This is a significant drawback of the eighteenth-century baroque organ that explains why the foundation opted for a newer model: the original organ would have been unable to adequately produce much of the music needed for modern church services and concerts!

This doesn’t matter to us, and we probably already assumed that an organ made 200 years ago was different from a modern one! We don’t know if the features on the original organ were good or bad, so we can’t determine if this is a benefit to, or drawback of, the original.

This is the opposite of helpful. If the donation hadn’t been designated solely for rebuilding the organ, the foundation might’ve opted to build the cheaper, modern organ so they could use the excess funds for other work. This answer choice takes away that possible explanation.

This doesn’t matter. We don’t care about the history of the original organ, we just want to know why the foundation decided not to rebuild it in any of its forms, modified or not.

This doesn’t matter. We don’t care how important the original organ was in church services, we just want to know why the foundation decided not to rebuild it.