Chapel of King's College, Cambridge [L] R4 3 p.m. 24.xii.2018

[ardcarp]

I wondered if #29 might draw some reaction! However, folks, it's not a contest, so Happy Christmas to one and all.

[Philip]

I haven't heard the whole service, just bits of it, so what follows are more general thoughts. Apologies in advance for the ramble.

It was certainly an accessible mix of repertoire. I agree with someone who posted earlier about the Darke - it is a lovely setting but I'm bored stiff of it. Everyone does it - from humble parish (including my own, every year, regular as clockwork) to great cathedral, and I don't feel it has anything left to offer me. That's probably my loss, but there are plenty of other oft-performed pieces (A Spotless Rose, for example) which still move me after numerous hearings (that cadence!). I realise its inclusion this year was because Darke acted as DOM during WW2.

Almost every year someone comments on SC's brisk tempos. I'm generally in favour of a bit of time and space, but maybe the service is trying to cram too much in? Cleobury has been in charge at King's longer than I've been alive (an awesome achievement) and it will be odd with someone different. I look forward to seeing how Dan Hyde makes his mark on it.

Looking at the list of commissions in the service book on the KCC website reveals how few have won hearts and minds and entered the mainstream repertoire. This is interesting, as the King's service is often a showcase for pieces which do then see widespread use (Simon Preston's 'I saw three ships', I believe, is one example). I know Judith Weir's 'Illuminare' has fans on here, and given how regularly he programmed it SC must also be one, but I just don't get it. I found Weir's commission for the Wabbey Remembrance service similarly incomprehensible. I couldn't level such an accusation at the 2018 commission, but equally I didn't detect any enduring appeal in it. At any rate, it was better than her thoroughly trite 'I love all beauteous things' for the Queen's 90th birthday service (IMO!).

Descants also comes up in this thread every year. I used to think Willcocks or else, but latterly I've come to the view that some of his only get done because they are in the Carols for Choirs books. SC gets it right by repeatedly using the best IMO (O come, Unto us is born - although strangely without the third verse arrangement, and God rest ye, in my view Willcocks' best). Others are not unsuccessful but can easily be bettered, and for my money SC's Hark the herald as heard this year is certainly an equal for the much-repeated Willcocks. Ledger wins on Once in Royal for me, and I agree SC's latest of this is too OTT. It will be fascinating to see what Dan Hyde does here - it would be good to see some not composed by Kings DOMs feature. I went to Manchester Cathedral's Nine Lessons service on Saturday and we got this fruity arrangement by Howard Arman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmcbeDPn5Qs (wondering where I can find the music, Google is no help), along with a good While shephards by home team DOM Christopher Stokes.

SC's travails this year have been commented on - is it me or did he sound somewhat frail when reading his lesson? Kings bashing is an occupation, especially at Christmas, but it is only right to salute his dedication and achievements which certainly deserve recognition.

[Petrushka]

SC's travails this year have been commented on - is it me or did he sound somewhat frail when reading his lesson? Kings bashing is an occupation, especially at Christmas, but it is only right to salute his dedication and achievements which certainly deserve recognition.

Indeed so. I predict a well-deserved knighthood in the forthcoming New Year Honours.

[Vox Humana]

I have yet to hear any of the King's broadcasts because I currently have a house full of offspring and partners who, sadly, are not interested in anything that involves people in surplices. Mrs Humana and I will be catching up later when the house has quietened down. I, too, am bored with hearing the Darke. Every year I feel a certain sense of "same old...". However, it's worth remembering that the Darke regularly tops the list of the nation's favourite carols. The annual King's services do need to appeal to a public who, by and large, will probably want to be hearing settings that are familiar and this might account for the regular repetition of certain carols and of favourite arrangements when others are available. Taste in carols is always a personal thing. I quite like Illuminare Jerusalem. I could certainly name many far worse pieces. I wouldn't call it great, but Britain doesn't currently have any composers worthy of that epithet (though time may prove me wrong). There are plenty of very good ones, though, and for church music Weir is one of the best. As for the annual commissions not having been widely adopted, how much might that be due to their technical demands?

