Impressive tininess. The Arch Linux package is 879.54 KiB. And yes, there’s dynamic linking with the contents of other packages like libx11, jack and alsa-lib, but I think the total most people will be adding will be 1.11 MiB. But then, I had to replace jack2 with pipewire-jack to get it to work, and that saved 1.18 MiB, so installing Aeolus literally saved me disk space!

(Yeah, I know I could have done jack2 → pipewire-jack independently, and yeah, I know I’ve added a few files to /var/cache/pacman/pkg/ so that I didn’t actually save disk space, but hey, I like the narrative.)

Good point.

Disclaimer: I'm just a hobbyist but I know a few professional organists.

TL;DR: each organ is unique, pipe organs are not produced in series like pianos.

The main reason for people use something like Organteq or Hauptwerk, is usually to practice organ at home. Unlike what happens with other instruments, it is very rare for an average person to own their own pipe organ, so digital reproductions are the way to go for pretty much everyone.

But here's the problem: organs are very, very different one another. With piano, you could practice e.g. on a Kawai at home then perform a recital on a Yamaha; the two pianos don't have the same sound and the same action, but they are close enough that you can practice on one instrument then perforom on another. This is not the case with organs: a baroque organ and a romantic organ will be completely different in terms of registrations, pedalboard extension and shape, manuals etc. etc. - not only that but each pipe organ ever built, is a completely custom instrument.

For example, all Steinway D-274s ever built, despite some differences due to the year and place of construction, are still the same model (model D-274). But with organs, it's almost never the case that the same organ is built twice. Each single instrument is completely unique, and that's why we identify them by opus number, and we have catalogues of all the organs ever built, like for example this one https://ohta.org.au/organs-of-australia/

So, the main problem for someone setting up a practice organ is to have access to a digital model that is either that exact organ, or at least a very similar instrument to the one they will use to perform in public. For hobbyists like me who don't plan to perform, there is still a need to at least have a certain type of organ available, because of the great diversity of organs.

That said, it shines on a real auditorium sized pipe organ.

> you have to wonder where we'd be today musically if not for him.

Err, probably using lute music[1] transposed for organ[2] and adapted[3] as film soundtracks[4] I guess.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM6hd8EPFl0

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nf3eU-Y6Ew

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ9_6W6bVoQ

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adv9gYQWqb8

I'd say an electric guitar orchestra beats an organ on this piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqgQ7IYhvRg

I’ve never had the opportunity to play a pipe organ, and other sorts don’t tend to lean into stop banks that you can rapidly swap between so much, and this drawbar organ doesn’t have that kind of thing at all—changing mid-piece is much more impractical, and so done much less. All up, I’m confident it’s an easier instrument to play than a pipe organ, but still with a lot of the same qualities. (But it’s not just an inferior pipe organ—it’s its own thing.)

I’ve found it fascinating what works and what doesn’t: I played a wide variety of things, my expectation of how well a piece will transfer has not always been correct, in one direction or the other.

Anyway, pianos and organs are definitely quite different instruments, but there’s also a lot of overlap in the techniques and skills, and playing one will improve significant aspects of your playing of the other.

(Nice three-em dash, BTW. I settled on —⁂— as a divider, but seriously contemplated two-em and three-em dash, which I do still use in other situations.)

Yes, this can get quite extreme. And then there are churches where some of the organ sounds are purposefully piped to the other side of the building to be injected in different places. That can really add to the delay and the confusion.

https://www.catholicsun.org/2011/12/15/liturgical-music-as-p...

https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/01/19/a-short-history-of-li...

https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/02/16/sacred-musics-role-in...

https://www.catholicsun.org/2012/03/15/practical-points-for-...

In principle, the Catholic Church doesn't object to a particular type of instrument being used for sacred music, as long as the text is sacred and the instrument is not overtly profane. BUT she still exhorts us to give "pride of place" to certain classical styles of sacred music, the Latin language, and the pipe organ itself. That's still non-negotiable, but really falls by the wayside when you consider restrictions on budget and talent. There are not that many professional-volunteer organists or Gregorian-chant schola directors to go around.

So the reality is that any church that did have a bona fide pipe organ, or even a good electronic one, these gathered dust while people slung their acoustic guitars and tambourines around while playing music that's indistinguishable from Simon & Garfunkel. I mean it didn't necessarily get that bad, but we did practically abandon those classical styles in favor of new vernacular experimentation.

In practice, Catholic parishes exhibit a wide disparity of musical style, and this will be tuned by the liturgists and pastors according to the needs and tastes of their faithful. Many pastors find it advantageous to mix Latin, classical, a cappella, and modern CCM all in the same liturgy, or some will segregate it out so that Traditionalists can enjoy a liturgy dedicated to traditional music, singing, and instrumentation.

What are the implications of constructing brand-new traditional pipe organs in our two "flagship" churches? What does it mean that our previous bishop wrote down a series of four documents on the form and function of sacred music? Regionally, they have set the tone and established a legacy for decades to come. Pastors may do what they like, but Cathedral worship is often the "Gold Standard" for a diocese to imitate and promote.

At the very least, constructing a permanent pipe organ in a church is a capital investment that can't be easily shoved aside. The pastors and parish councils will indeed be very reluctant to sideline something that cost 5-6 figures in favor of "easier" music.

You can reproduce the 3D soundfield of a big organ using wavefield synthesis. I heard a phenomenal recording/reproduction of a performance of a Messaien piece recorded in the Koeln cathedral and played back at the TU Berlin with their 4k+ speaker wavefield synthesis system. You can walk around in the room and experience the actual "space" of the cathedral.

Modelling detailed individual sound sources and mixing their contributions at a particular point in space would be doable though.

My point was more oriented toward the effect of the pipe on the sound, e.g. the big square wooden ones probably bring something different than the metallic circular pipes.

The accordionists I know don't think the accordion sound of Roland digital accordions is all that good, though many still use them.