|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: We don't sing any more
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
No-one gets to abolish tradition. Add to it, fine. Adapt, again, fine. Behave as if it doesn't exist? No. Same with these attempts to behave as if we can have a mid-2nd-century church in the 21st century. Just not an option.
Nor is attempting to set it in stone. It's organic, and attempts to stop it from changing kill it.
Cultures have memories, and the church, among the many things it is, is a culture. It won't be bullied into forgetting itself.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Regarding commercialisation, that happens to all forms of church music. People will pay to listen to nice tunes without thinking too much about the meaning behind the words. Whether it's Handel or gospel music, the more secular listeners enjoy it the money money can be made. The record labels know this, and I should think the artistes do as well.
For the sake of the recording industry if nothing else we need the churches to nurture a love of communal singing, since not many other organisations are doing it these days!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
I am yet to see a CD featuring New English Hymnal hymns.
--------------------
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
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
To be honest, "relevant" means it's played and you listen. That's how people interact with music in the main these days. Quite often as background.
ISTM that part of the artificiality of some modern worship material is that stylistically it's the sort of stuff you listen to, but you're expected to perform it.
The traditional church music is a genre (or indeed group of genres) all of its own, a genre specifically evolved and developed around congregational involvement. Hymns are meant to be sung by a congregation, pop/rock songs aren't. That's not to say that congregational music can't be written with modern influences and using modern instruments, but there's more to "relevance" than that, IMV.
Yes, yes and yes*. And the second para explains why trying to play some of it in church is really quite difficult. It doesn't seem made for recreation in any setting other than a mega-gig, and a Sunday morning church service isn't that environment. So one ends up with conversations like the one I had with our new bass man on Sunday morning, who had learned all the songs from youtube recordings of the songs, and was frustrated that we were playing things differently. I think it leads to frustration all round, really. There are people who are frustrated that we don't sound like a Matt Redman gig, and others (like me) who are worried that the perfect recreation of the songs as per album / gig make it difficult for any congregation members who don't own those albums to keep up, what with all the musical/technical gimmicks Belle Ringer refers to above.
*With the slight proviso that it's not the sort of thing I listen to, since we play power ballads - perhaps that's what our congregation like in non-religious music too - and I'm more of a rock & folk person myself. I've often thought Frank Turner's songs would make for decent congregational hymns. Apart from the words...
[ 18. December 2014, 21:56: Message edited by: Jemima the 9th ]
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
My issue is with the quality and lack of reverence. I think what we need is modern hymns with a bit of strength behind them, rather than a catchy but shallow worship song*.
*I know not all worship songs are shallow!
Oh, I agree - plenty of contemporary worship songs are shallow and trite. Two points in defence of the people who write such songs, though:
- There were surely many low-quality songs / hymns in other eras, it's just that we've forgotten them. In the same way, the worst of today's songs will drift into disuse and the best will remain popular.
- In charismatic evangelical church services, you get the 'worship set' concept where several songs are fitted together, in kind of the same way as the various elements of a liturgical service fit together. So it can be a bit unfair, I think, to pick out a single contemporary chorus and say it's shallow or whatever; instead we should look at the theology and sentiment you get in a series of songs put together by an experienced music leader.
--------------------
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 Pomona:
I am yet to see a CD featuring New English Hymnal hymns.
Recorded collections of traditional hymns are not normally linked to a particular hymn book, but a visit to Amazon suggests that many have a CofE 'theme'. And the choice seems quite large.
I own Perfect Peace, which comprises two CDs of traditional hymns sung by the Westminster Abbey Choir. I have a few other recordings of traditional hymns too, and it wasn't hard to find them, even in pre-internet days.
[ 18. December 2014, 22:18: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I have trouble with the tendency of some bands to do fancy endings, forcing the congregation to stop singing for the last half of the last verse. An otherwise decent congregational piece becomes a performance piece at the end.
At our commitment ceremony years ago, we had O Jesus, I have promised sung to the tune of the Muppet Show! The friend playing keyboard offered us a choice of endings: slightly camped up or utterly over the top; we chose the latter.
Despite the words being printed as hymn verses only those attending, a mix of churchgoers and not, were able to work out and belt out an ending that went something like:
quote:
And then in heaven receive me
And then in heaven receive me
And then in heaven receive me
My Saviour and my friend
Saviour and my friend
Saviour and my friend
Be always my Saviour and my friend.
Watching the video and listening it's quite remarkable. But then it was a well-known tune!
