CE Salisbury Cathedral Wed, 27th Jan 2016

[DracoM]

CE Salisbury Cathedral



Order of Service:



Introit: In Christ we see our God (Richard Shephard)
Responses: Radcliffe
Psalms 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 (Cutler, Goss, Jones, Walford Davies, Rogers)
First Lesson: Genesis 4: 8-16
Office Hymn: Jesu, thou joy of loving hearts (Eisenach)
Canticles: Chichester Service (Lennox Berkeley)
Second Lesson: Hebrews 13: 1-6
Anthem: Komm, Jesu, komm (Bach)
Final Hymn: Hail to the Lord's anointed (Crüger)


Organ Voluntary: Präeludium in C BuxWV 137 (Buxtehude)



John Challenger, Organist and Assistant Director of Music
David Halls, Director of Music

[DracoM]

Reminder: today @ 3.30 p.m.

[DracoM]

Brave choices all round - Berkeley and Bach are only the most ambitious choir's idea for an easy ride!
Steely top to the treble line, a teeny tad over-miked for my taste - and we do NOT say that very often on CE!
The odd untidiness, but in repertoire like that, and with young singers leading, a tiny quibble only.

[light_calibre_baritone]

Found lack of text in JSB very disappointing.

I sometimes think cathedral choirs should think twice about repertoire like that (I speak from experience as an ex Lay Clerk of a v. well known establishment btw and a current full-time freelance singer, not some some arm-chair fanatic) - I often find the rehearsal process doesn't allow for real focus on pronunciation and interpretation of foreign text; this is a lack of rehearsal time issue for sure, but the mind-set of a cathedral choir can often be a bit "you get a run-through in the service", yeah, you can sightread the notes but I'd love a real emotional attachment to those words, then it really comes off the page

Rest of service was what I'd have expected!

[teamsaint]

Don't you just love dismissive side swipes.

[light_calibre_baritone]

Don't you just love dismissive side swipes.

Professional opinion, mate. Not saying the choir was bad or out of tune or terrible; far from it.

I didn't feel the words were present. End of.

[underthecountertenor]

Don't you just love dismissive side swipes.

This remark, following l_c_b's well-argued and perfectly respectful comments (based on experience) suggests to me, once again, that the usual rules of music criticism don't apply to this forum, at least when dealing with choirs with a top line of children. The rule here appears to be that any negative remarks about performance must be heavily diluted, whereas unqualified (and often partisan) adulation is acceptable and indeed welcome. I can go to the so-called music critics of my local free newspaper if that's what I want to read.

If comments like l_c_b's are going to be met with this sort of, um, dismissive sideswipe, what's the point?

[jean]

But surely there's a difference, insufficiently stressesd in l_c_b's comments, between the amount of rehearsal an established choir would get, and what would be available to the occasional blow-in?

[DracoM]

I would respectfully suggest that the issue is perhaps centred round the decision to include the Bach piece, rather more than its execution?

I'm not entirely convinced that if there were the usual restrictions on rehearsal time - always at a premium in a cathedral setting - I would have chosen quite a complex little bit of Bach for the same service as the not unchallenging Berkeley - and, yes, even though they had sung the Chichester canticles fairly recently.

Bach is ALWAYS tricky no matter who is singing - diction, expression, phrasing, ensemble can all come under pressure, and with not a lot of / enough time to polish, then.......? A Salisbury choir sang a Bach motet on 17th, but not the one in last Wednesday's service.

[teamsaint]

My comment was about LCBs remark about " Armchair Fanatic", which was completely unnecessary.

Showing that comments are based in professional expertise is great ,and helpful to the discussion.
It could have been left there.
Contributors to this board have a wide range of valuable experience and valid opinion, not all of it based in professional performance.

IMHO of course.

[underthecountertenor]

My comment was about LCBs remark about " Armchair Fanatic", which was completely unnecessary.

Fair enough - sorry I misunderstood and interpreted it as a remark about his post as a whole.

[underthecountertenor]

But surely there's a difference, insufficiently stressesd in l_c_b's comments, between the amount of rehearsal an established choir would get, and what would be available to the occasional blow-in?

I had to look up 'blow-in,' and I'm still not quite sure what you mean, jean. I'm sure it's my fault, but would you mind elaborating?

[jean]

I meant an extra or dep brought in for a particular occasion.

Whatever the constraints on rehearsal time that may apply to the regular choir, they will be able to work on a difficult piece over a period, and are unlikely to be restricted to a run-through in the service.

[teamsaint]

Fair enough - sorry I misunderstood and interpreted it as a remark about his post as a whole.

No worries, UTC.

Thanks for your reply.

[underthecountertenor]

I meant an extra or dep brought in for a particular occasion.

Whatever the constraints on rehearsal time that may apply to the regular choir, they will be able to work on a difficult piece over a period, and are unlikely to be restricted to a run-through in the service.

Aha. Thanks, jean.