Nine Lessons and Carols 24th Dec 2011 [R4 4 live ] 25th Dec [R3 / 2 p.m. ]

[Petrushka]

Draco, I could so easily fall in step with your post #58. But to do so would be to disregard an important factor. When I was directing a school chapel choir, I used to hate the Carol Service: colleagues and parents would be pressing for Rutter, and the HM would drop hints about 'nothing too modern'; even the kids wanted the 'usual' carols. And why? Because, whereas Sunday chapel would attract a dozen or two parents, suddenly almost all parents would be in attendance, and as a body the school community had a clear notion of what the Carol Service should be. They were not looking for a musical experience, but a glorious kick-start for Christmas.

On Christmas Eve, KCC perform the same service for the nation, and maybe for a fair slice of the world. The choir probably view the business as a millstone, just as we do, but to fail to deliver would be regarded as an abject betrayal, a dereliction of duty. I believe that the 9L&C is technically a gift from the college to the City of Cambridge, but, through the Beeb, it has become Britain's gift to the world. It is much more than a 'special' CE broadcast, and is enjoyed by those who perhaps think that the 'fair choristers' are waifs pulled from the streets at the last moment. There is no scope for asking another choir to undertake the burden, and this is not a service aimed at the choral cognoscenti.

Thus I believe that Cleobury introduced the commissioned work as a way of ensuring that some innovation was possible. I did not dislike the Tansy Davies carol as much as others, and was well satisfied to have both the Weir and Part offerings in addition. And I see little reason to doubt the competence of the choir; if standards have risen such that KCC is no longer exceptional (were they ever?), they are still a choral force to be reckoned with - my knowledgeable contacts visit mid-week mid-term, and they usually report rapture rather than disappointment. Charity demands compassion for King's on 24th Dec.

Excellent post, decantor! Very well said. Also Magnificat in #59.

Are there any present or former King's choristers on the forum who would like to give their perspective?

[Guest]

Indeed and apparently a 'gift for the world'. Hmm. And charity and compassion on Dec 24th? Hmm.

Yes, all that, and yes I agree with much you say. As I said, I feel sorry for them. And yes, I well know that the choristers - well some of them at least - certainly do love the excitement of the occasion of the 24th, and cherish it. Whether it does much for the choir per se is open to question. So much of that service is pretty well set in stone as it is for many foundations nationwide, so I do see the dilemma. I just find myself less and less in love with the results.

We all on this messageboad know when we have heard choirs giving it real gun, and the result is thrilling. I really do not ever sense that with KCC, well not as currently directed. They seem not to know how to throw caution to the winds and give it their all. St Paul's have a massive acoustic too, so do other foundations, but it seems to inhibit them less than it does KCC. Why?

KCC sounds so defensive, more apparently dedicatedly careful not to make mistakes rather than committing and exciting. They just sound so.....well, in chains over delivery. Fine musicians all, I know for a fact, but............

[Gabriel Jackson]

Having contributed to this service two years ago, and so was present in the chapel, I was not expecting the extraordinay musical, emotional and spiritual experience that resulted. There was no lack of commitment and intensity from any of the performers and the unfolding trajectory of the occasion had a quite overwhelming potency. No broadcast, however good, can convey the special sensation of actually being there, of course, but it strikes me that this service doesn't broadcast well (several colleagues had criticisms of the singing on that occasion which, for me, were simply not an issue live in the building). For all that, it clearly means a great deal to the estimated 100 million around the world who tune in each year. It seems to me that Stephen Cleobury gets the balance of the familiar and the unfamiliar, the reassuring and the challenging, exactly right. Having worked with him on a number of occasions, I have always found him to be a musician of enormous integrity, dedication and flair who goes way beyond mere professionalism (for all that he is totally professional, and always immaculately prepared) in everything he does. I have huge respect for him.

[Guest]

The occasion itself on site is impressive as I know from my own attendance at a series of 9L&Cs - it is a "total experience".

Yes indeed, but GJ is surely right to acknowledge that the resultant broadcast experience is by no means as overwhelming. Why it is not is a puzzle. Partly due to the straitjacket of the repertoire, the tough and largely unyielding structure of the service so slavishly adopted all over the world and thus having less 'local habitation and name' these days. And the plain fact that it must be hard for any DoM to be anything more than supremely 'professional' in such inhibiting circs. Alert, even nit-picking 'professionalism' resulting in a somewhat tense, constricted sound worries me, especially when you hear what boys and men of this age can do elsewhere. The undercurrent seems to be of a terror of making mistakes under such a huge spotlight giving rise to a need therefore for an almost conscious battening down of sheer thrill factor. Given what rides commercially on their Christmas performances both for themselves and the BBC, you can see why the choir sings focused, disciplined, relatively small-toned, as risk-free as possible and just a tad chill.