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Regarding commercialisation, ... Whether it's Handel or gospel music, the more secular listeners enjoy it the money money can be made. The record labels know this, and I should think the artistes do as well.
One difference maybe - but those who know music history better than I can correct me - in the "old days" Handel, Bach, black gospel song writers etc may or may not have been paid to write but wrote what they wanted to then presented the composition, whether for mostly listening (the Messiah) or for congregational singing.
*IF* some articles I've read are correct, budding modern CCM writers are told by their secular handlers what to write, or perhaps more specifically what not to write, like OK to say "he" "Lord" "king" but avoid "Jesus" for broader commercial appeal.
Having written this I thought I should page thru my praise band notebook. Hmm. Little mention of Jesus or Christ although some have the imagery without those words - bread and wine, or pierced hands for example. Lots of "holy" and "Lord" and "love." Not that you have to use the name all the time to be a Christian song.
(Trying but not succeeding in finding one or more of the articles, not finding the right search terms. And maybe the articles I've bumped into are wrong about secular control of new sacred songs.)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
*aside* every time I see this thread title, I can't stop thinking of this
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
Nobody has ever told me that I can't sing, so at least for me not singing wasn't due to any discouraging comments. It simply wasn't ever a particularly relevant feature of life, until I started going to church as an adult. I would have answered the question "why don't you sing?" in much the same way as I would answer the question "why don't you play handball?" now. There was no particular reason - I just wasn't doing it, the few times I had tried it it was sort of fun but certainly not enough to make a hobby out of it, and I had no other reason why I would be doing it.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
One difference maybe - but those who know music history better than I can correct me - in the "old days" Handel, Bach, black gospel song writers etc may or may not have been paid to write but wrote what they wanted to then presented the composition, whether for mostly listening (the Messiah) or for congregational singing.
Handel was composer-in-residence for the Duke of Chandos and paid as music master to the Royal Family. Many of his most famous works were commissions.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Al Eluia:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
There are very few people who can't sing, even if they have trouble pitching a tune.
You wouldn't know that from watching American Idol and similar shows!
With greatest respect, Al, and I know you're making a funny, but I think that attitude is actually part of the problem. I don't care for the singers on these shows either, but they can sing, if not in the way or to the quality we'd like in a professional singer. However, if people are told that the level of singing on these shows is "can't sing", then they know for a fact that they themselves definitely can't.
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Karl: quote:
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.
That's true, but there are different types of singing. I expect what bib meant was that there are very few people who are completely incapable of singing a traditional hymn as part of a congregation, and that's true. Singing a tune as part of a group is relatively easy. Singing a harmony part is harder. Singing a solo (well) is harder still. Singing a principal role in an opera (for example, Turandot or The Queen of the Night in 'Magic Flute') is hardest of all.
Most of the people who do these reality TV shows have fairly good natural voices, but either haven't been trained how to use them properly or haven't got a good sense of pitch. Or both. They'd be fine singing in a group as they are, and after a few singing lessons most would be OK doing solos too.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, I am well aware that one can buy Gregorian chant and Anglican choral music in secular outlets - that's not the problem - I don't have an issue with Hillsongs being available in 'secular outlets' per se.
The problem I have with it is the 'deliberate' level of commercialisation - as Belle Ringer has indentified. With commercialisation comes pressure to conform and to pitch things to the lowest common denominator.
I would go so far as to suggest that this is why the 'power-ballad' form has proven so popular rather than other genres of popular/contemporary music.
I have less of an issue with contemporary worship songs that derive from a folk or rock (or indie) idiom than I do with those which deploy the power ballad, build to a crescendo style.
Even then, I think that most folkie or indie influenced Christian music and worship songs are pretty substandard compared to the 'secular' models they seek to emulate.
However we cut it, though, and whatever 'style' we prefer, the fact remains that all of us - regardless of background - are effectively 'socialised' and 'habituated' into whatever the dominant style and paradigm happens to be in our particular neck of the woods.
I first encountered contemporary worship songs at Spring Harvest in 1981 - and at my university Christian Union on Saturday evenings. Prior to that, I was more than happy to go along with traditional hymns and liturgies and so on - because I was familiar with them from my school-days - from Sunday school and school assemblies (and we were a bog-standard comprehensive in South Wales not a posh boy's boarding school) ...
To be frank, my initial reaction to the worship songs I encountered was that they were soppy, sentimental and somewhat exhibitionist - people would close their eyes, sway, raise their hands ... it all looked like attention-seeking to me ...
