The photographs were taken of a large three-manual organ manufactured in Italy.  While the exterior presents as a large console, the interior tells a different story.  This includes: 1) low-quality stapled wood console construction , 2) exposed power and digital circuitry, and 3) little electronics included in the organ, more typical of what is found in lower-cost two-manual organs.  These physical qualities help demonstrate why these organs  are often the lowest cost solution.  However, low-cost does not equal good value.

Large 3-manual Organ From Italy
Large 3-manual Organ From Italy


21 thoughts on “Digital Organ from Italy Photographs

  1. is there an external rack with computers and amps ?

    this can not be the entire stored samples and …. there is only one amp??

    how many channels of audio are needed? got to be more than two.

    1. We have been informed that there is no external amp rack or other equipment. What you see in the photo is what you get.

  2. I’m all for factual information but this is misleading. If you look at the bottom of the console you will see an audio output system. In fact, you can order this organ with up to 28 audio channels of independence. Obviously, you’ll need those amplifiers outside of the console. But what disturbs me most, is your statement of “little electronics included in the organ.”

    This Unico 500 organ has no samples but uses massive amounts of processing power in compact assemblies to create the sounds via complex algorithms. In fact, they calculate many BILLIONS of instructions per second. And guys, that’s a lot more than an Allen organ!

    1. It is all about the facts. That is the great thing about clear and unaltered photos; they are factual, accurate and tell an unbiased story. The Viscount tone generation pictured shows circuitry that physically is no greater than a PC that starts in price at about $500. The amps included are consumer grade, similar to those included in boom-boxes that sell for a couple hundred dollars. Power and logic circuitry mounted on wood is not commercial-grade and would likely not meet various regulatory requirements.

      While your comments are posted in full, in the future unsupported claims will not be posted. For example, you mention supposed processing power of Viscount and Allen organs that are not supported and therefore not factual.

      For those reading this exchange, beware for organ salesmen who make product comparison claims that are not supported with written factual material from the organ’s manufacturer.

      1. What David Jensen is saying sounds a LOT like the claims Al Murrell of Daffer Organ makes with no facts to back them up. The Murrell guy from Daffer organs to this day tries to claim Allen is behind in their technology. Nothing could be further from the truth. Why Allen does not confront him on this is beyond me! They need to!

    2. I know this is an old post but for someone new reading this I want to inform them,,,,, If you go to Allen’s website and look at their studio instrument the historique IIIa you will find an inside picture of the organ and you will find a MUCH better built instrument with MORE circuitry and being their smaller and less expensive line than this top of the line Viscount Now if you are a daring person Look at the innards of Allen’s top of the line 5 manual monster. I mean it’s like comparing a Prevost motor coach to a school bus

  3. Lets be honest – this is an Allen organ sales/promotion/marketing page – with mis-information regarding all other competitors, and page moderators and editors who delete anything that doesn’t fit the Allen Organ agenda of making everyone else look like they build crap. Ive replaced over 25 AOC power supplies in the last couple of years and have at least 3 organs in my service area that act up randomly the Macungie boys can’t figure out. I’m sure there are others. We’ll see how long this comment lasts.

    1. This site has not received one request to correct any information included on it. You also do not include any such request. That speaks well for the validity of the information. It will be up to the readers to interpret your unsupported comments and any motivation behind them.

      As for your comments made about Allen products, since you have not shared model numbers, serial numbers, or customer names, we will consider them invalid. Should you make any further unsupported claims they will not be posted. This Blog is about facts in an effort to assist customers in making informed decisions. Unsupported claims are not a part of that goal. There is already too much of those in this industry.

      1. I believe the information on this site to be valid and factual as well. Joe Jones is not any different than that guy from Daffer Organs,..making unsupported claims and not able to back them up!.

      2. Hey, “Organ-Editor”, instead of sitting in your cubicle in Macungie ……

        1. Content removed since it includes no objective material to back up what is an angry diatribe. Interesting, the person does not question one fact or photo including on this site that is inaccurate.

  4. so,,,, visiting their website watching a video patting themselves on the back,. they don’t record any actual pipes (too tedious I guess) they do it through making wave forms kinda like the days with oscillators and formant filters Hmm does this sound like going backwards? Kinda reminds me of a Baldwin technology. Whereas Allen records each and every pipe It takes weeks to record each pipe organ of any size and make a loop out of it. and Allen loops them for 30 seconds? hence the huge amount of memory on an Allen.. I smell a rat

      1. This Blog received comments from Ryan that have not been posted since they are replete with incorrect information about various organs. Example: Ryan claims Allen introduced sampling “20 years ago”. In fact, Allen introduced sampling in 1971, closer to 50 years ago. Possibly Ryan confused the fact that some other organ builders did not move to digital tone generation until decades later.