Hearing them mid-week in Feb or whatever is a notably different experience.

[Gabriel Jackson]

Yes indeed, but GJ is surely right to acknowledge that the resultant broadcast experience is by no means as overwhelming. Why it is not is a puzzle. Partly due to the straitjacket of the repertoire, the tough and largely unyielding structure of the service so slavishly adopted all over the world and thus having less 'local habitation and name' these days. And the plain fact that it must be hard for any DoM to be anything more than supremely 'professional' in such inhibiting circs. Alert, even nit-picking 'professionalism' resulting in a somewhat tense, constricted sound worries me, especially when you hear what boys and men of this age can do elsewhere. The undercurrent seems to be of a terror of making mistakes under such a huge spotlight giving rise to a need therefore for an almost conscious battening down of sheer thrill factor. Given what rides commercially on their Christmas performances both for themselves and the BBC, you can see why the choir sings focused, disciplined, relatively small-toned, as risk-free as possible and just a tad chill.

I didn't hear any of this in the chapel - quite the opposite! - and can only conclude that something is being "lost in translation" if that is how it comes across.

[Vile Consort]

Something else I'd like to pick up on is the statement (made twice above) that that big acoustic amplifies any mistakes. This is quite the opposite of what I hear from organists (and, indeed, of my own limited experience as one), who say to a man that a big acoustic covers up - some go even so far as to say "corrects" - their mistakes.

Any idea why organists and choral directors would have such opposite opinions?

[Magnificat]

Vile Consort.

I would agree with you that a big acoustic more often than not does cover up mistakes or allows a choir not to have to work at its singing.

But according to Philip Ledger this is definitely not the case at King's, just the opposite in fact, and it is why the choir has to be very careful and disciplined about all the technical aspects of its singing.

A big choir sound in King's chapel with less than perfect intonation, for example, would be a disaster whereas in somewhere like Westminster Cathedral they could possibly get away with it.

VCC

[Barbirollians]

I really enjoyed it this year on Radio 4 - no ghastly dissonant choral wailings masquerading as a " modern carol ".

[Simon Biazeck]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr6yZ-deibU&context=C376b60bADOEgsToPDskLePMUh7Xz3VpMsi2eeKj2J

KKC Carols from 1954!

Many will be aware of this, I'm sure, but it's worth a look not least because all the values are quite different from the present incumbents' - care with the expression of text and sound, in particular.

[Guest]

Less is more conducting!! A mere raised finger, mimed lines, the choir's total confidence in the material, which, one has to say, was hardly all that testing, but still well turned out. Choir looked fewer in number - 12 trebs, 12 men? And a sense of a SERVICE as opposed to a TV global brand.

[Simon Biazeck]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio3/2011/12/the-festival-of-nine-lessons-and-carols-in-surround-sound.shtml

Above is a link to a 1958 service with Wilcocks. You must be a Word user to install the software required to listen to it. I can't, sadly!

That conducting is the most conservative I've ever seen, but he is very much in control! I was particularly impressed with the priests' singing - solemn, unaffected and pitch perfect. I dare say we would get a similar overall effect if New College, Oxford were broadcast doing the same.

[Gabriel Jackson]

Less is more conducting!! A mere raised finger, mimed lines, the choir's total confidence in the material, which, one has to say, was hardly all that testing, but still well turned out. Choir looked fewer in number - 12 trebs, 12 men? And a sense of a SERVICE as opposed to a TV global brand.

Hardly at all testing, as you say. The music was all homophonic, not hard, and all in four parts (except the Pearsall). For all the other virtues of the singing, the mens' sound is horrible (especially the altos).

[Guest]

Not sure I'd say 'horrible', but certainly of a whole other age, and pretty wobbly and thin, boys discreet and small toned, and the whole thing all of a piece with a black and white video! If you see what I mean..............!!

[Keraulophone]

Cathedral musicians to whom I have played this 1954 sevice (on a BBC DVD) have been amazed at the wonderful quality of the singing and ensemble, given the single finger direction, and indeed at the whole aura of the event as captured on film, given the stylistic manners of the day. It is fascinating to compare this with the 1958 Willcocks/Preston 9L&C, presumably DW's second. I love the way Preston subtly lowers the pitch from A to A flat in 'Once in Royal' - effortless control, though nowadays such a loss of pitch (or the solo treble going sharp) might be considered a minor disaster!

[paradisum]

By 1954, Boris Ord's Parkinson's Disease had progressed to the point where apparently all he could do to conduct was pretty much raise one finger. I didn't know if people were aware of this. I heard this from a David Willcocks lecture in the USA some years ago.