Gradually, I was drawn into a more full-on charismatic setting and grew accustomed and acclimatised to the music style and way of doing things.
The same would have happened had I, say, headed in more Catholic direction - or a Quaker direction or whatever else - rather than the route I went down.
Perhaps I am too old, but I find myself at a loss to understand what is so 'alien' about a book with the words of the hymn printed on them ... or an organ or a choir or whatever else.
I don't see why these things should be any more or less 'alien' than some prat at the front thinking they're Matt Redman or that girl from Phatfish or whatever it's called exhorting us all to go, 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus ooh ooh Jesus -- Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, I love you Jesus ...' or whatever the latest ditty happens to be ...
More seriously, I do agree with SCK that worship 'sets' can be arranged in a way that takes people through a process or 'journey' - with a theme that develops and resolves. I've seen that done well at times and I don't have an issue with it in principle.
But it's the word 'sentiment' that worries me here ... because it seems to me that the sentiment and mood overtakes the theology far too often.
We've all seen the 'usual suspect' worship songs strung together with some cues and narrative inbetween in order to steer or manipulate people towards particular reactions and responses.
Or, conversely, a set of unrelated worship songs strung together in a set with no discernible rhyme or reason other than that the worship leader liked the tunes or was familiar with them and the band could play them ...
I think the worship 'set' approach can work - if it's properly thought through and done well.
Sadly, it so often isn't and it ends up directionless and gloopy.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
This seems to be coming back to the point that we often reach in discussing these things:
(i) Think about what kind of music is usable for congregational singing. To take an extreme example, you wouldn't ask a congregation to sing Tallis's Spem in Alium but you might (if you had a sufficiently skilled and numerous choir) profitably use it as a setting against which a congregation could engage in contemplation or prayer. OTOH, you wouldn't normally have the choir belting out 'Will your anchor hold in the storms of life' (to pick a title at random) as an anthem- you'd want that as a rousing congregational experience. Same principle applies for different types of contemporary music.
(ii) Whatever you do, do it as well as you can and think about how it will work within the context of other music being used at the same service, and of your wider worship.
IMO, keep these two points in mind and you won't go far or irreparably wrong, whatever kind of music you are using.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Karl: quote:
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.
That's true, but there are different types of singing. I expect what bib meant was that there are very few people who are completely incapable of singing a traditional hymn as part of a congregation, and that's true. Singing a tune as part of a group is relatively easy. Singing a harmony part is harder. Singing a solo (well) is harder still. Singing a principal role in an opera (for example, Turandot or The Queen of the Night in 'Magic Flute') is hardest of all.
Most of the people who do these reality TV shows have fairly good natural voices, but either haven't been trained how to use them properly or haven't got a good sense of pitch. Or both. They'd be fine singing in a group as they are, and after a few singing lessons most would be OK doing solos too.
Yes, but we need to stop telling people who are able to do the first one two (or even three) of those that they "can't sing" because they can't do the fourth. Or at least the 3.5th - singing professionally outside of opera.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Perhaps I'm a grumpy old git but given the choice between a contemporary worship band approach and a trained cathedral choir - or even a hoarse village parish one - I know what I'd prefer. But I wouldn't have said that 30 years ago.
Of course, one can enjoy both, just as one can enjoy both rock and Bach. To coin your phrase, it's not either/or. I love both 16th century polyphony and Kate Bush. (If she ever became a Christian, what amazing worship music she might write. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[Smile]](smile.gif) )
As with anything, there are some good contemporary worship people around (e.g. Sara Groves, Audrey Assad, Lou Fellingham, Iona) as well as stuff that doesn't do a thing for me. I still think that Delirious? were one of the best things ever on the Christian contemporary scene. I always found their brand of soft rock quite contemplative, with some rich melodies and thoughtful lyrics.
Not a fan of the corporate culture of Hillsong and Jesus Culture. Hillsong, however, do write some pretty good songs, although I am suspicious of their theology. Jesus Culture - meh. I've listened to quite a lot of their stuff and - yeah, I'm still meh. I also find it incredibly manipulative, and that worries me. Delirious?, twenty years ago, were HEAPS better.
I love lots of trad hymns. And there are other trad hymns that I find boring, dirge-y or I think have dodgy theology.
quote:
I do think this 'relevance' malarkey is a over-used term though. What's 'relevant' to one person is likely to be completely 'irrelevant' to someone else. If we are constantly chasing so-called 'relevance' we are constantly chasing a chimera.