I agree with Philip about descants (with reservations). The best and most endurable descants are those that don't try to be clever, but are just good, simple melodies in their own rights that complement the hymn tunes without trying to usurp them with overblown swankiness. After all, the main tune needs to retain supremacy. Willcocks knew instinctively what would work best and for Carols for Choirs composed/selected accordingly. The descants in those volumes are, for the most part, perfectly judged. Yet after 40+ years of annual use, I have to admit that they do pall. On feels that they can't be bettered, but one nevertheless longs to hear something different. Yet one is constantly disappointed because no one else has the necessary genius (although at this point I have to defer to Philip's wider experience). I have never understood why Alan Gray's super descant for "While shepherds watched" never made it into Carols for Choirs because it is very much in the same, simple aesthetic as the other descants printed there and packs more punch per note* than other contenders I know (the opening notes are electric and the interest is maintained to the end). It's also quite easy to forget that the familiar descant to "O little town" is by Thomas Armstrong.

* "Punch per note" might even be a good yardstick by which to measure descants. It certainly seems to me that the most contrapuntal are the least edifying.

[Vox Humana]

Indeed so. I predict a well-deserved knighthood in the forthcoming New Year Honours.

I really do hope so. That would be very nice and, as you say, well deserved.

[jonfan]

I listened to the binaural mix this evening and very good it was too - and I thought it was good that they left in a bit of the venue sound after the voluntaries, just the sounds of the congregation walking out etc., before fading out. A nice touch.

Yes agree. Effective hearing the blessing way off to the right at the altar, just as it would be for the congregation. Had to adjust the volume for the hymns as my ears nearly blew off at the fffs

[ardcarp]

Just have to say that I think 'Illuminare' is a brilliant, well wrought, and effective piece! It has great 'originality' too, if you know what I mean...it's not ploughing any well-tried formula. Apart from all that, I just love it and its harmonic language.

[Vox Humana]

... in terms of blend, energy, clarity of diction and vocal quality, no reservations whatever.

I have just managed to catch up with this service, which was altogether superb. I agree with Caliban's verdict. I thought the blend of the men's voices in particular - and the overall balance between the parts - was the best I have heard for many a year.

[PeterboroughDiapason]

The King’s boys sound considerably better than those at St John’s these days.

Gosh!

[DracoM]

Not sure I could entirely go with that................!

[Wolsey]

The best and most endurable descants are those that don't try to be clever, but are just good, simple melodies in their own rights that complement the hymn tunes without trying to usurp them with overblown swankiness. After all, the main tune needs to retain supremacy. Willcocks knew instinctively what would work best and for Carols for Choirs composed/selected accordingly. The descants in those volumes are, for the most part, perfectly judged. Yet after 40+ years of annual use, I have to admit that they do pall. On feels that they can't be bettered, but one nevertheless longs to hear something different. Yet one is constantly disappointed because no one else has the necessary genius...

This discussion appears here annually. I mentioned Christopher Robinson's last year (The Novello Book of Descants), and do so again because I have used them instead for many years, and find them effective and thrilling. Snippets can be heard here (tracks 8 and 49).

[DracoM]

Q: why did George Guest write relatively few descants for John's, yet other DoMs seem to write a steady stream?

[Quilisma]

I understand the points made about Cleobury’s tempi and phrasing, but there should be wider recognition of his ability as a choir trainer. The King’s boys sound considerably better than those at St John’s these days. Fascinating to hear King’s choristers singing with more colour warmth and depth than down the road. Also striking are the lack of tributes from rival choirs - you’d get more magnimity in the House of Commons. Says more about chips on shoulders than anything else.

Let me approach this kind of thing indirectly. In the course of a similar discussion over on the Book of Face, some were suggesting that it might, at least in theory, be a good idea if occasionally choirs other than King's were to be invited to do prominent radio and television broadcasts at Christmas (in addition to King's). One comment was typical of several people's response to this: "No no no it HAS to be King's"...

