CE Chapel of Rugby School [R] Wed, 11th Aug 2021

[DracoM]

CE Chapel of Rugby School [R] Wed, 11th Aug 2021
Recorded 23 June 2021


Order of Service:


Introit: Those who wait for the Lord (Benedict Tanner)
Responses: Byrd
Psalms 59, 60, 61 (Barnby, Howells. Stainer)
First Lesson: Isaiah 45: 1-7
Office hymn: Firmly I believe and truly (Halton Holgate)
Canticles: Noble in B minor
Second Lesson: Ephesians 4: 1-16
Anthem: Like as the hart (Howells)
Hymn: Lead kindly light (Alberta)

Voluntary: Master Tallis’ Testament (Howells)

Ian Wicks (Organist)
Richard Tanner (Director of Music)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000ylxq

[DracoM]

Reminder: today @ 3.30 p.m.

[ardcarp]

Another excellent CE from Rugby. (Presumably recorded at the same time as their last broadcast.) Especially good diction in the psalms, I thought.

[Vox Humana]

I really enjoyed that, especially the full-blooded delivery of the canticles. What an electrifying opening to the Magnificat! Real lapel-grabbing stuff! Lovely psalm singing - slower than I would do, but it worked just fine. How lovely, too, to hear the hymns sung at perfect speeds. The anthem and voluntary didn't work so well for me. I thought the anthem was just a bit too slow to work over the radio - perhaps the atmosphere came over more successfully in situ. The Kenneth Jones organ had a major rebuild (mechanical only?) by Nicholson's a couple of years ago, but, on the basis of this broadcast, I can't say I liked what I heard very much. It sounded unsubtle. Some of the registration changes in the voluntary sounded quite clunky and the wayward rubato was disrupting. On an instrument as inexpressive as the organ you have to be particularly careful about rubato, which can so easily come across as simply unrhythmical. But I did also wonder whether the microphone set-up might have been to blame. To my ears, the choir sounded slightly distant, but the organ sounded close and it tended to overbalance the singing. (The priest doesn't sit opposite the organ by any chance?) Anyway, enough quibbling. Top marks for the choir and their trainer(s)!

[DracoM]

<< Top marks for the choir and their trainer(s)! >>
Yes.

[Finzi4ever]

I've heard several broadcasts of the Byrd 3rd Amen recently that cut the English cadence: is this now thought 'more proper' or that Watkins Shaw got it wrong?

[Finzi4ever]

I really enjoyed that, especially the full-blooded delivery of the canticles. What an electrifying opening to the Magnificat! Real lapel-grabbing stuff! Lovely psalm singing - slower than I would do, but it worked just fine. How lovely, too, to hear the hymns sung at perfect speeds. The anthem and voluntary didn't work so well for me. I thought the anthem was just a bit too slow to work over the radio - perhaps the atmosphere came over more successfully in situ. The Kenneth Jones organ had a major rebuild (mechanical only?) by Nicholson's a couple of years ago, but, on the basis of this broadcast, I can't say I liked what I heard very much. It sounded unsubtle. Some of the registration changes in the voluntary sounded quite clunky and the wayward rubato was disrupting. On an instrument as inexpressive as the organ you have to be particularly careful about rubato, which can so easily come across as simply unrhythmical. But I did also wonder whether the microphone set-up might have been to blame. To my ears, the choir sounded slightly distant, but the organ sounded close and it tended to overbalance the singing. (The priest doesn't sit opposite the organ by any chance?) Anyway, enough quibbling. Top marks for the choir and their trainer(s)!

Rare, I'd say, to have consecutive broadcasts both with Kenneth Jones instruments. If the previous week had happened to be from Tewkesbury, we'd have had the full set. I know which one I prefer!

[Vox Humana]

I've heard several broadcasts of the Byrd 3rd Amen recently that cut the English cadence: is this now thought 'more proper' or that Watkins Shaw got it wrong?

Now this is an interesting question. Possibly. I wonder whether they were using Craig Monson's edition, which Stainer & Bell publish as an offprint from the relevant volume of The Byrd Edition? I've not seen this; one's budget has its limits, you understand.

When Shaw prepared his edition, the only source for the vocal parts of Byrd's (third preces and) responses was the so-called 'Latter' set of Caroline partbooks at Peterhouse Cambridge. This set lacks its contratenor cantoris book, so Shaw had to reconstruct the second alto part. In the process, he gave us that English cadence. So it was always speculative. In 2017, Ben Byram-Wigfield prepared a new edition using the same source; his reconstructed second alto retains Shaw's English cadence. Yet a bit of internet digging suggests that the contratenor cantoris part survives in some manuscript additions to a printed prayer book at Christ Church, Oxford. I've not seen this (it's not been digitised) and, judging by what happened to Stone's Lord's Prayer in the other book from this set that survives, it might be heavily bowdlerised. I wonder whether our Master Coverdale has any information.