As someone who sings with my church's worship band, the elusive concept of 'relevance' is not something that I'm concerned about. It's not a big priority for our worship leader either (she is really excellent, both musically and as a leader). I'm 52 and have been round the block a few times myself. I no longer care about what's 'cool' - if I ever did.
Speaking about culture, though, in general, not just Christian stuff ... I am sad that England has long lost its own musical folk culture. I visited Ireland in summer 2000 and it was brilliant being in pubs in the middle of nowhere with local people playing a session of traditional Irish music. Absolutely fantastic. I think it's so great that Ireland still has this, and I dearly wish that England did.
Singing is a wonderful thing to do, a beautiful part of being human, and creative. As Christians we have a lot to give, spiritually, because singing is a spiritual thing - in cultural terms it expresses the soul of a people, and the Bible is full of songs and God's people being encouraged to sing to Him.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
I see what you're getting at, but I think part of the problem *is* those people who sing professionally outside opera without any formal training or (in some cases) much musical knowledge. It gives the impression that you either know how to sing instinctively or you don't, and if you don't there's not much you can do to improve matters. This is not true except for the very small number of people who are completely tone deaf.
I think programmes like 'The Voice' do help to raise awareness that singing is something that can be improved with training and practice, but the pop music industry is geared to selecting stars on their looks.
[x-post - that was a reply to Karl]
[ 19. December 2014, 09:56: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
I see what you're getting at, but I think part of the problem *is* those people who sing professionally outside opera without any formal training or (in some cases) much musical knowledge. It gives the impression that you either know how to sing instinctively or you don't, and if you don't there's not much you can do to improve matters. This is not true except for the very small number of people who are completely tone deaf.
I think it's more people being told that unless they can sing like that they "can't sing" that's the issue. I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.
quote:
I think programmes like 'The Voice' do help to raise awareness that singing is something that can be improved with training and practice, but the pop music industry is geared to selecting stars on their looks.
[x-post - that was a reply to Karl]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think it's more people being told that unless they can sing like that they "can't sing" that's the issue. I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.
Stone me! I that's the second time in a week now that I think I agree with you. Has hell frozen over or something?
[ 19. December 2014, 10:46: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I don't disagree with the tenor of all that, Laurelin. Even if I may disagree on the detail ... I just thought Delirious? and similar were sub-Cold Play but there you go ...
If you saw my CD collection you'd find everything from The Pogues to Bach, Arvo Part to Handel, The Clash, Sex Pistols, world-music, folk music, jazz, blues and Gospel.
I think Albertus strikes the right note.
But that doesn't stop me sounding off at times ...
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
The main point though, is that however we cut it, if we are going to have congregational singing then it should be sing-along-able.
It also has to be recognised, I think, that some Christian traditions such as the Catholics (in most countries - Poland an exception I understand) and the Orthodox aren't necessarily focused on congregational singing at all - but they still have a rich musical and choral tradition - as a visit to any monastery or convent or to a Russian Orthodox service (dig that basso-profundo!) will soon reveal.
I am interested in the idea of these 'emerging' churches which have done away with congregational singing altogether because it is so alien to their particular - presumably previously unchurched - constituency.
I'm interested to hear what they do instead.
I get the impression from what Karl: Liberal Backslider is saying about his church that they tend not to sing but do listen to the music or to other people singing ... which isn't a million miles from what the Orthodox tend to do. Full circle?
It isn't all about singing or congregational singing of course - worship isn't simply about the words we use or the way we articulate them.
Do some form of physical action comprise the worship in these new, non-congregational singing churches?
Do they 'do actions' ... in some kind of post-modernist way?
Physical actions - walking to pilgrim sites, bowing, kneeling, prostrations, crossing oneself, raising one's hands, lighting candles, venerating icons etc etc have long played a part in Christian worship - and can be found in most Christian traditions (apart from the most Reformed where sitting on one's arse and listening to sermons is about as physical as it gets) ...
Are these - or developments/alternatives to these - taking the place of congregational singing in some of the 'newer' or 'emerging' settings?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
....I think Albertus strikes the right note...
Except when I'm singing ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
(Actually, I was always led to believe I 'couldn't sing'. Then I took some lessons to see if I could, and I could, after a fashion! But need to work on it again.)
[ 19. December 2014, 13:14: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Heh heh ...
A chap I knew who was an accomplished singer used to say that virtually everyone can sing, they simply need to be shown how.
He even reckoned I could sing ...
