|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Eccles: Keeping church music contemporary
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
What I always wonder about the move to contemporary music "to attract young people," is how often they're prepared to change. Because the definition of "contemporary" changes nearly every day.
The answer to this is simply, ISTM, to keep introducing new songs on a regular (but not too frequent) basis. Bringing in a few new songs each year keeps things fresh and contemporary, hopefully without alienating those who retain a love of some older songs.
Following this comment in the 'A distressed Church member...' Purgatory thread, I thought I'd start a new discussion.
Twilight asked how often churches that want to attract young people should be prepared to change the music / songs they use. Putting aside the question of whether contemporary music really does attract young(er) people, I wonder if anyone would like to talk about this.
Thinking about how my church handles this issue, it seems simple. Monitor the songs you use so you aren't doing different ones each week and giving new folks the impossible task of learning dozens of new songs. But also encourage people to introduce new songs every now and then, maybe a couple a month, so the bank of songs used by the church is constantly being updated.
This way, there is no question of 'how often should we change our songs / music' because it's happening constantly. It seems simple to me; what have I missed?!
[ 10. January 2015, 16:47: Message edited by: seasick ]
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
IME you can keep things interesting enough without leaving the pages of the New English Hymnal. After all, there'll always be someone hearing Ye Who Own The Faith of Jesus for the first time ![[Smile]](smile.gif) I suppose non AC churches may have more of an issue though!
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
The same songs week after week, with a few new ones thrown in sometimes? That sounds awfully boring. I'd rather be singing something old but different every week.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og, King of Bashan
Ship's giant Amorite
# 9562
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
After all, there'll always be someone hearing Ye Who Own The Faith of Jesus for the first time
The old hymn books are full of fantastic hymns. Unfortunately, there are a lot of churches who only sing a small number of them. Keeping things "fresh" should be a concern for everyone- if I started visiting your church and discovered that you sang the same songs over and over again, I would probably start shopping around again, even if you stuck to the hymnbook, as I prefer.
You have to know how and when to challenge the congregation. Programming a bunch of unfamiliar hymns on Easter in place of the old chestnuts would probably be a bad start. Mixing in some of the more unusual or less frequently sung Easter hymns in the following weeks along with some more familiar pieces would probably be a better step.
--------------------
"I like to eat crawfish and drink beer. That's despair?" ― Walker Percy
Posts: 3259 | From: Denver, Colorado, USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bostonman:
The same songs week after week, with a few new ones thrown in sometimes? That sounds awfully boring. I'd rather be singing something old but different every week.
Sorry, I meant having a bank of songs that the music group / leaders choose from (e.g. from a hymn book) while also introducing new songs (new to the church or newly written, perhaps newly written by members of the church!) at a rate of maybe 2-3 each month.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Unless your church happens to include gifted lyricists and composers, I'll pass on the songs written by members, thanks.
Introducing songs that are new to the congregation is no great difficulty, indeed we have nearly 500 years of hymns in English to choose from, as well as many excellent hymns that can easily be sung in Latin from earlier in the history of the church. Better yet, they have already been filtered and the dross lost in the mists of time. There are some excellent new songs, and I think introducing one or two recently written ones every couple of years will help ensure that the congregation isn't drowning in awful, unsingable pap whilst still allowing access to the best of the new.
"Now my tongue the mystery telling" is as new to the congregation here as "Oh, to see the dawn", and why should we consider the latter to be a more worthwhile introduction than the former just because it was written less than 10 years ago rather than several hundred?
[ 23. April 2014, 20:27: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
How old does a song have to be before it is no longer considered contemporary?
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
"Now my tongue the mystery telling" is as new to the congregation here as "Oh, to see the dawn", and why should we consider the latter to be a more worthwhile introduction than the former just because it was written less than 10 years ago rather than several hundred?
Introducing songs that are new to a particular church but were actually written several hundred years ago is fine with me! That wasn't really what I wanted to talk about in this thread, though. I was more interested in the question of how often we should update our songs and whether it can be done in an organic, gradual way - evolution rather than revolution, I suppose.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
A previous (evangelical Anglican) church of mine got the balance right, I think - a good mixture of contemporary worship band type songs, and classic hymns (although Wesleyan and Revivalist hymns were usually as old as they got!). Current evangelical church that I sometimes attend unfortunately uses music that sits awkwardly between venerably old and contemporary - it just feels dated.