Rare, I'd say, to have consecutive broadcasts both with Kenneth Jones instruments. If the previous week had happened to be from Tewkesbury, we'd have had the full set. I know which one I prefer!

I suspect I would agree!

[Miles Coverdale]

Now this is an interesting question. Possibly. I wonder whether they were using Craig Monson's edition, which Stainer & Bell publish as an offprint from the relevant volume of The Byrd Edition? I've not seen this; one's budget has its limits, you understand.

When Shaw prepared his edition, the only source for the vocal parts of Byrd's (third preces and) responses was the so-called 'Latter' set of Caroline partbooks at Peterhouse Cambridge. This set lacks its contratenor cantoris book, so Shaw had to reconstruct the second alto part. In the process, he gave us that English cadence. So it was always speculative. In 2017, Ben Byram-Wigfield prepared a new edition using the same source; his reconstructed second alto retains Shaw's English cadence. Yet a bit of internet digging suggests that the contratenor cantoris part survives in some manuscript additions to a printed prayer book at Christ Church, Oxford. I've not seen this (it's not been digitised) and, judging by what happened to Stone's Lord's Prayer in the other book from this set that survives, it might be heavily bowdlerised. I wonder whether our Master Coverdale has any information.

I don't, I'm afraid. I admit I wasn't aware of the existence of the Christ Church source. It may not, of course, be by Byrd himself, but the efforts of someone else entirely. It would seem an odd place to be the sole repository of genuine Byrd. As far as I can recall, Byrd wrote very few English cadences.

One aspect of the Shaw edition I've never liked is the fact that the final third is the G below middle C, where altos are rarely at their best. The edition by Dr James Wrightson used on the King's recording of the Great Service is rather better in this respect, in my view.

[Vox Humana]

I don't, I'm afraid. I admit I wasn't aware of the existence of the Christ Church source. It may not, of course, be by Byrd himself, but the efforts of someone else entirely. It would seem an odd place to be the sole repository of genuine Byrd.

Well, John Milsom's catalogue has them attributed to Byrd and far be from me to argue with him. http://library.chch.ox.ac.uk/music/p...p?set=Gibbs+12

[Miles Coverdale]

That's not quite how I would interpret that page. Yes, the music contained in the Christ Church book may be to go with Byrd's Third Preces/Responses, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the music itself is by Byrd. John Milsom was one of my tutors when I was an undergraduate, so perhaps I should ask him exactly what he meant. Contrary to what the page says, images of the companion Peterhouse source are not currently on DIAMM, so I couldn't make any comparison. I will try to get a look at the book next time I'm in Oxford.

Are we talking about exactly the same source? The DIAMM inventory of the Peterhouse book makes no mention of Stone's Lord's Prayer.

[Vox Humana]

Are we talking about exactly the same source? The DIAMM inventory of the Peterhouse book makes no mention of Stone's Lord's Prayer.

Ach! Sorry, mental lapse on my part. I meant Queens', Cambridge. https://www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/4123/#/ The Stone is coupled with some responses which aren't familiar to me.

[Miles Coverdale]

Ach! Sorry, mental lapse on my part. I meant Queens', Cambridge. https://www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/4123/#/ The Stone is coupled with some responses which aren't familiar to me.

Hmm, interesting. The pitches match Stone almost exactly, but the rhythm is significantly different. I wonder if this setting and Stone's make use of the same Tenor melody in the same way that Farmer's setting and others use what was called The Church Tune.

As anyone who has tried to edit this sort of music will attest, it's frequently all but impossible to distinguish between the composer's original intentions and later scribal intervention.

[Vox Humana]

As anyone who has tried to edit this sort of music will attest, it's frequently all but impossible to distinguish between the composer's original intentions and later scribal intervention.

Tell me about it! It's probably worst of all with the vernacular music of the composers active in the 1550s. The late John Morehen once told me that he had never tackled the English music of Thomas Tallis because he didn't feel equipped to assess the (mostly late) sources - and, coming from someone as erudite as him, I thought that was a salutary comment.

[Vox Humana]

I wonder if this setting and Stone's make use of the same Tenor melody in the same way that Farmer's setting and others use what was called The Church Tune.

It's difficult to see why a composer would do that unless the tenor was known as a 'tune' and I don't get the feeling that it is one, especially since the part doesn't end on the 'tonic'. I guess it could be a complete rehash based on Stone's setting though.