I'd still like to be one of those basso-profundo Russian deacons ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
To judge from this thread, both traditional CofE worship and 'commercialised' charismatic worship are sometimes similar in at least one sense: in both cases ordinary members of the congregation prefer not to sing up too much, and would rather just listen to the 'professionals' at the front.
This is what sometimes puts me off singing in church, though - not being able to hear my own voice. It's in large congregations with modern charismatic music being played that this can be a problem. I don't know if this is to do with the type of mysic being played, the acoustics, or the number of people present.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Karl: quote:
I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.
I never said they did. What I was trying to say in my previous post was that many (most) people need training to sing solos.
Confidence is good too, though. I agree with you there. As someone else said further up the thread, the habit of listening to recorded music tends to make people more self-conscious about singing in public as well. Most of us are capable of telling the difference in quality between our own singing and (let's say) Kiri Te Kanewa's or Pavarotti's.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
...I would have answered the question "why don't you sing?" in much the same way as I would answer the question "why don't you play handball?" now. There was no particular reason - I just wasn't doing it, the few times I had tried it it was sort of fun but certainly not enough to make a hobby out of it, and I had no other reason why I would be doing it.
Interesting comment, thank you.
I grew singing, not daily, but around the campfire on vacations, on car trips, in Scouts. Singing was a normal activity outside church.
I have lots of friends who never listen to or indulge in music in my hearing. I go to their family Christmas, they never gift a CD or talk about swapping i-tunes. Maybe they do music at other times or maybe they have no more interest in music than in handball.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Karl: quote:
I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.
I never said they did. What I was trying to say in my previous post was that many (most) people need training to sing solos.
Confidence is good too, though. I agree with you there. As someone else said further up the thread, the habit of listening to recorded music tends to make people more self-conscious about singing in public as well. Most of us are capable of telling the difference in quality between our own singing and (let's say) Kiri Te Kanewa's or Pavarotti's.
Nonsense. I sound exactly like Pavarotti did in his prime. Honest.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
To judge from this thread, both traditional CofE worship and 'commercialised' charismatic worship are sometimes similar in at least one sense: in both cases ordinary members of the congregation prefer not to sing up too much, and would rather just listen to the 'professionals' at the front.
This is what sometimes puts me off singing in church, though - not being able to hear my own voice. It's in large congregations with modern charismatic music being played that this can be a problem. I don't know if this is to do with the type of mysic being played, the acoustics, or the number of people present.
At the event in the OP anyone doing anything above a sotto voce murmur would have been able to hear themselves very clearly.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Karl: quote:
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.
That's true, but there are different types of singing. I expect what bib meant was that there are very few people who are completely incapable of singing a traditional hymn as part of a congregation, and that's true. Singing a tune as part of a group is relatively easy. Singing a harmony part is harder. Singing a solo (well) is harder still. Singing a principal role in an opera (for example, Turandot or The Queen of the Night in 'Magic Flute') is hardest of all.
Most of the people who do these reality TV shows have fairly good natural voices, but either haven't been trained how to use them properly or haven't got a good sense of pitch. Or both. They'd be fine singing in a group as they are, and after a few singing lessons most would be OK doing solos too.
I'm with Karl. As I mentioned upthread, I think the "professionalization" of church life (imported from corporate business culture) is the problem. We emphasize "excellence" rather than "giving your best"; we emphasize a "polished, professional" presentation rather than recognizing the historic role the church has played in nurturing budding talent (recognizing that a "budding" talent needs to begin somewhere-- and somewhere is not going to be polished, professional act).
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... I sound exactly like Pavarotti did in his prime. Honest.
I sound like Caruso. Robinson Caruso. (My jokes are no better than my singing, see?)
[codefix]
[ 19. December 2014, 16:14: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Except, SvitlanaV2, that in traditional Anglican worship the congregation do tend to sing along with the 'professionals' as you put it - even if these 'professionals' are simply volunteer members of the local choir.
They may not sing with gusto, but they generally do sing. Which isn't always something that happens in RC or Orthodox services. It does vary though, I've visited Orthodox parishes where people sing along with the choir - and don't simply recite the required bits - like the Creed and the Lord's Prayer and the pre-communion prayer which begins, 'Of Thy Mystic Supper, O Son of God, accept me today as a communicant ...'
In fact, I've sung along with the Cherubic Hymn and other parts of the Liturgy with which I'm familiar and nobody has looked askance or taken any notice.
Coming back to Anglicanism, other than the vicar, there aren't likely to be that many 'professionals' around in your typical traditional Anglican service - unless it's in a cathedral and there'll you'll find professional choir directors and so on.