My (A-C) church uses the New English Hymnal but I am so unfamiliar with so many of the hymns (unless they use a tune I already know from another hymn, as sometimes happens) that it is a struggle for me to enjoy singing them. They also often use quite complex melodies and are not easy for less confident singers to get to grips with. I think one of the attractions of modern worship songs is how easy they are for the average untrained congregation member to sing - that's not something that should be dismissed. Congregational singing is important. A good compromise might be something like Taizé chants - ancient and historic and even sometimes in Latin, but simple tunes and easy to learn.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
In terms of being "contemporary" the actual choice of songs probably isn't the defining issue. You can produce new songs which fit traditional styles of worship, and old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion.
I don't really know what the current style is that makes something "contemporary", though probably not the drums/keyboard/guitar line-up that wouldn't have been out of place in a 70s folk rock band that was common 20 years ago. As was said on the other thread, it's a moving target and the church is typically at least far enough behind popular culture to make us all look like parents of teenagers attempting to be hip.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
South Coast Kevin, what you propose about the music would probably work in most churches. I'm afraid that for churches to stay really, really contemporary (as in popular Christian rock that has been released very recently), it's going to look more like the church band performs and the congregation overwhelmingly listens. Only those places that have a majority of members who listen to Christian rock will have lots of active join-in (and even in con-evo circles, this seems to be rather uncommon).
What you're missing is that churches trying to attract young people through gimmicks are bound to fail. They work a tiny percent of the time, but they alienate the active membership a large part of the time.
It's tough to predict what music hypothetical people will like. There are dozens of "traditional" churches within thirty miles of here that have very active, young congregants. On the other hand, there are dozens of "contemporary" churches that have very active, older congregants.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
A lot of the so called contemporary songs and choruses that abound are not in fact contemporary as they arose in the 1970s (hardly contemporary!).I think we all go through stages in our lives when different types of music appeal. What I liked as a teenager is now an anathema to me and my tastes have become much more conservative and traditional.I don't go to church to be entertained. It is impossible to please all of the people all of the time which is why it is important to have a variety of services in a church, or else different groups can choose to go to selected churches that cater for their tastes. I'm afraid that if I walk into a church which is set up looking like a rock concert with drums etc, I rapidly retreat and look elsewhere.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
A lot of the so called contemporary songs and choruses that abound are not in fact contemporary as they arose in the 1970s (hardly contemporary!).I think we all go through stages in our lives when different types of music appeal. What I liked as a teenager is now an anathema to me and my tastes have become much more conservative and traditional.I don't go to church to be entertained. It is impossible to please all of the people all of the time which is why it is important to have a variety of services in a church, or else different groups can choose to go to selected churches that cater for their tastes. I'm afraid that if I walk into a church which is set up looking like a rock concert with drums etc, I rapidly retreat and look elsewhere.
I wouldn't have called anything written in the 70s contemporary - something written in the 90s at the very earliest.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
"Contemporary music" seems to have several aspects, many of which seem to be treated as central when they don't have to be.
1. The style is fairly simple tunes and words (except when the band confuses performance pieces with wide ranges and tricky rhythms for congregational sing-along pieces, a common mistake that leaves the band doing a solo and the congregation looking puzzled.)
2. The word "contemporary" seems tied to "music notation is wrong." In one band, I was writing or finding music notation for the songs and the music director snatched it out of my hands, saying looking at a song sheet is not singing from the heart, not worship.
3. The word "contemporary" seems tied to what I call one note theology. The song is cheerful. Or awed. Or pensive. There aren't enough words to touch on more than one of these. No telling the story of Jesus from birth to resurrection. No helping you see even though life can be really hard, God is with you, and those that have gone before kept going when it was hard, and so can you, and be assured even in darkest pain that it's worth it. (That takes several verses to do well; they'll tell you music isn't for teaching.)
4. I've been told "contemporary" is about constant change. I sang under a music director who scorned any "old" songs - "That song is 15 years old" he would object as if songs go bad in a short time like milk. A previous director changed songs every week, not repeating any within half a year, how could the congregation learn the songs?
Couldn't you have a verse chorus bridge repeat style with music notation available for all, with lyrics that say more than one thing, and with enough reuse for songs to become familiar friends?
