|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why is "Christian music" so unremitingly crap?
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
You used to catch a lot of scorn/snootiness about reading dots rather than playing purely by ear in (rock) guitar circles, as well as a general disdain for anyone that understood theory in any shape or form. Generally it would come from the arrogant and ill-informed who equated formal learning/knowledge with being 'constrained', conforming, or in some other way failing to be a righteous rebel and stick it to The Man.
In church circles I guess it's because the dots will "block the Spirit" or some such bolleaux.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Does remind me of the old joke - "how do you make a lead guitarist turn his amp down?"
"Hand him some sheet music."
Frustrates me no end that the best you can hope for if you look guitar music up on the 'net is Tab. Tab's useful to tell you how to play something - on the guitar a given note can be played on different strings using different frets for different effects (or just because it's easier with the notes before and after and the scale in use) but the dots explicitly tell you about rhythm, melody, harmony and whatnot.
That's what comes of taking up guitar from a classical background, I suppose.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
In my own little group, our leader doesn't read music
I'd be inclined to tell him to go away and come back when he's learnt the fundamental tools of his trade.
Our band's leader scorns reading, says it's a crutch and holds people back, true musicians don't read, they learn by listening.
Oh my goodness me, that's hilarious. What does he think people in an orchestra are doing? Or are they not proper musicians?
I wouldn't call myself a musician. My highest musical achievement is grade 5 piano (I failed grade 7). I've been playing in church for years though. I can, from the sheet music, make a reasonable job of yer average worship song and hymn. I do make occasional mistakes - probably half a dozen bum notes over the course of a service. Hopefully not too many. I play well enough that the congregation know when to come in and when to stop, and where the tune goes.
I can (and have had to) work out how things go from youtube and chords. That's it. I hope it's good enough...
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Our band's leader scorns reading, says it's a crutch and holds people back, true musicians don't read, they learn by listening.
While it's true that some of the greatest entertainers of all time (Kate Smith, Irving Berlin) couldn't read a note, I somehow doubt that your band's leader is in their league.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Perhaps it's that attitude that had whole congregations, for many years, sing nothing harder than Kum ba Ya.
There is certainly space for learning things by heart (Taize is a good example) but think how limiting it would be if everything sung in church was that basic!
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Perhaps (going back to the original question), there is a lack of market forces. Nobody gets up and says, "This Christian book, or this Christian song, sucks." The 'Christian' allows the writer or composer to get away with a lesser product. And, because if you can get away with less you do, this leads to a crappification of the entire genre.
This is not as it was in the past. In the past there was the expectation that the work done for the Church or for God had to be the very best you could get. Hence Michaelangelo to paint the ceilings, and Bach to do the cantatas.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Many classical musicians need the music to play with (not the virtuoso ones, of course, but many of the rank and file). Many contemporary musicians cannot read music (or not well, at least).
One of the reasons behind this difference is that classical musicians mostly have to play pieces to the music*, whereas most contemporary musicians will often improvise as a basic part of their normal playing.
And yet, IME, improvising in worship music is not generally looked on well. So why would a worship leader disparage music reading? Personally, I would have liked to improvise (Many others might not have liked it though).
* This is not as rigid as some people might suggest - there is a lot of listening to others, adjusting ones own playing.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Perhaps it's that attitude that had whole congregations, for many years, sing nothing harder than Kum ba Ya.
There is certainly space for learning things by heart (Taize is a good example) but think how limiting it would be if everything sung in church was that basic!
Oh, yes, I forgot, he also opposed word sheets or word projections. If people are looking at a piece of paper they aren't worshiping, he said. I guess that explains why it was all CCM music, he assumed everyone in the congregation listens to CCM radio and if not they should, so they'll have already memorized the words. No need for word sheets. (He's gone now.)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
In the past there was the expectation that the work done for the Church or for God had to be the very best you could get. Hence Michaelangelo to paint the ceilings, and Bach to do the cantatas.
Paid for by rich patrons. If those two had to sell to the public at a price the public could afford, what would they have churned out?
Churches are no longer patrons of the arts. They hire the cheapest musical labor they can find (some refuse to pay anything, not even cost of purchasing music, people are supposed to donate music).
The really good musicians I know would be glad to play in a church but they do their art elsewhere so they can afford a house and food for the family.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Perhaps (going back to the original question), there is a lack of market forces. Nobody gets up and says, "This Christian book, or this Christian song, sucks." The 'Christian' allows the writer or composer to get away with a lesser product. And, because if you can get away with less you do, this leads to a crappification of the entire genre.
But people are freely able not to buy Christian books or CDs if they don't like what's on offer. They can even write their own books or produce their own music if they think they could do better....
However, maybe the reality is that church communities have a way of nurturing passivity, or else attracting an overabundance of passive people rather than a healthy range of personality types.
quote:
This is not as it was in the past. In the past there was the expectation that the work done for the Church or for God had to be the very best you could get. Hence Michaelangelo to paint the ceilings, and Bach to do the cantatas.
I'm not sure that this was always the case. Most RC churches are not the Sistine Chapel. And I can't believe that they would all have had access to the kinds of trained musicians or chorists who would have been able to perform Bach at an impressive level.
There are probably some very well-attended and wealthy evangelical churches that can afford to hire professional musicians to make their music for them. But such churches then come under fire for being too obsessed with money, too materialistic!
I'm uneasy about institutional churches (historical or contemporary)and their acquisition of wealth, but the fact is that stunningly beautiful church art and architecture and the making of amazing church music cost money, and the money has to come from somewhere.
[ 19. January 2015, 22:49: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
...maybe the reality is that church communities have a way of nurturing passivity
Interesting observation, which would perpetuate the chronic lack of volunteers which reinforces the importance of clergy and expectation they do it all. If someone wants to be active, creative, non-passive in a church, what's the avenue for that?
But also, our culture turns people passive. It's not just flopping in front of the TV, it's being unable to measure up to what the see there and thus unwilling to look foolish by doing anything in public. Like sing, play, offer art, read the lesson, start a group.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Excuse me, but good music doesn't necessarily cost the earth.
To take my own choir as an example: full choir is 7 children - they get paid a nominal amount; the remaining 24 adults are all volunteers who give their time and talent ad gloriam Dei.
I get paid but nothing like the going rate for the amount of work; but I do it because (a) its what I'm trained to do, and (b) I find it fulfilling (for the most part).
The most important thing is that the PP who appointed me and the current chap are both committed to having the highest standard of music possible: that is not to say inaccessible but that whatever is played and/or sung is done to the best possible standard.
It also means that music chosen for liturgies is selected not only because it is appropriate but because it is of a certain standard: unfortunately that can't be said for some churches. There seems to be a belief among some clergy that reducing music and lyrics to the point of inanity makes a worship song 'easy' - it doesn't, it just makes it annoying and exhibits a lack of care on the part of the person choosing it weekin, week out.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
Belting stuff out is really important to me. What I lack in finesse when it comes to singing, I make up for in enthusiasm. This does sometimes happen in church, but (to repeat an oft made sentiment hereabouts) it's the hymns that do it. Singing "death of death, and hell's destruction" with two of my mates was one of the few moments in church lately where I've thought "actually, there might be something in this. Perhaps I'll stick it out for a bit".
Ever tried Sacred Harp singing?
I was here Saturday and Sunday. Way better than church for me these days.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Excuse me, but good music doesn't necessarily cost the earth.
To take my own choir as an example: full choir is 7 children - they get paid a nominal amount; the remaining 24 adults are all volunteers who give their time and talent ad gloriam Dei.
... I find it fulfilling (for the most part).
I have seen excellent musicians contribute their music free week after week. But many musicians don't find church music fulfilling, perhaps because of the selections.
But the payment issue - I didn't think we were talking about choir members who show up twice a week for an hour or so.
When a church demands one person provide every week an opening instrumental, a closing instrumental, accompany the choir, direct the choir, choose the music, put up with the many complaints about the music selections, attend rehearsals, attend every Sunday or find a substitute, triple all that Christmas and Easter seasons, it's an awful lot to expect free!
Add a requirement to attend staff meetings during the week day, you now need either a church music fanatic who is also independently wealthy or you need to pay enough to compensate for not allowing him or her to have a day job. I've seen music pro friends quit when a church insisted on all that for $1000 a month, less than the cost of monthly rent on a house. How is the director suppose to buy groceries?
Bach worked full time, you can't expect that free.
I've never been in a church choir of more than a dozen on a good day, 5 on a bad day. Just a few mediocre singers requires easy music, which bores the good singers, so they don't join.
Two hour rehearsals going over simple phrases again and again and again are painful for a good musician to sit through, but those who need the long rehearsals object if a good musician is allowed to pick up the music in the quick run-thru before church, the slow learners feel like someone else is getting to sing without paying their dues. It's really hard to get the musicians to join a mediocre choir, so it stays mediocre.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Well, Belle Ringer, you've described what I do almost exactly except that you've underestimated the amount of time I spend on choir training (particularly the juniors) and grossly over-estimated the amount of money I get. Hells teeth - if I got anywhere near $1,000 a month I'd be thrilled!