I think that the point you're making is an interesting and valid one in principle, though ... it seems to me that some forms of uber-contemporary 'emerging' style churches have gone full cycle and returned to a situation where congregational singing has been abandoned in favour of listening to a dedicated choir or music group (not necessarily professionals) who sing on their behalf.
Meanwhile, I'm quite intrigued by the issue of non-sung worship (and yes, I know that worship is't all about singing nor what we do or don't do in church) - and I may start a thread on that over on Ecclesiantics.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
The other aspect, of course, is that if it's an 8am BCP service with no musicians or choir present then there is unlikely to be any music at all - it'll be a 'said' (or chanted) service with the congregation joining in the set responses as the clergy person goes 'by the book'.
I suspect that in some of the 'emerging' style churches that have been alluded to - where there is no congregational singing - then there'll be an equivalent of some kind - even if it isn't a formal liturgy as such.
I'm guessing, but I'd imagine that in some of these places they won't have any 'set response' at all but people will simply watch whatever it is that goes or - or perhaps they are given interactive things to do - like cutting things out of pieces of paper or putting pebbles in baskets and whatever happens to be in vogue in these circles ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Hmm. 'Uber-contemporary 'emerging' churches' reinventing Choral Evensong? Interesting!
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
There's nothing new under the sun, Albertus ... it's just that these trendy new 'emerging churches' haven't quite clocked that yet ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
As I mentioned upthread, I think the "professionalization" of church life (imported from corporate business culture) is the problem. We emphasize "excellence" rather than "giving your best"; we emphasize a "polished, professional" presentation rather than recognizing the historic role the church has played in nurturing budding talent (recognizing that a "budding" talent needs to begin somewhere-- and somewhere is not going to be polished, professional act).
One problem might be that people go to Cathedral A with enough members to have a paid organist and professional quality choir of 40 members, then moves to Church B with an amateur pianist and 8 choir members on a good day, and "it's just not the same."
Not unlike people who feel stained glass windows create a worship inducing environment and lack of such windows is "just not the same."
It really is not the same! (Should it matter? To some it just experientially does matter.)
I see two value systems in churches that collide. Pursuit of excellence (stop being sloppy, God deserves the best, which at mid level means auditioning choir members and at the extreme means hiring outsiders for preaching, organ, choir members, band members, handbell chorus, etc, not unlike the "clergy/laity divide" where "they" do it all and "we" sit) vs full active participation (a local member on keyboard with an occasional stumble, open membership choir and band, even lay preachers).
Some middle ground may be valid. You don't want a keyboardist who stumbles so much the rest can't figure out what tune they are to sing. Most churches hire a preacher to, if nothing else, try to control what theologies are presented.
Sometimes there aren't (or don't seem to be) any members with skills or interests to fulfill a function, so hiring is the only option. When a local church's volunteer band leader quit, the church hired a replacement band because hiring was how to quickly fill that hole in a "necessary" function. (Nothing is being done to nurture locals to create a future or substitute band of church members. Churches don't usually see "development of skills" as relevant.)
I reluctantly admit my "full participation" bias is challenged by an elderly in poor health who sings in choir with a voice that makes a frog sound elegant. LOVES to sing, face glows when singing, loud rasping voice dominates the choir's sound with the most irritating vocal tone I've ever heard from a human. Fingernails on blackboard tone quality. The person would be shattered to be told "you need to leave choir, your voice is so hard to listen to it significantly damages the choir's sound and the congregation's experience of the music."
Which is the holy way - kick that person out so congregation cease cringing at the sound, or delight in that person's enjoyment in participating?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Hmm. 'Uber-contemporary 'emerging' churches' reinventing Choral Evensong? Interesting!
The emergent church is an extremely diverse lot, one significant strand is indeed the rediscovery of "high church" liturgical/ contemplative worship by formerly "low church" charismatic-lite evangelicals.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
As a woman who is an alto, one of the best things about traditional church music is that it's actually singable for me - I find so much worship music far too high for me. Worship leaders are usually tenors or sopranos and it's not like worship songs have different parts - whereas traditional congregational hymnody has set parts for sopranos, altos etc which makes life a lot easier. I can't read music so sheet music isn't much help for me unfortunately.
Laurelin, Yerevan, SCK etc - do you help the different kinds of singers in your churches at all? Would you consider getting your worship bands to teach hymns in parts, if you sing hymns?