I see a lot of bands doing "solos" simply because the congregation don't know the song and can't sing along. The band I'm in, both the last and the current director regularly say "I'll do this one solo because there is no time for the band to learn it" - if the band with a practice session can't learn it, surely the congregation hasn't a chance! Give me a songbook and I'll join in no matter what the style. Without one, I gradually slide out of the church because the constantly changing songs leave me unable to participate.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I think one of the attractions of modern worship songs is how easy they are for the average untrained congregation member to sing - that's not something that should be dismissed. Congregational singing is important. A good compromise might be something like Taizé chants - ancient and historic and even sometimes in Latin, but simple tunes and easy to learn.
Yes, definitely, both to the musical simplicity of modern worship songs and to the use of Taize as an alternative.
I gather the transition from complex to more simple arrangements began to happen (at least in the UK) in the 1960s and 70s, and IMO it's an excellent thing; making it easier for non-musical people to quickly join in with the singing and lowering the bar in terms of the technical skill required to get involved in leading.
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
South Coast Kevin, what you propose about the music would probably work in most churches. I'm afraid that for churches to stay really, really contemporary (as in popular Christian rock that has been released very recently), it's going to look more like the church band performs and the congregation overwhelmingly listens. Only those places that have a majority of members who listen to Christian rock will have lots of active join-in (and even in con-evo circles, this seems to be rather uncommon).
This isn't my experience, Olaf, although I haven't ever been part of a church that has tried to make a big transition from older to more modern music. That point raised above about how easy many newer church songs are to learn is a key one - this means that learning the new songs doesn't usually take very long, and the congregation will (IME) quickly be joining in with songs that they've just been introduced to.
Another point regarding contemporary church music is that it's in similar styles to contemporary secular music, so most people know the broad 'lay of the land' even if they aren't musically gifted or trained.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The word "contemporary" seems tied to what I call one note theology. The song is cheerful. Or awed. Or pensive. There aren't enough words to touch on more than one of these. No telling the story of Jesus from birth to resurrection. No helping you see even though life can be really hard, God is with you, and those that have gone before kept going when it was hard, and so can you, and be assured even in darkest pain that it's worth it. (That takes several verses to do well; they'll tell you music isn't for teaching.)
You raised several interesting points, I think, Belle Ringer, and I'd particularly like to have a go at answering this one. I recently read an academic paper that covered this exact issue, and the key point is that in contemporary charismatic-style worship, it's the whole group of songs used in a service that should be looked at, not just one song in isolation. Just like it would be unhelpful to focus on one particular liturgical response in a more traditional service.
So, yes, any given song might well be rather 'one note' in terms of its theology, but when the minister or music leader puts several songs together for the service you can get (can get!) a much more theologically rounded experience.
I also think you're right to suggest that charismatic / contemporary church people often don't pay enough attention to the theological messages in the songs - IMO songs are an absolutely key way in which people are taught! I for one certainly remember songs far more readily than I remember sermons, Bible passages and so on.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I think that picking up new songs is as much a matter of familiarity with the style as it is one of the style itself.
Congregations used to singing traditional hymns don't normally have a difficulty singing an unfamiliar hymn. Have the tune played through once, and a large proportion of congregations I've known will have a good stab at the first verse, with the rest of the congregation being confident by the third verse. That's with a large proportion of the congregation using words only hymn books, or not being able to read musical notation if they have it - assuming the new hymn isn't just words on a bit of paper.
On the other hand, the same congregation will often struggle with a contemporary worship song, even when they have accompaniment by something more suitable than an organ. Part of that, of course, may reflect the musical talents of the congregation. With a good organist a new hymn will be well led, but if the church doesn't have someone able to lead a new song on piano and/or guitar then there will be difficulties if the contemporary song doesn't have a setting suitable for organ.
ETA: and I agree with SCK that for younger congregants the style of more contemporary songs is part of the musical landscape, which would make such songs easier for them to pick up. I just wanted to say that for many congregations the style of hymns is part of their landscape.
[ 24. April 2014, 07:05: Message edited by: Alan Cresswell ]
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
In terms of being "contemporary" the actual choice of songs probably isn't the defining issue. You can produce new songs which fit traditional styles of worship, and old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion.
Old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion, but I wish they wouldn't. IMO, traditional hymns performed by a worship group sound awful, just as much as contemporary worship songs tackled by an organist is if they are traditional hymns. They are two completely different genres and neither should be mucked around with.
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Firstly we need to distinguish new material from new styles. There is a lot of new material, but there really has not been much change in style in the last fifty years.
Musical songs used for worship come in four styles defined by two factors. There are classic and popular hymns, and there are pre and post the last big style change within the discipline. I am less good on classical style change (I think it was the end of 19th Century) but popular music was 1960.
