King's College Cambridge Lessons and Carols (both L and R) 24/25th xii 22 / Rads 3 /4

[Alison]

Not at all - it has nothing to do with teaching or flying a plane. Of course people who have been trained and doing that for years will be better at teaching or flying than those who haven’t . It means you don’t win an argument about say education policy by saying I’m a head and know more about it than you do. You win it by producing evidence. It’s a very lazy way of winning an argument and it’s used all the time. Incidentally a really intelligent teacher will constantly be asking themselves whether the students should be listening to them.

[ardcarp]

I love it, but I can think of at least one DoM who doesn't like it for nearly all the reasons listed above

Thanks for posting that; but the descant (when it arrived) was somewhat overwhelmed by the very non-Howells brass fanfare arrangement!

[Alison]

the very non-Howells brass fanfare arrangement!

Good descant, awful fanfares!

[PeterboroughDiapason]

A descant, however un-inspired, at least gives a bit of a thrill to the 'congregation' if they hear a few high and heavenly notes soaring above. And choristers enjoy them too.

IMV the best descants:

1. Avoid note-to-note matching with the basic rhythm of the verse

2. Do a bit of clever canonic or at least imitative stuff

3. Go over the ends of lines

4. Are conceived with a re-harmonised version of the last verse

Using all four above, Andrew Carter's last verse of O Come O Come Emmanuel is a cracker. Leaving Christmas behind, Herbert Howells' own descant to 'Michael.' (All my hope on God is founded) is the most adventurous of all. Probably for that reason it's hardly ever done, but appears in English Praise.
Go on, I dare some place to use it on Choral Evensong!

I agree with 4, but I don't necessarily think the best descants have to go over the ends of lines , e.g'. Willcocks classic ones for "Once in Royal" "Hark! the herald", O come all ye" and Armstrong's one for "O little town". I think too many descants these days are too 'clever' and risk destroying the hymn rather than just occasionally peeping over the top of the tune. A little rhythmic displacement can be very effective, of course

As for Howells' descant for "Michael: it's silly and it doesn't work. I wonder if it will be in the new English Hymnal, if and when it appears.

[oddoneout]

I agree with 4, but I don't necessarily think the best descants have to go over the ends of lines , e.g'. Willcocks classic ones for "Once in Royal" "Hark! the herald", O come all ye" and Armstrong's one for "O little town". I think too many descants these days are too 'clever' and risk destroying the hymn rather than just occasionally peeping over the top of the tune. A little rhythmic displacement can be very effective, of course

As for Howells' descant for "Michael: it's silly and it doesn't work. I wonder if it will be in the new English Hymnal, if and when it appears.

This is rather my view as well. It also happens with folksong settings, where the original feel and simplicity( and tonality) gets buried in cleverness.

[Vox Humana]

I agree with 4, but I don't necessarily think the best descants have to go over the ends of lines , e.g'. Willcocks classic ones for "Once in Royal" "Hark! the herald", O come all ye" and Armstrong's one for "O little town". I think too many descants these days are too 'clever' and risk destroying the hymn rather than just occasionally peeping over the top of the tune. A little rhythmic displacement can be very effective, of course

I'm very much in the 'less is more' camp. For my money, the best descants are good, shapely tunes in their own right.

[Vox Humana]

Good descant, awful fanfares!

Apparently Gerald Knight asked Howells to make this setting for a Royal Festival Hall event in 1970. Howells never completed it, but Christopher Palmer later did. Does anyone know how much of what we hear is Howells and how much is Palmer?

[ardcarp]

Not very Howells-ish to my ears. I wonder if he had any doubts about writing in that sort of vein when the hymn tune was named after his dear son whose death affected Howells deeply.

[Vox Humana]

Not very Howells-ish to my ears. I wonder if he had any doubts about writing in that sort of vein when the hymn tune was named after his dear son whose death affected Howells deeply.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't have thought so. Almost everything HH wrote after Michael's death commemorated him in some way—his memory was ever-present—so I don't think he would have felt at all diffident about a descant.

