Letter from Henry Willis to Ernest M. Skinner

Mr. Ernest Skinner
Skinner Organ Co.
Dorchester
Boston, Mass. U.S.A.

My dear Skinner,

Thanks for yours of the 24th April — but I am sure that I do not know what I have done that you should “Mr.” me!

Your remarks re: swell engines are very interesting. I do not agree with the thin shades you favor. Of course thin and light shades help the engines, but I do not consider that the crescendo can be so good. As I think I told you I use boxes and shades 2″ thick to contain stops speaking on pressures up to 6″ — 3″ thick on pressures above that. At Liverpool the swell boxes are 4″ thick with 3″ thick shades.

I have done some very successful swell engines recently both whiffletree and concertina — with my uncle’s floating lever control — all connected with a cam action to get a slow first opening.

I am glad that you are getting on all right with the mixtures — Farnam writes enthusiastically about your work in this connection.

I am surprised to learn that you find it “very hard to get an innovation of this kind started” (referring to rolling machines for hard zinc). I felt sure that you would be able to go straight for it.

I will send you one of our magnets as soon as I can spare one! This sounds ludicrous but supplies come in so slowly that the works manager is crying for magnets all the time. However you will have one soon.

I am sending per S.S. “Scythia” 5 rank Mixture exactly as the Grand Chorus at Westminster Cathedral but voiced on 5″ instead of 4″. It was voiced on the machine you sent over and I had no difficulty about cut up which was normal. You have to cut up more on account of your absolutely flat lower lips which I hold to be a bad form construction except for very small Diapason work voiced on pressures not exceeding 3″ it being the early English type.

The sample pipes sent to you were voiced on 5″ wind as mentioned in letter to Catlin dated 13/2/25. The power of a Salicional is not a defined thing over here — every firm has a different idea of what it should be. I sent you an average treatment.

I am sorry to have to disagree with you entirely upon the subject of diapasons — the leathering of diapasons etc., kills their blending properties. I can get all the power that can possibly be required by suitable scaling and pressure. I put in a whopper at Eton College last year CC 7⅝” 4th mouth on 10″ wind that has its harmonics fully developed and so blends. You do not want diapasons to “stand up” to the reeds but to blend with them, and this effect cannot be obtained with very foundational diapasons. Shall I send you one of these big diapasons — same scale as the No. 2 8ft Diapason on the Great at Liverpool Cathedral voiced on 1O” wind or 12″ if to stand on a chest with reeds? I think that it would convert you; say from tenor C up.

As regards forming opinions hastily — well, a man who knows what he wants and hears what he doesn’t want ought to form an opinion at once. Anything that does not conduce to perfect ensemble (except of course certain solo stops) I consider wrong. To be quite candid, as I was when over with you, you don’t get a true ensemble and won’t until you adopt the necessary design, forms of construction, and voicing that are necessary to obtain this result.

To merely add proper mixtures is not sufficient though a step in the right direction. I have got a lot from you mechanically and I want you to get all I can give you tonally.

I am at a loss to understand why you found the trumpets on the Florida Organ more difficult to voice on 12″ than on 10″ — we find that the higher the pressure, the easier on our system it becomes. I suppose your voicer increased the brass weights one size?

No, I only skim through Audsley’s tosh — it’s hardly worth the reading.

I see Elliot has transferred his allegiance to the Welte-Mignon.

Yours very sincerely
Henry Willis