The four groups therefore are as follows:
- Classical
- Modern
- Revivalist
- Contemporary*
My observation is that congregations strongly using contemporary tend not to use modern and those that use modern tend not to use contemporary or revivalist.
For those who are contemporary, the production of new modern material is also prolific at present. So you are only using part of the new material if you are not singings items by artists such as Marty Haugen, John Bell or Shirley Erena Murray.
Jengie
*For Roman Catholic substitute "Christian Folk" here.
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
The problem I find with contemporary and modern music is that much of it was not written for congregational singing. It was written for a single voice/band. So it sounds great on CD/MP3/live/whatever, but awful when sung by a Church.
We had two such on Easter Sunday - I would much rather have sat and listened to it on CD.
[ 24. April 2014, 09:04: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I think part of that is that culturally we have lost corporate public singing, other than in church. Probably the last bastion of the culture is the football/rugby terraces. People don't stand around the piano at home or down the pub singing songs together.
Instead we have a karaoke culture where people sing individually (or, as 2s or 3s) to their favourite popular music. Not necessarily at a karaoke session - singing in the shower or singing along to a song on the radio driving to work are similar. That is, people sing along to songs meant to be performed by an individual artist/small group. Is it all that surprising that much contemporary worship is similar?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Heavenly Anarchist
Shipmate
# 13313
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The problem I find with contemporary and modern music is that much of it was not written for congregational singing. It was written for a single voice/band. So it sounds great on CD/MP3/live/whatever, but awful when sung by a Church.
We had two such on Easter Sunday - I would much rather have sat and listened to it on CD.
I think that really depends whether the congregation is used to singing to such music. My own charismatic church sings mostly contemporary songs, and regularly introduces brand new songs and the congregation sings enthusiastically along. But I guess having a couple of hundred people present does make congregational singing easier.
We also occasionally have songs written by church members but we are blessed with some very talented musicians, including a worship leader who is a classical harpist and Director of music at an independent school ( she used to teach at Kings, where the choir boys attend). Our church is perhaps unusual in regularly featuring a harp in its worship.
--------------------
'I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.' Douglas Adams
Dog Activity Monitor
My shop
Posts: 2831 | From: Trumpington | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion, but I wish they wouldn't. IMO, traditional hymns performed by a worship group sound awful
I think it needs a good music group, or at least leader. And, part of that is realising that there will be times when the guitarists need to stop playing and just join in the singing, or at least step back a while. A keyboard player can do a great job with hymns, and in a lot of cases I've known hymns played well on wind/brass instruments.
By "played well" I basically mean that it makes it easy for me in the congregation to join in singing. Which, in leading congregational singing, is the role of the music group or organist. There are other occasions in worship when the music group/organist could be playing without congregational singing, in those cases "good" has a different basis for judgement.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Firstly we need to distinguish new material from new styles. There is a lot of new material, but there really has not been much change in style in the last fifty years.
Wouldn't you agree that the emergence of songs that focus on our feelings is a significant stylistic development? Before the, I think, 1970s weren't there very few 'I love you, Lord', 'I come to praise and worship you' sort of songs? Arguably, there are now too few of the more objective, theologically rich songs emerging from the contemporary charismatic scene, but it often happens that the pendulum swings one way and then over-corrects the other way, eh?
Thinking about it, I guess you meant musical style but, even then, isn't the Coldplay-ish soft slightly alternative rock style (which is ubiquitous in my corner of Christianity, the Vineyard movement) a far more recent development than your time frame? Didn't this begin around 20-25 years ago?
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The problem I find with contemporary and modern music is that much of it was not written for congregational singing. It was written for a single voice/band. So it sounds great on CD/MP3/live/whatever, but awful when sung by a Church.
Hear hear! In so many new songs, the vocal range is just way too large for most people, and even the starting pitch is often all wrong. The latter is particularly disappointing, IMO, as it shouldn't be difficult for a songwriter to realise their song would be more congregation-friendly in a different key.
Mind you, one of the musicians at my church got in touch with a Very Famous Christian Musician to raise this very issue and the VFCM said he had no idea it was a problem. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
posted by South Coast Kevin quote:
Mind you, one of the musicians at my church got in touch with a Very Famous Christian Musician to raise this very issue and the VFCM said he had no idea it was a problem. [Hot and Hormonal]
If its the same person I'm thinking of I'm not surprised they hadn't realised there might be a problem since they've had no formal training in either composition, choral training or even simple music teaching. They also seem singularly unaware that singing as a whole has declined in the latter part of the 20th century.