I was once advised by Ruth Gipps never to waste time reworking a composition, but always to move on to a new one. That was excellent advice (which I have never been able to follow). Keep creating was what she meant, but there is also the problem with reworking old stuff that you have to think yourself back into the sound world that you were in when you were composing the piece. That's almost doomed to failure. I happen to think that the introduction HH added to his Coll Reg Te Deum when orchestrating it was a big miscalculation for this reason. Its different harmonic style doesn't really fit the rest of the piece. It's exactly the sort of inconsistency of style he warned me against in my lessons with him (and against which, in his youth, Stanford had counselled him), but no doubt some will think me a heretic for even suggesting the possibility. I love HH's late style, but I do think he lost it every once in a while in his old age.

[ardcarp]

so I don't think he would have felt at all diffident about a descant

No, I don't either. Quite the opposite. In fact it's a rather special descant. I was referring to the slightly OTT fanfare arrangement flagged up in post #74. In view of your comments, Vox, I could be persuaded otherwise, but still think the fact that a relatively short fanfare intro had to be 'finished' by someone else meant Howells had some emotional block.

Good to hear you personally had some lessons with Howells.

[Barry Rose]

[QUOTE=PeterboroughDiapason;903912]I agree with 4, but I don't necessarily think the best descants have to go over the ends of lines , e.g'. Willcocks classic ones for "Once in Royal" "Hark! the herald", O come all ye" and Armstrong's one for "O little town". I think too many descants these days are too 'clever' and risk destroying the hymn rather than just occasionally peeping over the top of the tune. A little rhythmic displacement can be very effective, of course

In view of the preceding comments, perhaps this is not the place for a (much) older person to contribute any thoughts. But blow that - I will.
Peterborough Diapason is absolutely right about descants - 'less is more' and it's interesting to see that by its regular inclusion Sir Thomas Armstrong's simple descant to 'O little town of Bethlehem' has never been bettered - or, IMHO, is ever likely to be bettered. Maybe people have tried, but as its longevity implies, not successfully.
In the choir in which I sang (Hampstead Parish Church), and the choirs I ran, we told it like it is, and my desription of a descant seems to have done the rounds - ' a descant is a decoration - it is not an annihilation'.
From a personal point of view, the effect of a descant is lost if there is one in EVERY hymn in a Carol Service. Should we really save that rather special effect until later on in the Service ?
Hymns are for congregational singing, and are they likely to be taken aback, or even put-off, when the trebles go off at a tangent in the last verse ?
On 'big' occasions, should we think a little more about the congregational involvement ? - paticularly in hymms/carols that begin on the up-beat - e.g. It came upon the midnight clear'. Often the congregation is left scarmbling to keep up as the well-drilled choir has shot off in the first line. But there, I've said that before - and not many of my younger colleagues think it's a valid point.
Those of us who listen on these occasions may think otherwise.

[Vox Humana]

Hymns are for congregational singing, and are they likely to be taken aback, or even put-off, when the trebles go off at a tangent in the last verse ?

I imagine that would depend on the descant. My parish church jobs are now such a dim and distant memory that my views may not be very relevant, but I used to find that my congregations enjoyed hearing descants. Then again, as I hinted above, I favoured ones that were more or less note-for-note. I doubt that contrapuntally elaborate ones would have been as well received. I'm sure that descants are more effective the less they are used and we probably do over-use them at Christmas (although the ones in Carols for Choirs are now so well known that perhaps it doesn't matter).

[PeterboroughDiapason]

a relatively short fanfare intro

Not short enough for me, I fear.

Having listened to the descant again I can see that it might (with brass trimmings) be a magnificent end to a longer work - a cantata or oratorio, perhaps. As a descant setting for organ in a hymn book, definitely not.

As for not having too many descants in a carol service, I know Barry Rose is right; but when the singers have sung the "Green Book" ones for years, woman and girl, I wouldn't know how to stop them. In any case, as the congregation are probably singing them as well it probably doesn't matter, as Vox says!

[Simon Biazeck]

No, I don't either. Quite the opposite. In fact it's a rather special descant. I was referring to the slightly OTT fanfare arrangement flagged up in post #74.

I wasn't flagging up the fanfares. It was just the most convenient recording on You Tube. Please, don't assume what I was a doing to drive your own posts. I won't bother anymore. Most of the time you just ignore me and my posts. Let's keep it that way.

Good bye.

[ardcarp]

On the contrary, Simon, I have always regarded you as one of the most experienced and knowledgeable contributors to the Forum. Apologies for any offence caused.