CE Three Choirs Festival 10th August 2011

[Miles Coverdale]

Apart from that, it is a shame when we get these rants from people after a rare bit of criticism. Rather unprofessional, really. Are they like the cockerels who think the sun comes up just to hear them crow...?

Unprofessional - in what way? You are inferring, Simon, that I was part of this broadcast solely on the evidence that I took exception to post 18, which is a bit of a leap of logic, if I may say so.

[Simon]

Having now listened, both (partly) via R3 and also on LA, I can only agree with the following, from Chorister49:

I enjoyed this broadcast - yes, the clergy were a bit slow and ponderous but they often are exactly the same 'live' and, after all, we are encouraged to consider these broadcasts as a dip into what we would hear if we were to be in the cathedral itself. Yes, the intonation wasn't always 100% perfect, but the commitment was admirable and there was a lot of very good singing here.

The anthem certainly wasn't a Pot Noodle, though for me it was too long for the musicality within it.

The only other thing I might mention is that, on the evidence of this service at least, lucasorg is a far better composer of hymn-tunes than he is of psalm chants... "Ballards" is a blinder!

[Simon]

Unprofessional - in what way? You are inferring, Simon, that I was part of this broadcast solely on the evidence that I took exception to post 18, which is a bit of a leap of logic, if I may say so.

I didn't think I was implying that, Miles, and didn't do so consciously, but now you mention it I suppose that must have been in my mind. In which case, the subconscious leap of logic was unwarranted and I'm sorry.

That said, my general point remains: it does seem a shame that on the rare times when someone posts something less than effusive, s/he gets hammered! I don't agree with all the criticisms made on here, of course, but over the past six years or so, the majority of them have, in my view, been generally more or less valid.

[ahinton]

I may not be able to give you names and addresses, but I do think that many posters may it pretty clear from what they say that they are not 'in the business'.

The principal source of my irritation was post 18. If other people then assumed I was talking about them, so be it. It just annoys me when people take potshots from the sidelines and say things under the cloak of anonymity which they (probably) wouldn't have the nerve to say to your face.

I've not "said" anything in this thread until now and do so now for the sole purpose of pointing out that we do not all "say things under the cloak of anonymity" here - a fact which I have not merely the "nerve" but also the evident need to say to certain "faces" here!

[Magnificat]

Some of us prefer the cloak of anonymity mainly because we do not want our real name spread all over the internet in this surveillance society we live in.

These boards are pretty innocuous but but, even so, there is enough information about us all out there already.

VCC

[AscribeUntoTheLad]

If the candidate hasn't run a choir of his/her own then it is always, in my opinion, going to be pot luck as to whether the right choice is made whatever the adviser might say.
VCC

Except if you only appoint people who've run a choir of their own before, how are assistant organists ever going to climb up the ladder?

[decantor]

Some of us prefer the cloak of anonymity mainly because we do not want our real name spread all over the internet in this surveillance society we live in.
These boards are pretty innocuous but but, even so, there is enough information about us all out there already. VCC

Precisely so, VCC. It amazes me that so many risk their real names in non-secure environments. But the licence for anonymity should be conditional on the responsibility not to abuse it. That contract is breached all too often - not on this board especially, as you say, but widely on the internet at large. Better to play safe - and play fair.

[Simon]

I don't think there's any great risk in those who work in the cathedral music environment using real names, or obvious (to some of us) aliases. They aren't doing or writing anything wrong or likely to cause grief. I can't use my real name on this sort of forum, because my contract of employment doesn't allow it - nor can I get involved in Facebook (not that I want or need to!).

I'm often surprised elsewhere about how much info people give away. Most people are of course honest, but nowadays, especially with the influx of ne'er-do-wells from other countries, there are specific gangs set up to use internet info for all sorts of illegal purposes.

[amateur51]

I don't think there's any great risk in those who work in the cathedral music environment using real names, or obvious (to some of us) aliases. They aren't doing or writing anything wrong or likely to cause grief. I can't use my real name on this sort of forum, because my contract of employment doesn't allow it - nor can I get involved in Facebook (not that I want or need to!).

I'm often surprised elsewhere about how much info people give away. Most people are of course honest, but nowadays, especially with the influx of ne'er-do-wells from other countries, there are specific gangs set up to use internet info for all sorts of illegal purposes.

Do you mean New International & News Corp, Simon?

[Magnificat]

Except if you only appoint people who've run a choir of their own before, how are assistant organists ever going to climb up the ladder?

As I have said many times before if a cathedral assistant organist is looking to become a cathedral DoM he/she ought to look for every opportunity to run a choir of their own, i.e move around a bit, so that they can demonstrate their abilities as choirtrainers when applying for a DoM post. If they stay as assistants forever there is no chance of being able to do this unless they have specific responsibility for a choir at their cathedral.

Cathedrals do seem to be moving in the direction of looking away from assistants and even organists when appointing DoMs these days and quite right too when it comes to the part of the job that involves training the choirs. What place a Musical Adviser has to play in all this when someone should be able to demonstrate their proven ability to do this aspect job anyway still defeats me.

If I was a Dean or member of a selection panel I would be asking to hear recordings of the candidate's choir/s and going around to their cathedrals or churches to listen to their choirs for myself first hand and to check on their success or otherwise as recruiters of choristers especially boys. It's no use leaving it to a Musical Adviser who wouldn't have to sit through endless services that might turn out to be very indifferently or, perish the thought, dreadfully sung.

VCC

[muticus]

Indeed Magnificat, I agree, it seems that sometimes we take more trouble over vetting a visiting choir, that will only plague us for a week, than we do over appointments that could potentially blight the choir for a generation - not least because the indifferent appointee is much less likely to obtain preferment! (Mentioning absolutely no names - obviously )

[gainasbass]

Well, being away for most of last week I was unable to hear the live R3 transmission of the Three Choirs' CE. Upon my return I hastened to visit this thread not least for the purpose of reading the thoughts of those members who had been able to listen/attend the service in person, and, as a result, it was with some trepidation that I invoked the LA procedure.

Listening to the introduction to the service, which explained the relevance to the impending 10th Anniversary of 9/11, I have to say that I found each constituent part, and the chosen music (especially the Howells introit, the psalms and the Canticles), to be most appropriate (and extremely well sung!); and I was emotionally moved by these. Unfortunately time did not permit my listening to the Anthem, ie beyond a few bars, and yes, I did find it a bit strange and wondered how it would develop.

When I was able to return to the LA and this thread, I was interested to read Lucasorg's most welcome post which threw a whole lot of light on this service, and to which he attached the texts of the Anthem (thank you so much for this!). I subsequently listened again to this Anthem, and again this Sunday afternoon in the R3 repeat, as a result of which I was able to appreciate the 'appropriateness' of both the words and the extremely challenging aspects of the music (and also how the work can grow on you!).

All in all a truly memorable CE from the Three Choirs, and a fitting swan song to Lucasorg's tenure with it. Many thanks to all concerned.

[orson]

Children, children - is it time for Mr and Mrs Smack to pay a short sharp trip to Botty Land?

As regards Music Advisors - they've started being used so that the vicars don't get all the blame when the choice they've made is wrong. They CAN add something to the process - if only asking the questions that those on the panel might not necessarily be able to ask or know what to ask, if that makes sense. "How do you train probationers?" being one such, or questions about vocal technique. If I were an organist interviewing a vicar to become a Dean (think how much fun you could have with that!) I wouldn't necessarily know all the correct liturgical questions to ask. Sure, the vicars can (mostly) spot a ham-fisted rendition of an audition piece, but they might not spot something of concern or praise in a choir rehearsal.

That's not to say the advisors necessarily know everything, and I can think of one or two appointments recently where the vicars have gone against the advisors decision. Advisors advise and Ministers decide, as I believe MHT once said.

[Magnificat]

This may well be the case where a parish church is concerned and the applicant is just starting his/her career but for a post as DoM at Worcester the applicants ought to be able to demonstrate that they have already trained very competent choirs. They should be able to say to the selection panel "here you are these are CD's of my choirs or come and listen to my choir at wherever and judge for yourselves whether I am any good or not as a choirtrainer".

I went to auditions at a cathedral years ago where the Musical Adviser sat in and the applicants conducted a choir vastly better than the Adviser's own. How he could judge the competency of the applicants I have no idea.

No, the real judges were the men and, in their own way, they made sure they got who they wanted and I wouldn't be surprised that this is what will happen at Worcester.

VCC

[AscribeUntoTheLad]

Well, it depends who the adviser is then, doesn't it? Maybe you should make a list of DoMs you consider of suitable quality to advise Worcester...