Most of the singing heard by babies is recorded: various surveys have found that mothers feel nervous or inadequate about singing to their babies, so school is reached before singing may be expected, at which point its a 50/50 chance there is a music specialist about...
Looking at notes from a 40+ year career, I see that in the 1970s 7 and 8 year old children coming to a choir would, on average, have a comfortable vocal range (tessitura) of a 10th, somewhere between Middle C and G+1. By 2010-13 this had shrunk to a bare octave, placed somewhere between the B below Middle C and E+1. Much more work is required now to increase the range than was the case.
Yet at the same time some people are producing worship music demanding an increasingly broad tessitura.
But then if you look at the printed rhythms of some of this worship music it is very complex and most likely impossible for a congregation to reproduce.
[ 24. April 2014, 12:37: Message edited by: L'organist ]
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Higgs Bosun
Shipmate
# 16582
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
In terms of being "contemporary" the actual choice of songs probably isn't the defining issue. You can produce new songs which fit traditional styles of worship, and old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion.
Old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion, but I wish they wouldn't. IMO, traditional hymns performed by a worship group sound awful, just as much as contemporary worship songs tackled by an organist is if they are traditional hymns. They are two completely different genres and neither should be mucked around with.
I agree with this. It seems that the typical worship band has no idea of phrasing suited to a more traditional melody - that's partly because melody lost out to beat in the 1960's. So, you get a style which is a dull 'plonk, plonk, plonk, plonk'.
Don't get me started on those who change stuff from 3/4 to 4/4, thereby slowing the flow of the melody. Is this because strummers and drummers cannot do three beats to a bar?
Posts: 313 | From: Near the Tidal Thames | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Yes it is a stylistic change, but it is one due to the change in style of popular music in the 1960s. The sentiments are not new as anyone whose grandma attended a tin tabernacle will tell you. For "I love you Lord" you need to go to the revivalist meeting songs. They were more wordy versions but the sentiment seem to be much the same, try How can I keep from singing, I know he is mine or Where my saviour leads. Perhaps better known Blessed Assurance gives a flavour of the emotion held in these songs.
They are designed to go with a piano rather than a guitar and drums but the theology and sentiments remain largely the same.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
I am an alto and find a lot of contemporary worship songs difficult to sing for that reason - they all seem to be written for sopranos, and I have to sing tenor with the men to keep up.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
One change I would make to my classification is to distinguish in classical between the English hymn which spans between 1700 and 1900 and the catch all of classic hymns that predate 1700 (a very diverse group which have little in common except their longevity).
After the Evangelical Revival you get the splitting between the classical and popular modes.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
You are right - but it's also reflected in secular music, e.g. "The Beggar's Opera" vs. "Messiah",
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Looking at notes from a 40+ year career, I see that in the 1970s 7 and 8 year old children coming to a choir would, on average, have a comfortable vocal range (tessitura) of a 10th, somewhere between Middle C and G+1. By 2010-13 this had shrunk to a bare octave, placed somewhere between the B below Middle C and E+1. Much more work is required now to increase the range than was the case.
How interesting! It's good to get the perspective of an expert in the field (and I've learnt a new word, so thanks).
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Yes it is a stylistic change, but it is one due to the change in style of popular music in the 1960s. The sentiments are not new as anyone whose grandma attended a tin tabernacle will tell you. For "I love you Lord" you need to go to the revivalist meeting songs. They were more wordy versions but the sentiment seem to be much the same, try How can I keep from singing, I know he is mine or Where my saviour leads. Perhaps better known Blessed Assurance gives a flavour of the emotion held in these songs.
Mmm, I don't know. Those songs are mostly about the assurance of salvation and the joy that comes with following Jesus. Whereas the songs I'm talking about from the last 40 or so years are about the act of praise / worship / devotion itself, they are 'reflexive' as I've seen it dubbed. For example:
They're not two totally different categories, of course, but I think it's a clear change in emphasis.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Try I am thine O Lord then.
quote:
O the pure delight of a single hour
That before Thy throne I spend,
When I kneel in prayer, and with Thee, my God
I commune as friend with friend!