        Ryan accuses this Site of being “basically a fear tactic”, but offered no support of this claim. This site has published un-doctored photographs and related material on various digital organs being marketed. And yes, the lack of quality evident in some of these un-doctored photographs should be of concern to consumers. But don’t blame the messenger!

  5. I don’t know what Ryan said. ALL I DO KNOW is… that I have seen more Allen nudies than Hugh Hefner posted in his magazines and I have seen the nudies of all the other brands except for Alborn Galanti (SP?) I have worked on Allens for my friend who used to be their dealer and I have installed many Allens. I have a Rodgers in my church and I have Lowreys here at my house and my HUGE Allen. SO,,,, how can you “doctor” a picture? how can you make an Allen look any better than the they are. I tell you what Ryan ,, I will take a picture of my Allen and show you the quality and I will go to my church and take a picture of the Rodgers. The only other organ I like is the Lowrey they are not up to Allen by NO MEANS but they are a second in quality they use cages my C500 has T6 Aluminum trays and mahogany plywood enclosures and baffle board for the speakers the C500 reminds me of a Hymnus Galanti with sealed wook enclosures and that is a decently built organ. I laugh at anyone claiming this site “doctors” pictures I mean seriously I have tons of nudies of organs and stereo equipment and other audio stuff.. Allen is expensive and parts are not cheap. you know what? how about Lowrey? or the old Rodgers or any other brand excluding Allen of course. Tell that old lady who spent 100K on an Aria pro and Kawaii is ceasing ALL production of Lowrey? What is she going to do when she needs a new motherboard cause lightning struck her 400 LBS Boat anchor Allen is just a phone call away if you need a part. I can still get parts for my MOS1 and cards can I get a board for my 90s Rodgers? HA yeah on GREEDbay.. but except that fact Allen is the Steinway of the organ world and yeah I know it pisses everyone off cause they know it and once you come over to the good side you will be so glad you got a REAL organ and a REAL heirloom not this garbage you defend I have years of experience seeing the innards of organs and there is NOTHING out there that is as good as an Allen. pipe instruments I have no clue but I would put an Allen up to a Wicks in casework any day How do I know? I have a Wicks console to go by

  6. in reference to Ryan’s comments,,, well all comments regarding the “pathos” of this blog I for one don’t care who owns it nor do I have any dog in this hunt. as I am a hobbyist and a musician who doesn’t build organs but repairs and enjoys them.. I am posting a link of a picture of my Royale. It’s my personal image of my PERSONAL organ. as you can tell it is not “doctored’ but taken in the raw . This photo can be shared and enjoyed for it is on a public forum so no copyrights nor concerns but I want to show you all that Lowrey (no longer made as of 2019) indeed used “caged” electronics and some open boards but the bulk of the organ is in a “METAL CAGE”
    Allen is the most expensive organ out there. UPFRONT however is it really the most expensive? think about it Oh back to my first topic. if you are an organ builder look at this PUBLIC photo that I took of MY personal organ that I own. and if lowrey can use metal cages YOU ALL HAVE NO EXCUSE NO excuse So stop being jealous and trying to compare to Allen with at best thin arguments. Stop using “pathos” and read this blog with a ‘LOGOS” mentality and then you will arrive at the truth of what this blog undoubtedly posts. You can winge and whine about Allen’s prices parts prices and all that. but it boils down to TRUTH “ETHOS” and they have earned it let’s give credit where it’s due. Editor if you want please us my image any way you want to. I give you FULL permission and no credit needed of it. thanks

  7. I’m an organist and music director who was responsible for purchasing two two-manual Allens, one in the late ’70s and the other in the early 80’s. They produced a high-quality sound and were a pleasure to play. In 2015, someone gave us a 1996, 3-manual, 53-stop Ahlborn-Galanti, with 14 speakers, which we duly installed. We’ve had only two minor problems with it that were easily fixed. I agree with you — the guts of the instrument look cheaply-constructed compared with the old Allen (now in my living room) and your Allen photos. But the sound of the instrument is spectacular, so pressboard, lack of metal cages and sloppy-looking wiring don’t really bother me. We’re not about to move the instrument around and jar things loose. So, while I admire anyone who sticks to the old principles of craftsmanship in construction and woodworking, I can’t see how the additional expense adds anything to the real value of a digital organ, which lies in its sound.

    1. Maybe if you heard the sound of newer Allen Organ you would have a different conclusion. Ahborn-Galant stop making organs years ago and is no longer in business. There must be a reason for that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *