CE Chapel of King’s College, Cambridge [L] Wed, 16th June 2021

[Simon Biazeck]

Someone bumping into a chair, I expect - wood on stone.

[Finzi4ever]

Someone bumping into a chair, I expect - wood on stone.

but it was a perfect fifth above the cantor...

[Magister Chori]

An immaculate, soulful rendition of the psalms - the unaccompanied singing made it even more poignant, though a little bit strange given the King's tradition of imaginative accompaniments so wonderfully immortalized in Willcocks' set of psalm recordings - was the icing on the cake of a superb service.

To continue the theme of old pedants: what was meant, I'm sure, is that this is the first BBC broadcast of CE by this choir under Daniel's direction.

Obviously I meant what you've clarified... Thanks for helping me with my unexpressed thoughts: I'm ageing quite badly!

I agree. Dare I say that the choir sounds better than even during the Willcocks era?

Better or not it's largely a matter of taste, I think. Surely it's a very different sound (though both Ledger and Cleobury elaborated their own "King's sound", quite different from the Willcocks' iconic one).

[Simon Biazeck]

but it was a perfect fifth above the cantor...

The building's fabric is tuned to Pythagorean...

[Simon Biazeck]

An immaculate, soulful rendition of the psalms - the unaccompanied singing made it even more poignant, though a little bit strange given the King's tradition of imaginative accompaniments so wonderfully immortalized in Willcocks' set of psalm recordings - was the icing on the cake of a superb service.



Obviously I meant what you've clarified... Thanks for helping me with my unexpressed thoughts: I'm aging quite badly!



Better or not it's largely a matter of taste, I think. Surely it's a very different sound (though both Ledger and Cleobury elaborated their own "King's sound", quite different from the Willcocks' iconic one).

I quite agree.

[DracoM]

Meticulous preparation, fine engineering, good team singing.
Augurs well?

[ardcarp]

I could listen to Psalm chanting like this all day. Quite breathtakingly wonderful.

Yes the Psalms were beautifully sung. As at St Thomas Fifth Avenue, Daniel Hyde obviously prefers them unaccompanied. While that is perfectly valid (and indeed very effective for parts of a psalm) I do have a personal preference for organ accompaniment. Maybe I'm fussy, because I don't like the organ to overwhelm or to be too 'word painty' (fun though it is for the organist to illustrate 'water pipes' or 'things creeping innumerable'). But sensitive discreet accompaniment gives a blended sound that I do like. Any thoughts?

A most enjoyable CE, so thanks, King's.

[mopsus]

but it was a perfect fifth above the cantor...

The cantor at King's is equipped with a set of tuning forks in a velvet-lined box. Probably Cathedral precentors standardly have such a set, but King's is where I have observed one in use at closest quarters.

[cat]

King’s routinely sing unaccompanied on Fridays, so it’s nice to hear that on one of their live CEs for a change.

[Resurgam]

No doubt a little too soon for anyone to notice anything on this broadcast, but there's been an interesting appointment behind the scenes - David Lowe who has been the choristers' singing teacher at St John's for nearly 30 years has moved down the road to join King's as Head of Singing, teaching both choristers and choral scholars. (He is replaced at St John's by Anita Morrison, singing teacher to the choristers of Westminster Cathedral for nearly 30 years). The role of such teachers can often be overlooked, so I thought these changes merited a mention.

When did the DoMs of cathedral/chapel choirs stop teaching the choristers to sing? I'm sure they used to do so. How do they get the sound they want otherwise?

I know they are not always organists these days. Are they just conductors?

What is the difference between a Director of Music and an Organist and Master of Choristers? It seems to me that the former these days are primarily music department managers rather than all round musicians. Is this desirable?

[ardcarp]

DOM, O&C ? I think it's just a question of fashion. DOM sounds more important somehow. It doesn't mean that whatever you call them have stopped
training their choristers to sing! It has been a fairly recent development, however, for choristers to have extra singing lessons at some cathedrals/colleges. A friend of ours (female...but with a fine straight voice) has been doing this at a SW cathedral for some time. I think the past year has been difficult though for obvious reasons.

[Vox Humana]

DOM, O&C ? I think it's just a question of fashion.

It's a bit more than that, I think. I'm outside the club, so might well be spouting gibberish, but, as I understand it, in the old days, it was normal for a cathedral Organist and Master of the Choristers both to train the choir and accompany the services, the choir being mostly unconducted except, perhaps, for a boy or man on each side signalling starts and stops. The OMC ran the show largely single-handed, the Assistant/Sub-Organist's main function being to stand in when the boss had a day off, or to accompany when a piece really needed conducting. I think Bairstow and W. H. Harris operated that way. Robert Ashfield certainly did, so I'm told, as did Sidney Campbell. These OMCs were organists, not professionally trained singers. They read (even wrote) books on choir training and vocal technique and had ears that informed their approaches to things like tuning and pronunciation, but in matters of voice production they could never stand as equals alongside properly trained singers. But then, in the early twentieth century a lot of the back rows weren't trained singers either (I remember a recording of Bairstow's choir being cited to me as an instance of this). Even in the '70s I knew lay clerks who had never had a singing lesson. I expect someone will be able to cite exceptions, but I think this picture was probably true as a general rule.

As choral standards rose from the '70s onwards and the boss men (still male) spent more and more time downstairs conducting (following David Willcocks's lead at King's, I think), it eventually dawned that it was perfectly feasible, even beneficial, to split the conducting and playing roles into DoM and Organist (or ADoM)—and from this it followed naturally that there was no particular reason for the DoM be an organist at all, so long as s/he knew about choirs and singing. I do wonder whether, even today, all the top bods are 'proper' singers. I suspect not, but if the choristers are receiving separate, professional singing tuition, perhaps it's not vital.

[ardcarp]

Adding to the above (with which I agree) it was quite unusual, before WW2 let us say, for an O&C to flap about between the choir stalls. Two old freinds of mine (now long departed) were choral scholars at Kings in Mann's and Ord's day, and conducting was discreet, usually from within the stalls. At Lichfield in the 60s and 70s Richard Greening did likewise, with the merest wag of a finger. As far as vocal training is concerned, some (most) boys have a natural head voice and all the O&C had to do was capitalise on that and get them to sing in tune and with musicality. Hence the pure sound of yesteryear which some people cruelly described as a hoot. Some choirs still emulate that sound very beautifully. And definitely no hooting. Others, however, get their choristers (boys and girls) to sing with more character in their voices. Guest at John's was a prime example and NCO with Higginbottom likewise. Not to mention Westminster Cathedral with George Malcolm. Nowadays, listening to John's with Andrew N. a very 'mature' sound emanates from the choristers, definitely evidence of some vocal training. When Salisbury first had girl choristers I was amazed at their sound. Quite 'hard' and expressive. Richard Seal was a pioneer. And the recent CE from St David's (all girls choir) had a lovely sound. I wouldn't be surprised if some singing lessons were going on there...though I have no local knowledge.

Although David Willcocks always said (perhaps surprisingly) that the person in charge should be a capable organist, there is no reason at all why (as currently at St Paul's) the DoM should not primarily be a choral expert, especially as highly capable organ scholars abound and are there to be snapped up for accompanying duties.

[Wolsey]

DOM, O&C ? I think it's just a question of fashion. DOM sounds more important somehow.

Your first quoted sentence is incorrect; the second is spot on. The change of nomenclature was a recommendation (39) in the 1992 report of the Archbishops' Commission on Church Music In Tune with Heaven "in order to indicate the importance of that person's role in the cathedral's life, as well as expertise in choir training, vocal technique and organ playing."