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
...maybe the reality is that church communities have a way of nurturing passivity
Interesting observation, which would perpetuate the chronic lack of volunteers which reinforces the importance of clergy and expectation they do it all. If someone wants to be active, creative, non-passive in a church, what's the avenue for that?
I've come across a number of studies that refer to the problem of clergy dominance and congregational (and parish) passivity. I think it must be the almost inevitable outcome of the clergy/laity divide.
But since most people want to preserve the clergy/laity system, the most obvious thing that an 'active, creative, non-passive' person, IME, is to enter the ministry and find a church that's willing to develop in new ways, or can be persuaded. Things won't be successful if the minister and congregation aren't of one mind.
The person who doesn't want to become a minister needs to join a church that's already embarking on this process and offer his/her services. But I don't think it makes sense to stick with a church that nurtures a passive culture and then complain about passivity. I've been there and done that and it just leads to a lot of frustration.
I don't know if these exist in your country, but Fresh Expressions of church within established denominations are popular now and they need active, creative people to work with them. You have to be in the right place at the right time to be involved with these. If you're a member of a struggling or complacent congregation you're probably in the wrong place, unfortunately. To those who have, more will be given. That seems to be the reality.
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Excuse me, but good music doesn't necessarily cost the earth.
To take my own choir as an example: full choir is 7 children - they get paid a nominal amount; the remaining 24 adults are all volunteers who give their time and talent ad gloriam Dei.
I get paid but nothing like the going rate for the amount of work.
I think it's all relative, rather like 'affordable housing'. What one church can manage, many others cannot.
From my perspective it would be interesting to know if there are any stats about British churches and the quality and cost of their music provision. How many CofE churches are like yours - able to attract good numbers of willing volunteers of high quality and/or to find the resources to pay good musicians even quite a low fee? How many British Nonconformist churches pay their organists? (Only a small minority, I imagine.) What about charismatic evangelicals - are they especially reluctant to pay musicians, even if they could afford to? Overall, what sort of income do churches normally achieve before they consider paying musical staff? These are the kinds of questions I'd love to see addressed.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
I think Belle Ringer's post illustrates a big difference between expectations, possibly cross-Pond, or possibly just denominational/tradition-based.
This year I gave out 60 little "thank you" gifts to volunteers at our place (weekly attendance ~300-ish across morning and evening excluding sprogs). That was only to people involved in music, service leading, PA, projection, or regular preaching. Not one of those people is paid for their contribution*, and most of them involve preparation/rehearsal/setting up/breaking down etc. in addition to the actual time in the services.
Of course, because it's a big team, it means that people don't have to do it week in week out, although there are inevitably frequent flyers and occasional fillers-in across the pool. But even so, the expectation is that this stuff is done from within the fellowship as part of one's service to the fellowship (and God, natch).
I do know someone who was taken on in a paid role elsewhere to be the church's Musical Director, but that's the exception rather than the rule in my experience. (And of course, as MD, they were then trying to develop, motivate and encourage a bunch of volunteers from a congregation who had the attitude "Well, you're getting paid to do all this, why should we?", despite the salary hardly constituting a living wage**).
*Actually, not quite true. One of them is the Children's and Youth Pastor, and he's salaried. And the 'guest' preachers I think are nominally entitled to a pulpit fee but I don't think anyone who's internal ever actually takes it.
**This person is fortunate in not having to worry about having a living wage, so happily not an issue, but also limiting on who you're going to get if you are looking for a pro
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Well, Belle Ringer, you've described what I do almost exactly except that you've underestimated the amount of time I spend on choir training (particularly the juniors) and grossly over-estimated the amount of money I get. Hells teeth - if I got anywhere near $1,000 a month I'd be thrilled!
Fantastic that you found something that fulfills you!
Fantastic that you can afford to do it for little or no pay!
If most churches had someone who found directing church music fulfilling and who could afford to spend that much time for token or no pay, this thread wouldn't exist. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Most musicians need to earn a living. Even if they find church music fulfilling, they need to earn enough to live on. Bach was paid, that's why he could use his time writing music instead of digging ditches.