Or
What a friend we have in Jesus
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion, but I wish they wouldn't. IMO, traditional hymns performed by a worship group sound awful
I think it needs a good music group, or at least leader. And, part of that is realising that there will be times when the guitarists need to stop playing and just join in the singing, or at least step back a while.
I'd go along with that. It really grates with me when I hear hymns like "Be thou my vision" or "Praise to The Lord, the almighty, the king of creation" played in 4/4 time. If the drummer and/or guitarist can't cope with 3/4 time then they shouldn't bother
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Sure JJ, there are examples of older songs / hymns with that more intimate, 'reflexive' tone, but I gather (and would you agree?) that the proportion of such songs is far greater in the charismatic contemporary scene of the last 40ish years.
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
It really grates with me when I hear hymns like "Be thou my vision" or "Praise to The Lord, the almighty, the king of creation" played in 4/4 time. If the drummer and/or guitarist can't cope with 3/4 time then they shouldn't bother
I only know about 'Be Thou My Vision' and I rather like the 4/4 version! In any case, I'm pretty sure it's a deliberate re-working rather than arising from anyone's inability to play in 3/4.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
The issue here is an old one; how to effect a change, whether liturgical, musical or in buildings. The key I have seen work is to begin by finding some element in the new that can be familiar or related to the old.
In our MR ECA parish our organist has introduced "contemporary" music by presenting familiar Gospel Hymns in up-date (1970's) setting such as using a Gospel choir for "This Little Light of Mine" or "Wade in the Water". This ties the familiar into the newer and so far has been received without complaint or grousing. His Choir anthems have taken their music to an even more updated version of familiar hymns.
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Jade: quote:
I think one of the attractions of modern worship songs is how easy they are for the average untrained congregation member to sing - that's not something that should be dismissed.
Actually a lot of old hymns are easy to sing; they have predictable intervals between notes, memorable melodies and straightforward rhythms. And obvious endings, unlike one of the favourites of the worship band at my previous church. They used to stick in extra repeats of the final chorus, the number of which varied depending on how many different riffs the lead guitarist felt like playing that week.
Don't get me wrong, I like some modern styles of music. The same band used to do a heavy metal version of 'Let all mortal flesh keep silence' which I loved.
If you want to encourage the congregation to sing, telling them how many repeats to expect is a good start.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Jade: quote:
I think one of the attractions of modern worship songs is how easy they are for the average untrained congregation member to sing - that's not something that should be dismissed.
Actually a lot of old hymns are easy to sing; they have predictable intervals between notes, memorable melodies and straightforward rhythms. And obvious endings, unlike one of the favourites of the worship band at my previous church. They used to stick in extra repeats of the final chorus, the number of which varied depending on how many different riffs the lead guitarist felt like playing that week.
Don't get me wrong, I like some modern styles of music. The same band used to do a heavy metal version of 'Let all mortal flesh keep silence' which I loved.
If you want to encourage the congregation to sing, telling them how many repeats to expect is a good start.
I agree re repeats in modern songs! But I still find using the NEH (and my church only uses the NEH) very hard-going - I know very few of the hymns and it's assumed that we all know them. I also find the melodies complicated. We don't get given the music for it but I can't read music so that wouldn't help much! None of the congregation singing is particularly strong or enthusiastic anyway.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
If you want to encourage the congregation to sing, telling them how many repeats to expect is a good start.
What's usually done (forgive me if you're already well aware of this!) is that the music group leader will announce mid-song in some cunning way that the chorus is to be repeated, or we'll be repeating the final verse or whatever.
Amateurs like me will say the first few words of the relevant verse / chorus, while the real professionals sing the words just before the verse / chorus starts again. Either way, if it's done properly then anyone who knows the song at all well should pick up which bit is to be sung next and can continue participating with gusto.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Old hymns can be done in a contemporary fashion, but I wish they wouldn't. IMO, traditional hymns performed by a worship group sound awful, just as much as contemporary worship songs tackled by an organist is if they are traditional hymns. They are two completely different genres and neither should be mucked around with.
I've heard some lovely rock, gospel and reggae versions of old hymns. And some Graham Kendrick-type songs can work well on the organ too. I suppose I just appreciate hearing different hymns 'covered' in different ways.
OTOH, a few months ago I heard a rather cheesy 'coffee shop' version of 'Blessed Assurance' at a local Baptist church. The old-fashioned church lady side of me didn't appreciated that very much!
