Yes. While they offered the best value of the options we looked at, there were many reasons. First of all, we realize that music, in general, moves each of us in unique ways and takes us to places that we might not otherwise go. It is our hope and prayer that the strong music program at St. Paul’s continues for years to come and that our organ will support the beauty and spiritual gift of music in our worship.

Our present organ, a Peragallo, was reportedly insufficient even from the time it was installed. At this time, it is clear – there are pistons that don’t work reliably, a sluggish console, keys that simply don’t play, the pipe leather that needs to be replaced, questionable electrical work, and tonal insufficiencies – that it has entered its last days. Recognizing this fact, the organ study committee worked for a year to study, learn, listen and reflect on the many options for organs: pipe, combination pipe/digital, and all digital organs.

The first step, however, involved recognizing our congregational and building context at St. Paul’s, and reflecting on the organ’s function within our context. The primary purpose of our organ is to encourage and support congregational worship, including hymn singing, prelude, postlude, and choral pieces. Historically, our music program, though strong, is not known for being a place of "showcase" recitals.

We commissioned 3 pipe organ bids which were submitted to the Organ Study Committee and Vestry. Additionally, feedback from these visiting pipe organ builders indicated that the cost-benefit of a restoration-rebuild of our present Peragallo organ is not an option. We then commissioned bids from Walker and other digital organ builders, and invited them also to consider both all-digital solutions as well a hybrid solution that would retain some of our pipes alongside the new digital functionality.Following these bids, for six months the organ study committee visited various churches with various organs in place for a “listening and learning tour.”

We decided on a Walker all-digital solution because:

1. It was by far the most cost-effective, at half the cost or less of the pipe organ bids we received and with substantially greater tonal range and flexibility, and the maintenance costs will be lower;

2. The site visits by the committee to churches with digital organs confirmed that the sound produced is virtually indistinguishable from that of a pipe organ;

3. Walker received good recommendations from organists at other area congregations who already have Walker organs;

4. Instead of having all of the sound come from the back of the church as in the case of our current organ and all of the pipe organ bids we received, the Walker organ will include “antiphonal” speakers hidden in the open area beneath the main stain glass window.

   In more detail, we considered:

   Congregational context. Though St. Paul’s is a vibrant and growing congregation with gifted musicians and great appreciation for music, we are very clear about who we are – and who we are not – as a congregation. We are a welcoming, inclusive community, with a broad range of ministries and desire for mission and outreach. In context, our mission and ministry depends on Spirit-filled weekly worship, but we also need to make our building accessible and plan/prepare financially for our future building needs.

   We also considered the primary function of our organ – which is to support congregational singing and worship – in terms of our lengthy list of other needs and the cost-benefit of a pipe organ.

   We considered our liturgical space. Admittedly, and obviously, we are not a cathedral. Our A-frame, modern worship space, includes a cramped rear choir-loft, with little room for console, choirs (Adult and Children) and instrumentalists (at Christmas and Easter). The stained glass window above the altar is the perfect space for the antiphonal speakers (though they will be out of sight), which will better support – without overwhelming - congregational singing.

   Organists in training and even well-seasoned organists are open to digital instruments, and appreciate the 3 manual console and workmanship of Walker Digital organs.

   Throughout the year-long process described above, we also received valuable input, professional opinions, and individual demonstrations regarding both digital and pipe organ options from accomplished organists Brian Harlow (St. Luke's Episcopal Church, Gladstone), Charles Hunter (St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, Montclair), Tom Wittemore (Trinity Episcopal Church, Princeton), Jim Little (Calvary Episcopal Church, Summit), Marilyn Currier Rabbai, (The First Presbyterian Church, Pitman, NJ), Andrew Moore (Christ Episcopal Church, Short Hills/Pingry School Music Chair), and Tad Cavuoti (Christ Episcopal Church, Rockville, MD). The proposals received were shared with most of these organists, who expressed the view that a digital solution was most appropriate for a parish like ours. There seemed to be consensus that the Walker pricing was very favorable for an organ of its quality and range. Given the enormous expense, combined with our building/liturgical space, none of the consulting organists encouraged us to pursue the Gluck pipe organ proposals (which appeared to be the best among the three pipe organ proposals) instead of a digital organ.

   For all of these reasons, and because of our lengthy and thorough learning and listening process, we unanimously came to the decision that Walker Digital should build our next organ.