If a church wants good music they need to be willing to pay for it unless someone like you shows up willing to do it free. Most churches don't have you, insist music should be free, and then wonder why the quality is poor.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
As to this thread, it's probably significant to point out not all full time church musicians are Bach, and his music was considered crap by some. Churches in any age tend to detest creativity.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Belle Ringer
The implication of some of your posts above is that the churches you're thinking of could well afford to pay the going rate for good musicians, but simply don't want to. Is this the case?
What sort of churches are they? Independent evangelical? Episcopalian? Lutheran? IOW, is this a 'problem' for one type of church rather than another? If the evangelicals don't like paying for top musicians, what else do they spend their money on?
Regarding your claim that most churches 'detest creativity', we should remember that many of the less prestigious Protestant denominations grew up precisely because ordinary people felt out of place amid the High Church grandeur of the RCC and the Anglicans, etc. Beauty was never their focus, except during certain historical interludes when some of their churches grew quite rich and wanted to appear cultured.
Maybe churchgoers should simply accept that if they want a top aesthetic experience they'll have to be prepared to seek out those churches that make this a high priority, rather than sticking with the denominations they know. They should vote with their feet.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Belle Ringer
The implication of some of your posts above is that the churches you're thinking of could well afford to pay the going rate for good musicians, but simply don't want to. Is this the case?
The church I'm most involved with (mainline) pays their clergy over $80,000, sends the youth on ski trips, and runs a surplus in the budget. They fired the (best I've ever sung with in church) music director on the grounds a church shouldn't pay for music, asked him to continue unpaid and when he said no (he's not from this denomination) they told the choir to continue with no director. (They quit; a member who hates directing finally grit his teeth and did it for a couple years, is that healthy? His lack of delight in it shows.)
Meanwhile a volunteer organist played a dozen years, got sick, a vestry member told me no they won't add an organist slot to the budget, the fact that he had played free proves churches don't need to pay organists. Meanwhile, they sent the resigning head of altar guild on a two week tour in UK (from USA) as a thank you for her five years of work. They now struggle with mediocre pianists trying to learn organ, and complain about the lack of quality.
Yes they can afford and yes they refuse. They are against paying for music as a principle.
Many churches can't pay for music (some can't even pay a clergy person). The solution is - well, one I used to sing in decided to buy CDs for the choir to sing along with so they could have a big church choir sound. (I quit, not worth the hour round trip and gas.)
Some think church music has to be high quality classical, and moan about not getting it free when they can't afford it.
But others do fine by using the music that fits well the talents of who they have. Musical members get to do their music, non-musical get to enjoy petty good music in whatever genre the musicians can handle well - country & western, black gospel, folk. Lots of amateur musicians can handle these well.
The problem arises when a church demands a different kind of music than members can gladly offer. Or expects full time work without adequate pay from someone who has to be the primary breadwinner for a family.
The concept of churches as patrons of the arts has flipped, churches now expect artists to be patrons of churches.
(Charities, too, want musicians to play all evening free. Basically I suspect the culture regards music as free, turn on the radio, so why would anyone pay for it?)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Most musicians need to earn a living. Even if they find church music fulfilling, they need to earn enough to live on.
Yes indeed. On the other hand, most churches neither want nor need a full-time music director. What is required is Sunday mornings, plus an evening a week for choir practice, extras at Christmas and Easter, plus the non-contact time (choosing music etc.). That can't be more than 10 hours a week. If you have multiple choirs, maybe it's a little more.
Then they need an organist (assuming we're talking traditional choir'n'organ) for roughly the same weekly commitment. If the organist and choir director are the same person, there's some overlap (but not complete - a music director/organist still presumably needs time to practice the organ).
There's no way an average church has enough work for a musician to make up a full-time job. A cathedral, possibly, but your typical church is nowhere close.
The church that was expecting it's (very part-time) music director to show up for weekday staff meetings is either completely barking mad, or used to musicians whose other job is as a peripatetic music teacher or similar, with a flexible schedule so that they could arrange to show up midweek.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
[qb] There's no way an average church has enough work for a musician to make up a full-time job. A cathedral, possibly, but your typical church is nowhere close.
The church that was expecting it's (very part-time) music director to show up for weekday staff meetings is either completely barking mad,...
Having seen them run through a series of high quality musicians each of whom lasts about six months, I think barking mad is a reasonable guess. It's a small church that wants a "full" music program: multiple services, soloists, choir, band, handbells, children's, youth. That's 6 different rehearsals per week. ASA around 100.
Not full time, but not just one evening and an hour on Sunday.
I think as with many things church, people get an abstract idea of what a church should look and sound like and then fuss when their limited resources can't match that image, whether a large choir in a small congregation or pipe organ sound from an inexpensive keyboard or a classical solo from a congregation lacking (willing) classical singers.