[ 24. April 2014, 19:06: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Amateurs like me will say the first few words of the relevant verse / chorus, while the real professionals sing the words just before the verse / chorus starts again. Either way, if it's done properly then anyone who knows the song at all well should pick up which bit is to be sung next and can continue participating with gusto.
And those who don't know the song just stand around feeling uncomfortable.
[ 24. April 2014, 19:21: Message edited by: Spike ]
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Spike, I'm not sure what you're proposing, sorry. If a church service has songs / hymns at all then there might well be people attending who don't know the songs and will maybe 'stand around feeling uncomfortable' until they learn them. What's your solution?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Spike, I'm not sure what you're proposing, sorry. If a church service has songs / hymns at all then there might well be people attending who don't know the songs and will maybe 'stand around feeling uncomfortable' until they learn them. What's your solution?
At least in places where traditional music is used the words and music are available in hymnals. Even granting that fewer people read music today than did 50 years ago, there's still a better chance for participation than with the words flashing by on an LCD screen.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Spike, I'm not sure what you're proposing, sorry. If a church service has songs / hymns at all then there might well be people attending who don't know the songs and will maybe 'stand around feeling uncomfortable' until they learn them. What's your solution?
At least in places where traditional music is used the words and music are available in hymnals. Even granting that fewer people read music today than did 50 years ago, there's still a better chance for participation than with the words flashing by on an LCD screen.
There's also way more chance of someone having heard a song before if it's 150 years old than if it's less than 1 year old.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Spike, I'm not sure what you're proposing, sorry. If a church service has songs / hymns at all then there might well be people attending who don't know the songs and will maybe 'stand around feeling uncomfortable' until they learn them. What's your solution?
Stick to the words on the sheet/book and to the order in which they are printed.
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
At least in places where traditional music is used the words and music are available in hymnals. Even granting that fewer people read music today than did 50 years ago, there's still a better chance for participation than with the words flashing by on an LCD screen.
OK, I'll bite.
Providing the words displayed on a screen are legible and are displayed in a timely manner, in what way does having them on a screen rather than printed on paper make participation harder?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Fr Weber
In the mainstream English churches I've attended it's not usual for congregational hymnbooks to contain the music, although sometimes a service sheet will include the melody of a new song. Some individuals will buy their own copy of the hymnbook with the music included.
There are books of contemporary worship songs that similarly come either or without the music, but the problem seems to be that 'contemporary worship' doesn't focus on one set of songs for any length of time, so it wouldn't be practical for members to buy their own books.
Maybe sheet music for individual songs of this type should be available for downloading.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
South Coast Kevin: quote:
What's usually done (forgive me if you're already well aware of this!) is that the music group leader will announce mid-song in some cunning way that the chorus is to be repeated, or we'll be repeating the final verse or whatever.
Mid-song?! Doesn't that ruin the mood?
It sounds more organised than what used to happen at my old parish though, which as I said was 'make it up as we go along'. Presumably the band had some kind of arranged signal, but it was never communicated effectively to the ordinary pew-sitters.
Most of the hymn books at our church are words-only, but there are some available with words and music for people who can read music. Of course, as Jade said earlier, this is only helpful if you can read music.
[ 24. April 2014, 20:27: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
For at least some of us who read music it's very nice to have the notes in our hymn books so that we can see what's going on. Projector screens in my experience don't have any notes.
Also I often look at words in the hymn book that aren't in the same place the congregation is. Last time I remember doing so was a couple weeks ago when I was trying to memorize one of the verses of a song we were singing, so I could sing it to my daughter later. I've also thought let the congregation leave me behind while I stopped to think about the verses of a hymn I thought particularly beautiful or helpful to my situation.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
South Coast Kevin: quote:
What's usually done (forgive me if you're already well aware of this!) is that the music group leader will announce mid-song in some cunning way that the chorus is to be repeated, or we'll be repeating the final verse or whatever.
Mid-song?! Doesn't that ruin the mood?
This practice goes back a long way. It seems common in Pentecostal-type churches, where it works very well. It probably wouldn't work in a more formal setting, though.
[ 24. April 2014, 20:40: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Contemporary often means 'the song I heard for the first time at the Christian music festival I've just returned from'. People return and enthusiastically want to teach it to the rest of the congregation. The problem with this is that the rest of the congregation didn't attend said Christian festival and so a) won't know it and b) won't have experienced the particular spiritual kick or blessing that those who did go experienced, and forever associate with the words and music of that particular song. The song therefore tends to get marketed without all the accompanying packaging and consequently may well fall flat.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
