CE Norwich Cathedral 7th October 2015

[Wolsey]

I certainly would not take Ravenshaw at that pace. Far too fast.

I disagree completely. By coincidence, we had this hymn this morning, and the tempo heard in the broadcast was quite appropriate.

[Magnificat]

[QUOTE=Vox Humana;512939] (I found the gabbled psalms more distasteful).

Vox

I agree with you on this.

It is impossible to ponder and meditate upon the words when sung at the speed Norwich took it ( one psalm, two chants by the way!)

VCC.

[Vox Humana]

Well, yes, there wasn't any chance to grasp the meaning of the words before they were gone, all of them despatched without any real impression of emotion or engagement. I thought the psalm actually sounded rather sterile - which is a great shame since the choir itself was terrific: good voices, good tuning and all the rest.

I don't think there was anything wrong with changing the chant though. A psalm may change its mood several times and each mood deserves its own general characterisation. I'm all in favour of portraying these - and I also like the organist to assist the choir by doing the same. There is drama in the psalms and it's rewarding to hear it.* If the Lord is thundering out of heaven I don't expect him to do it to a complacent major chant accompanied by Choir Organ flutes. Admittedly, the shift in psalm 37 is not so much one of mood as one of focus - but a change of chant is still appropriate.

Of course, if one were strictly purist, one would disallow all double chants. Several discerning nineteenth-century chant books do precisely that and their compilers knew what they were about. Almost no psalm consistently organises its sense in pairs of verses throughout (or in groups of three) and nor is there any structural logic in having a chant that straddles verses. If one wants real consistency, one chant per verse is the only option for nearly every psalm. But imagine suffering forty-one verses to a solitary single chant in the manner of A. H. Brown's Anglican Psalter! Oh, I'm so glad I'm not a purist :)

* Although I have to say that I increasingly find the psalmists conjuring up disturbing images of ISIS's atrocities. I mustn't get political, but it does contextualise their perspective - and not to their advantage.

[alycidon]

I disagree completely. By coincidence, we had this hymn this morning, and the tempo heard in the broadcast was quite appropriate.

I would have been very surprised if everyone agreed with me, but you appear cross that I should have had the temerity to express an opinion that differs from yours. Hymns need to be sung with understanding, and this is not possible if they are taken too fast.

But there we are, I am just a Scottish Evangelical and I suppose that my opinions are coloured by that fact.

[Finzi4ever]

I'm not surprised at what you say, but I do wish the Beeb would use the same guiding principle for sports broadcasts which always over-run. Anyhow, if what you say is the case, why not shorten the organ postlude rather than gee-up the hymns.

I can never be accused of dragging hymns, but I do reserve the right to play contemplative words, and tunes like Ravenshaw, at a respectable speed. It is strange, isn't it, that clergy who would never dream of gabbling the verbal parts of the service, seem to be quite happy to gabble the sung parts?

But, as you correctly say, it is a matter of personal preference, and I am in the north of Scotland where church singing tends to be slower, rather than quicker.

I really bridle at the suggestion of shortening the voluntary. Please don't encourage the Beeb to return to those bad old days of fading out the postlude. To me and others it's still very much part of the service. To fade it is far more insulting to its composer and performer than taking than taking out the odd verse of a hymn or speeding it up a tad.

[ardcarp]

And Heaven forbid one should shorten the Bridle March.

[alycidon]

I really bridle at the suggestion of shortening the voluntary. Please don't encourage the Beeb to return to those bad old days of fading out the postlude. To me and others it's still very much part of the service. To fade it is far more insulting to its composer and performer than taking than taking out the odd verse of a hymn or speeding it up a tad.

Hello Finzi4ever

My humblest apologies for causing you to have an apoplectic seizure over the clumsy wording of my previous post. I agree with what you say one hundred percent, and what I was trying to convey was that perhaps the organist could choose a shorter outgoing voluntary to fit the timing of the service.

But that itself is a seriously flawed argument, because it is just not possible to time a service to the last thirty seconds, so I apologise for being rather stupid over that one. I agree with you, that it is better to lose a verse of a hymn, rather than to rush it.

While we are on the subject of insults to composers et al, the one thing that makes me incandescent with rage, is the modern predisposition to expunge 'these' and 'thous' from traditional hymns to 'bring them up to date'. This is cultural vandalism of the very worst kind, and if older hymns are unsuitable, don't sing them, and certainly don't muck about with them.

It's good to chat to a Finzi lover.

All the best

Ian J

[ardcarp]

Compare Bunyan's original words to Who would true valour see with the dumbed-down version in (for instance) Songs of Praise. Bring on the lions!
Not to mention the hobgoblins.

[alycidon]

.........................or the foul fiends!

[DracoM]

Who would true valour see,
Let him come hither;
One here will constant be,
Come wind, come weather
There’s no discouragement
Shall make him once relent
His first avowed intent
To be a pilgrim.

Whoso beset him round
With dismal stories
Do but themselves confound;
His strength the more is.
No lion can him fright,
He’ll with a giant fight,
He will have a right
To be a pilgrim.

Hobgoblin nor foul fiend
Can daunt his spirit,
He knows he at the end
Shall life inherit.
Then fancies fly away,
He’ll fear not what men say,
He’ll labour night and day
To be a pilgrim.

[light_calibre_baritone]

What's new? Words to hymns being changed isn't just confined to now... Hills of the north rejoice (Charles Oakley) is different in NEH.

[ardcarp]

Words to hymns being changed isn't just confined to now.

I think that was the point I was making in #23

[alycidon]

What's new? Words to hymns being changed isn't just confined to now... Hills of the north rejoice (Charles Oakley) is different in NEH.

True enough, but the changes would have been relatively slight and sympathetic, usually. The changes made these days go beyond the bounds of reasonable editing.