The key is find out what you do well, and do that, even if it's penny whistle and rotating cantors instead of organ and choir.
A lot of Christian music as written is crap but done by decent musicians using the style and instruments they are good at, even Kum By Ya can be effective, yes?
(Of course, amateur musicians don't necessarily know what they are or aren't good at.)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
Belting stuff out is really important to me. What I lack in finesse when it comes to singing, I make up for in enthusiasm. This does sometimes happen in church, but (to repeat an oft made sentiment hereabouts) it's the hymns that do it. Singing "death of death, and hell's destruction" with two of my mates was one of the few moments in church lately where I've thought "actually, there might be something in this. Perhaps I'll stick it out for a bit".
Ever tried Sacred Harp singing?
I was here Saturday and Sunday. Way better than church for me these days.
That is wonderful, I think the nearest I've got to that sort of singing was at a workshop at a folk festivel. Thank you ever so much, no I'd never heard of it - I'm going to look and see if there's SH singing near me.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Belle Ringer:
Ah, your post above clarifies things.
I agree that Western (or even global) culture now regards music as something that should be free. The pop star Will I Am makes the point that musicians have to find some way of generating an income that doesn't just involve them playing their instruments. But he also implies that it's always been about more than that.
It could be said that by being a patron of the arts the RCC wasn't a disinterested admirer whose goal was merely aesthetic perfection in the service of God; the Church was using music and art as a way of displaying its wealth and power. Plus, it employed creative people who would then be less likely to bite the hand that fed them (and I think there was increasing criticism of the Church from the late Middle Ages onwards)....
IOW, there's almost always an ulterior motive. Clearly, the American mainline churches haven't worked out what current benefit they can gain from paying to have top quality musical performers. And the performers haven't considered what kid of 'value added' impact they can bring to the table.
[ 21. January 2015, 13:25: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The key is find out what you do well, and do that, even if it's penny whistle and rotating cantors.
Are they like a Christian version of Whirling Dervishes? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
And the schedule: all Sundays, all religious holidays -- means that it's difficult to make up the shortfall by holding two jobs. I suppose you could be the music teacher at a school, which would give you employment weekdays, or with a theater or orchestra, which would mean you would work all evenings.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Ever tried Sacred Harp singing?
I was here Saturday and Sunday. Way better than church for me these days.
I don't know anything about Sacred Harp Singing, but lots of people join secular choirs and enjoy singing religious and non-religious music without having to share a particular faith.
Religious music can now be written, performed and enjoyed by people of all religious beliefs and none. Maybe the future of religious music in the West is in the hands of the non-believers, since the believers will either be too few, too poor, too reluctant or too badly trained to be able to produce it and pay for it themselves.
[ 21. January 2015, 13:47: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Ever tried Sacred Harp singing?
I was here Saturday and Sunday. Way better than church for me these days.
I don't know anything about Sacred Harp Singing, but lots of people join secular choirs and enjoy singing religious and non-religious music without having to share a particular faith.
Religious music can now be written, performed and enjoyed by people of all religious beliefs and none. Maybe the future of religious music in the West is in the hands of the non-believers, since the believers will either be too few, too poor, too reluctant or too badly trained to be able to produce it and pay for it themselves.
Many Sacred Harp singers are non-believers or adhere to other faiths.
Jemima the 9th: The UK Sacred Harp website is here, and it looks like the listing of house group and all-day singings is pretty extensive. Info on the annual convention in London is here; a convention is two days of singing.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Many Sacred Harp singers are non-believers or adhere to other faiths.
That was my point.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
I don't mean exactly the same thing you said, but I should have elaborated.
Religious music can of course be written, performed and enjoyed by people who have no religious beliefs as well as people who espouse beliefs other than those expressed in the music. But most of the people who perform religious music -- I'd guess in fact the vast majority of them -- are either performing in a religious context they belong to or are professionals. Sacred Harp is different, and, I think, unique. No one ever gets paid to go to a Sacred Harp singing, and the vast majority of the people who sing Sacred Harp do not subscribe to the music's theology. The only thing that I know of that's comparable are Messiah sing-alongs, but I'd bet the rent there aren't a lot of Jewish people at them, whereas you do meet quite a few Jewish people singing Sacred Harp.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Jemima the 9th: The UK Sacred Harp website is here, and it looks like the listing of house group and all-day singings is pretty extensive. Info on the annual convention in London is here; a convention is two days of singing.