--------------------
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
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
In traditional Anglican worship the congregation do tend to sing along with the 'professionals' as you put it - even if these 'professionals' are simply volunteer members of the local choir.
They may not sing with gusto, but they generally do sing. Which isn't always something that happens in RC or Orthodox services.
[...]
Coming back to Anglicanism, other than the vicar, there aren't likely to be that many 'professionals' around in your typical traditional Anglican service - unless it's in a cathedral and there'll you'll find professional choir directors and so on.
I referred specifically to mainstream CofE congregations and to megachurch congregations because it's been mentioned on this thread that they often rely on either choristers or on worships bands to sing out rather than putting in too much effort themselves. These musicians are the 'professionals' (in terms of training) I was talking about, not the clergy. But I'm sure that neither mainstream Anglican nor megachurch congregations sit in complete silence during the songs!
I don't know about the RCC or the Orthodox congregations. The RC servces I've been to seem to do okay. Maybe it depends on the cultural background of the RCs in question.
quote:
I'm quite intrigued by the issue of non-sung worship (and yes, I know that worship is't all about singing nor what we do or don't do in church) - and I may start a thread on that over on Ecclesiantics.
I suppose one advantage of non-sung worship is that it can't be commercialised. (Although someone may now tell us that you can go online and order a copy some silent Quaker worship on CD....)
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
My wife's off to choir practice in a few minutes. She practices with a village choir in a medieval church about 7 miles north of here in exchange for singing with them on high-days and holidays.
She'll be singing at their carol service on Sunday.
I'll mention to her that you've referred to such choirs as 'professionals' and see what reaction I get ...
You might hear the laughing from where you are ...
More seriously, though, they are 'directed' by a professional, a woman with a PhD in 18th century church music who grew up Swedenborgian, migrated to the Methodists ('they sang better') and is now Anglican ('I'm still very much non-conformist at heart but I love the liturgy ...').
She teaches flute and piano and also plays the organ and acts as choir-mistress ... that's not her 'professional' job though ... the teaching is.
I have to say, mind, that there is something very 'community building' about choral singing - Chorister's made that point on these boards plenty of times and she's right.
I was recently invited to sing with the choir at our local Methodist church for their morning Harvest Festival service and their evening 'Harvest Celebration' - which I found to my cost, to be about 18 hymns sung back to back with short-readings in between.
We had to sing the final number twice because the minister had enjoyed it so much. I nearly enjoyed stringing him up and flaying him alive afterwards ...
They invited me back to sing in the Christmas cycle but I made my excuses ...
There was something rather jolly and very communal about practicing with them and hearing it all come together - sort of - on the day. But it was a close-run thing ...
They've got a very gifted woman there who organises the choir.
Every church I've been in or been involved with has had some musically gifted people involved and I think there's a lot of scope for such people to help everyone else. So the question posed to Yerevan, SCK et al on whether there's any help/support available to the congregations in their churches when it comes to singing is a good one.
Back in the day, when I was first involved with charismatic evangelical churches, it wasn't unusual to find churches using home-grown material - songs written by members of their congregations.
I think I caught the tail-end of that, it had already become something of a 'scene' when I got involved. I visited Spanish evangelical charismatic churches in the mid to late '80s and they were still using their own home-grown talent and music to some extent - as well as Spanish translations of popular US or British worship songs.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
The One Show has just broadcast what appeared a Skyped version of Adeste Fideles, with individuals joining in from their homes and projected on flat screen TVs. Various voices, one quite operatic.
So some people are singing.
Don't know how they organised it, and I missed the intro.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Gamaliel
They can laugh all they like, but if they're being led by someone with a PhD in a relevant field then they're doing vastly better in the 'professional' music stakes than the vast majority of British churches, I should think! It's all relative, though, I agree.
So long as we have access to the kinds of churches where we feel we can contribute as much or as little as we're able to, musically and otherwise, then perhaps that's the main thing. What other people's churches do or don't do is then irrelevant.
[ 19. December 2014, 18:34: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well yes, that particular parish is fortunate to have someone with those skills and background.
Not everyone has access to that - which is one of the reasons, of course, why traditional Anglican choirs have been in decline.
I'm not particularly commenting on the rights and wrongs and ins and outs of how various churches conduct their worship ... I'm simply making some observations about sung worship - just as over in Ecclesiantics I've started to make some on what we might call 'unsung' worship - the use of physical postures, gestures, actions and so on - rather than the vocal element we've been discussing here.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
...I would have answered the question "why don't you sing?" in much the same way as I would answer the question "why don't you play handball?" now. There was no particular reason - I just wasn't doing it, the few times I had tried it it was sort of fun but certainly not enough to make a hobby out of it, and I had no other reason why I would be doing it.