I confess that I felt moved to challenge this. I asked the person who had made this comment, and people making similar comments, whether they in fact really meant to ally themselves with the hard-line faction which holds that King's is by its very nature inherently and unfailingly superior in every way to every other college and cathedral choir in this country and the world, and that only King's should ever have the right to be heard on the grounds that all other choirs are dishonest upstart imposters, posing as valid whereas they are in fact inferior counterfeits of King's. I remarked that they would probably say "of course not", but that that is the strong implication of this kind of statement, year after year, decade after decade, in all sorts of fora like this. I clarified that I was sure they didn't think such things themselves, but that I was afraid to say that it is precisely this "only King's is legitimate" and "if it's Christmas it HAS to be King's" attitude which provokes what is commonly thought to be "King's bashing".

I have to say that I too find "King's bashing" equally obnoxious, as King's are indeed one of our finest choirs and should always be applauded for what they achieve; but in the opinion of so many people, it seems that anything less than unfettered worship of King's to the exclusion of all others is to be regarded as "King's bashing". I'm sure I speak for a lot of people when I say I have never had anything whatsoever against King's itself, but that it is the attitude of a particular fanatically pro-King's lobby which is irksome.

Speaking as a cathedral lay clerk only a few miles from Cambridge, I can vouch for the fact that the five days leading up to and including Christmas Day are extremely busy and taxing and musically and liturgically intense, and all of this takes an enormous toll, but with well over a thousand people in attendance for each and every engagement over that period it is distinctly irritating to read others banging on each and every year about how only King's will do and about how everywhere else is just no substitute. (Quite right, nowhere else is a substitute for King's, because nowhere else is setting out to be a substitute for King's, because everywhere else is its own place, and because Christmas is a major festival and that must be the focus, not aping what King's might happen to do.) Yet in local "what's on" magazines, if they mention that there will be several carol services and other choral and musical things going on chez nous over the Christmas period which might interest people, it always seems to be with the proviso "if you can't make it to King's". What does King's have to do with it?

For the record, I have not yet had time to listen to or watch the two King's broadcasts in full, as I had three services of my own on Christmas Eve and was running around like a headless chicken trying to sort everything out whenever I wasn't in the Cathedral; but I did manage to catch the last few minutes of the radio broadcast when it was going out live, and I was cheering them all on immoderately like a real super-fan. Indeed, I thought a lot of the singing that I heard sounded refreshingly lively and sparky, less flutey and "precious" than sometimes in the past, but from where I'm coming from that is an excellent thing!

Extreme respect to Stephen Cleobury on his final Christmas after 37 years, especially considering what a torrid time he has been having latterly. And of course I look forward to seeing how things will develop under Dan Hyde. A gentle reminder, though, that in Cambridgeshire alone there are not one but two eminent and very highly respected and long-serving choir directors who have just done their final Christmas in post. BOTH surely deserve knighthoods. Only one of them is at King's.

(P.S. I haven't commented on the suggestion that the King's trebles sing with more colour, expression, depth and warmth than their Johnian counterparts, and are better overall, but suffice to say my eyebrows could well be raised...)

[DracoM]

Agree with much.

The inane notion that 'Christmas is King's and nowhere else', or that they are the best ever choir and always be so, is IMO equally and demonstrably inane.
It is in the nature of choral things that there are in any and every one, two, or three, or five year periods good and better and worse intakes, better and not so good mixes of voices, better or not well-chosen or poorly chosen repertoires which for unknown and unpredictable reasons just do not gel.

For me, George Guest, James O'Donnell [ at Drome], Stephen Darlington have at various times and do have choral forces / output I would eagerly place well above King's. All DoMs of very different stamps and techniques.


NOT an enviable place to be - KCC under massive global attention.

[mopsus]

I wonder whether the BBC is afraid of losing its overseas audience for 9LC, and not regaining it, if it broadcasts instead a service sung by another choir? I don't know how large that audience currently is. The TV 'Carols from King's' is also widely sold overseas too.