Thanks very much for those. I shall investigate further - I would love to give it a try.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Maybe the future of religious music in the West is in the hands of the non-believers, since the believers will either be too few, too poor, too reluctant or too badly trained to be able to produce it and pay for it themselves. [/QB]
N'ah it's in the hands of Hillsong who are none of the things in the above list.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I agree that Western (or even global) culture now regards music as something that should be free. The pop star [URL=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHNiigP0ck0] Will I Am makes the point that musicians have to find some way of generating an income that doesn't just involve them playing their instruments.
...
IOW, there's almost always an ulterior motive.
Interesting interview. Explains artists putting their music on YouTube free; why not if those who would contract with you to sell don't share the income. Old record industry tricks reportedly left artists with million record sales in debt to the company instead of earning anything.
As to ulterior motives, thy name is human.
The church band I dropped out of last week was supposed to split into two bands that would alternate, no one person or band would be essential, a relaxed schedule for each band member. When the original leader left (church politics), the clergy hastily hired a band leader - who killed the thought of a second band not led by him. He regularly forgets to include some (specific) names on emails, requires some singers stand ten feet from any vocal mic (i.e. be unheard). The more the numbers dwindle the more essential he is and thus the more secure his paycheck. Musicians love secure gigs.
We all do ulterior motives.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Perhaps (going back to the original question), there is a lack of market forces. Nobody gets up and says, "This Christian book, or this Christian song, sucks." The 'Christian' allows the writer or composer to get away with a lesser product. And, because if you can get away with less you do, this leads to a crappification of the entire genre.
This is not as it was in the past. In the past there was the expectation that the work done for the Church or for God had to be the very best you could get. Hence Michaelangelo to paint the ceilings, and Bach to do the cantatas.
Pretty much agree with your first paragraph. It's amazing what people can get away with in terms of lack of artistic merit so long as they give it a veneer of 'spiritual' merit, doing it for the Lord and so on.
It's a difficult area, because on one level I think God really does care more about the sincerity of our worship than some kind of secular assessment of whether the music is any good. But if you're a person with any kind of musical sensibilities, getting through a service where people who don't really know what they're doing manage to wreck songs that weren't very good in the first place can be a bit of a struggle, as can listening to Christian radio.
I would say, though, that this is not entirely a new problem, in the sense that it doesn't just afflict the modern 'pop' music side of Christian music. Hymn books are littered with really uninspired tunes that plonk along in 8686 metre and hit the dominant and tonic exactly where you'd expect... and these rub shoulders with beautiful melodies by some of the finest composers who ever lived.
Nor is all modern Christian music terrible. There are things in my CD collection that I'm not at all embarrassed by, and indeed there are some albums that I would consider just as good as anything 'secular' that I have. And some artists straddle the line between CCM and secular in fascinating ways (such as the band Thrice which I am rather fond of at the moment - Biblical references absolutely everywhere in the lyrics if you know what you're looking for),
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
The hopeful thing is that the mills of God do grind, however slowly. The truly crappy songs and material go away, unloved and unsung. The good does stay on. So very gradually over time there is mostly gold, with a thin layer of modern junk that will eventually and mercifully be forgotten.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Signaller
Shipmate
# 17495
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
But most of the people who perform religious music -- I'd guess in fact the vast majority of them -- are either performing in a religious context they belong to or are professionals.
Major pond difference here, perhaps. ISTM in the UK a very large proportion of religious music is now performed by secular, amateur choirs. The average local choral society will almost invariably be performing mainly religious works (and probably both rehearses and performs in church premises), but its membership reflects the general population, with a minority of active churchgoers.
Sometimes discovering what the words actually mean (if the piece is in Latin or other unknown tongue) can be quite a shock ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posts: 113 | From: Metroland | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The hopeful thing is that the mills of God do grind, however slowly. The truly crappy songs and material go away, unloved and unsung. The good does stay on. So very gradually over time there is mostly gold, with a thin layer of modern junk that will eventually and mercifully be forgotten.
Well, I've already given you my opinion about material in the hymn book which is far from modern.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I'm afraid it is a centuries-long process.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
However, what I've read on the Ship is that worship songs fall out of fashion fairly quickly, so presumably the charismatic or Pentecostal churchgoer only has to wait a few years for the songs they dislike to be replaced. If you dislike a whole genre rather than just a few songs, though, maybe you have to wait a bit longer for the 'problem' to pass.
For myself, having spent most of my life as a British Methodist, I've had to grow accustomed a staple diet of traditional hymns, but there have been fashions for other things. Socially engaged modern hymns were around for a while, although some people found the lyrics ugly. Then there was Taizé. Neither seems to be hugely popular now.