Interesting comment, thank you.
I grew singing, not daily, but around the campfire on vacations, on car trips, in Scouts. Singing was a normal activity outside church.
As did I. But that was 50-55 years ago. Back then, we sang in school -- music class -- at the elementary level because that was all you could do in music class -- no theory was taught, no instruments were available (unless there was a piano played by the teacher). And we sang at scouts -- with all the embarrassment you would expect from a group of boys ages 12-16. And I remember campfires when at college, where we sang.
BUT....
Today music in schools really doesn't happen (around here) at the primary or elementary level, except possibly one term of learning to play the recorder. If there's a music male teacher who is otherwise popular, (one school in a hundred) then you might get somewhere, but school choirs at that level are girls only, because "boys don't sing" -- at least that's the attitude in the schoolyard.
And at other levels. instruments are king -- lots of bands but very few choirs and precious few boys in them.
As for scouts and such, they've just about disappeared from around here -- and with scouts now aged 8-11 -- remember that school teaches that "boys don't sing" you'd have a fine time trying to get anything sung round a campfire.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by John Holding:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I grew singing, not daily, but around the campfire on vacations, on car trips, in Scouts. Singing was a normal activity outside church.
As did I. But that was 50-55 years ago. Back then, we sang in school...
BUT....
Today music in schools really doesn't happen (around here) at the primary or elementary level, except possibly one term of learning to play the recorder... As for scouts and such, they've just about disappeared from around here
I wondered about scouts, seems like lots of kids are in sports instead, that's not good or bad, just a change.
The last adult campfire I was at no one sang, just chatted. I wished I had brought a uke or guitar, hadn't occurred to me they may not respond if I did!
Perhaps the concept of being as interested in singing as in handball is widespread - "nothing wrong with it, just not something that crosses my mind to do."
Also, perhaps have fewer songs "known by everyone" these days? That would war against spontaneous group singing.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I wondered about scouts, seems like lots of kids are in sports instead, that's not good or bad, just a change. The last adult campfire I was at no one sang, just chatted. I wished I had brought a uke or guitar, hadn't occurred to me they may not respond if I did!
Perhaps the concept of being as interested in singing as in handball is widespread - "nothing wrong with it, just not something that crosses my mind to do." Also, perhaps have fewer songs "known by everyone" these days? That would war against spontaneous group singing.
Actually, my dad was in the (German version of the) boy scouts, and one of the few memories of "amateur singing" I have from my childhood is my father singing (often very funny!) boy scout songs on long drives in the car, typically on our way to some vacation. Quite possibly my dad wanted to motivate us to sing along more than we did - I think for some of these we did the chorus line - but in the end it was little more than a curious variation of the radio to us. We also normally sang a couple of traditional German Christmas songs before opening our gifts under the tree. But again this was more filed under "special cultural things to do at Christmas" than under "normal activity with special content for this occasion".
I also did have a music education at school, and I'm probably doing our music teachers a slight injustice by saying that we did not learn singing at all. But really only a slight one. I remember more having to learn the "circle of fifths" than any particular song. It was more music theory, history and discussion than practice, best I can recall, and next to none of it stuck (in particular, while I must have been able to "read" music to the extent of passing a test or two back then, I have lost all but some basic recognition of music notation).
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stumbling Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 7637
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The One Show has just broadcast what appeared a Skyped version of Adeste Fideles, with individuals joining in from their homes and projected on flat screen TVs. Various voices, one quite operatic.
So some people are singing.
Don't know how they organised it, and I missed the intro.
--------------------
Stumbling in the Master's footsteps as best I can.
Posts: 492 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stumbling Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 7637
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The One Show has just broadcast what appeared a Skyped version of Adeste Fideles, with individuals joining in from their homes and projected on flat screen TVs. Various voices, one quite operatic.
So some people are singing.
Don't know how they organised it, and I missed the intro.
This is from last year's but explains how it was done:
and here is the performance.
(double posted cos hit 'add reply' without typing anything - ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif) )
[ 20. December 2014, 07:51: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posts: 492 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Salicional
Shipmate
# 16461
|
Posted
The comparison of singing to handball that arose earlier on this thread is very interesting! Although I'm not sure that scripture specifically exhorts us to "play handball unto the Lord".
Posts: 68 | From: near Lake Erie | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
