to €40,000, like it claims. I reckon I could replicate something like this using less than £10,000 of stuff. I could start by getting three £500 keyboards, a £500 pedalboard, and a £800 laptop with tonnes of music software, and then have essentially the same possibilities for much less. How in this case, could I convinced to spend four times as much for the same stuff? 2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:185B:228D:FA6C:AFB9 (talk) 11:34, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Wersi's website [1] they clearly describe their product as "premium quality", i.e. a product that is of better quality and therefore more expensive than others on the market. Now, I have no idea what that higher quality represents exactly (better electronics ? better sound ? higher quality finishing?), but clearly, that is the way they are being marketed, not as an alternative to a cheap electronic organ you could find in a department store. If you are truly interested and do not simply wish to rant, there is contact information on the website and you could ask them directly why their product is so much more expensive than an entry-level instrument. Xuxl (talk) 13:50, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m terribly sorry for ranting, but I am insulted that these companies aren’t making organs for my price range, for that is an act that would greatly expand their business. I only wish to create fine music in the style of Klaus Wunderlich. It is a style of music I definitely would like to get into, but I can’t afford any of the instruments here. I simply wish for an explanation as to why I can’t get the instrument I’m looking for, for less than £5,000, for that is my price range. Why can’t these companies see that their prices are driving guys like me away from the organ universe? Why can’t my type be catered for? All I want is to be able to learn how to play like Klaus Wunderlich. I need answers damn it! 2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:185B:228D:FA6C:AFB9 (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've already been told why. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:09, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven’t, I wanted tech info, I still haven’t got tech info, you know. Please can I have tech info, because I would like to know what is inside these organs and what they are made of. 2A00:23C5:B22E:7001:A418:1134:B76D:B5AC (talk) 18:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, if you'd just come on this ref desk asking for technical information on these organs without mentioning price, you might have gotten a response that was more to your liking. Secondly, you don't need to have loads of high quality equipment to make good music. What you need is talent. If your ambition is "to create fine music", then great. But you can do that with your "patented alternative", or with any kind of setup really. Don't sweat the techy stuff, concentrate on the content of what you are making. --Viennese Waltz 19:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]