I have fond memories of school assemblies in which we kids sang about black and white getting along together. Probably not very PC these days, but racial, religious and class segregation is an even bigger problem in our communities now, so perhaps we need more worship songs on this theme. And I miss 'Kum Ba Ya' - how many other hymns call upon the Lord to be present in the banal ups and downs of other people's lives? You can even personalise this song by changing the verb! But we don't live in a hippyish, cross-legged, lovely-dovey age any more.
It's quite hard, actually, to say what sort of 'Christian music', in terms of lyrics, ethos and sound, would really serve the desires and concerns of the present. And now that we're all so used to the highest quality writing, performances and production in the secular music scene what churches can offer on a weekly basis will hardly ever match up.
[ 24. January 2015, 00:40: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul.
Shipmate
# 37
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
However, what I've read on the Ship is that worship songs fall out of fashion fairly quickly, so presumably the charismatic or Pentecostal churchgoer only has to wait a few years for the songs they dislike to be replaced.
Heh. You'd think wouldn't you? I left the church for a decade and a half and when I came back, they were mostly singing new songs, some old hymns and about once every 2 or 3 weeks, an "oldie" from the 90s.
None that I disliked particularly though.
Actually what tripped me up more was to turn up one week to see that Amazing Grace was being sung and so I go into belt-it-out mode only to find it was based on some new arrangement from a modern worship album and my timing was all discombobulated. I've since heard the track itself and quite like the version but it was a bit of a shock at first.
Posts: 3689 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Música evangelica that's being played in Brazil is very bad. I only need to hear one or two notes to perceive: "oh crap, it's evangelical".
I don't think this has necessarily to do with the skills of the musicians or even the composers. Most of them are quite good at their trade. I think it's more deliberate that. They go for sequences of chords that try to invoke some pumped-up emotion, and that can be really off-putting.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
However, what I've read on the Ship is that worship songs fall out of fashion fairly quickly, so presumably the charismatic or Pentecostal churchgoer only has to wait a few years for the songs they dislike to be replaced. If you dislike a whole genre rather than just a few songs, though, maybe you have to wait a bit longer for the 'problem' to pass.
For myself, having spent most of my life as a British Methodist,
You only have to look through any hymn book which either gives the copyright date for modern songs or the birth and death years of the lyricist (and composer in music editions) to see that most of the songs that were contemporary to the compilation are unused.
As a Methodist you should know that we only use a small proportion of the hymns Charles Wesley wrote, and many of them are no longer to the tunes Wesley used.
The majority of songs from any era in any style have passed away. A very few are passed on to future generations.
'Twas ever so. There is nothing new under the sun.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paul.:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
However, what I've read on the Ship is that worship songs fall out of fashion fairly quickly, so presumably the charismatic or Pentecostal churchgoer only has to wait a few years for the songs they dislike to be replaced.
Heh. You'd think wouldn't you? I left the church for a decade and a half and when I came back, they were mostly singing new songs, some old hymns and about once every 2 or 3 weeks, an "oldie" from the 90s.
Having sometimes joined a Christian sing-along group at nursing homes, I see one thing today's oldsters have that we are losing is commonly known songs.
All ages of oldsters know many of the same Christian songs, because no matter which years of their lives they were in church, if today they are 100 or 70, they were singing a lot of the same songs in their churches. (And all the songs were rhythmically easy).
But today when I walk into a friend's church once every 4 years, I don't know any of the songs, they've all changed. That suggests in our nursing homes people half a decade apart in age won't know the same songs, and most songs will be only half remembered because they were sung only a short time.
How will we do singalongs in our nursing home? How will alzheimers patients join in if no song was deeply embedded through decades of repeat? The seach for always the newest is robbing us of shared culture across the years.
Actually, most of the songs the group leads at the nursing homes are crap to me, because they are all from the fundi evangelical side, which approach to Christianity I went thru for a while and then rejected.
So maybe a lot of "what is crap" is just where you sit at the big Christian table.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
However, what I've read on the Ship is that worship songs fall out of fashion fairly quickly, so presumably the charismatic or Pentecostal churchgoer only has to wait a few years for the songs they dislike to be replaced. If you dislike a whole genre rather than just a few songs, though, maybe you have to wait a bit longer for the 'problem' to pass.
For myself, having spent most of my life as a British Methodist,
You only have to look through any hymn book which either gives the copyright date for modern songs or the birth and death years of the lyricist (and composer in music editions) to see that most of the songs that were contemporary to the compilation are unused.
As a Methodist you should know that we only use a small proportion of the hymns Charles Wesley wrote, and many of them are no longer to the tunes Wesley used.
The majority of songs from any era in any style have passed away. A very few are passed on to future generations.
'Twas ever so. There is nothing new under the sun.
I didn't say anything to contradict this. (Indeed, I went on to talk about the more modern songs that have come in and gone out of fashion in Methodist churches.) My point was simply that it appears to happen more quickly in the charismatic evangelical context.
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Having sometimes joined a Christian sing-along group at nursing homes, I see one thing today's oldsters have that we are losing is commonly known songs.
All ages of oldsters know many of the same Christian songs, because no matter which years of their lives they were in church, if today they are 100 or 70, they were singing a lot of the same songs in their churches. (And all the songs were rhythmically easy).
But today when I walk into a friend's church once every 4 years, I don't know any of the songs, they've all changed. That suggests in our nursing homes people half a decade apart in age won't know the same songs, and most songs will be only half remembered because they were sung only a short time.
How will we do singalongs in our nursing home?
I think it'll be difficult to have churchy sing-alongs in many British residential homes in 20-30 years time because so few of the residents will know any Christian songs. Some evangelicals will perhaps set up their own residential homes and there might be some common ground in that context.
But do you think secular sing-alongs will go any better? The musical tastes of today's youth are so fragmented it's hard to imagine that in 50-70 years' time a large group of elderly people in a room are all going to want to sing along to One Direction or nod their heads to 'All About That Bass'.
[ 24. January 2015, 16:27: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
FWIW, I helped kickstarting Donny Todd's "Kingdom Come" album, which has just been announced as finished. Here's a sneak peek.
I think it's pretty decent Christian music...
--------------------
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
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think it'll be difficult to have churchy sing-alongs in many British residential homes in 20-30 years time because so few of the residents will know any Christian songs. Some evangelicals will perhaps set up their own residential homes and there might be some common ground in that context.
Most Evangelical/Charismatic songs come and go so quickly that they don't have time to get established in a musician's repertoire, let alone the congregation's memory.
quote:
But do you think secular sing-alongs will go any better? The musical tastes of today's youth are so fragmented it's hard to imagine that in 50-70 years' time a large group of elderly people in a room are all going to want to sing along to One Direction or nod their heads to 'All About That Bass'.
If they stick to sixties music, they will be OK. Most kids know a fair bit of that.
Anyway, two reasons for "Crap Christian Music" are that i) too much which is written for performance is used for worship and ii) modern composers can't do endings. FFS, you can't 'fade-out' in a worship meeting, so the song wanders off down some blind alley with the worship leader "Oh, Oh, Oh"-ing which makes me cringe.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
... you can't 'fade-out' in a worship meeting, so the song wanders off down some blind alley with the worship leader "Oh, Oh, Oh"-ing which makes me cringe.
Oh, you had to remind me - I *hate* fade outs of congregational songs!
I'm also not thrilled with random instrumental interludes (is it or is it not a congregational song?) or fancy endings that depart from the previous tune. Congregation have to drop out when the melody and rhythm change at the end.
What do y'all think of significant slowing down at the end of a congregational song? I equate it with show, not sing-along, but it is common enough to probably not be too disruptive of congregation members singing.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Most Evangelical/Charismatic songs come and go so quickly that they don't have time to get established in a musician's repertoire, let alone the congregation's memory.
Does this mean that evangelicals can't even have singalongs in church??
My experience of evangelicalism is mostly via black Pentecostal churches, where it's normal for individuals to break spontaneously into song and then to be joined by the rest. But this presumably isn't possible in the charismatic evangelical congregations if hardly anyone really knows the songs, certainly not off by heart. Pentecostal musicians have to be able to play by ear because congregations often initiate the singing themselves, rather than waiting for the musicians or leaders to decide what they're going to sing. This sounds very different from the charismatic evangelical experience.
Perhaps having a rapid turnover of songs is a way for charismatic leaders to keep control. If songs are introduced and discarded quickly then congregations won't have the time to develop favourites, won't be able to demand that particular songs be sung more often during worship, and won't slip into Pentecostal habits....
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
FWIW, I helped kickstarting Donny Todd's "Kingdom Come" album, which has just been announced as finished. Here's a sneak peek.
I think it's pretty decent Christian music...
So do I. But as we are talking about congregational singing it does seem to be pitched too high - especially for untrained voices.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
