CE Chapel of King's College, London 20th Feb 2013

[DracoM]

CE Chapel of King's College, London


Order of Service:


Introit: Miserere mihi Domine (Byrd)
Responses: Byrd
Psalm 104 (Aldrich, Attwood)
First Lesson: Genesis 42: 6-17
Canticles: First Service (Parsons)
Second Lesson: Galatians 4: 21 - 5 v1
Anthem: Tristitia et anxietas (Byrd)
Hymn: Lord Jesus, think on me (Southwell)



Organ Voluntary: Pavan and Galliard in C minor BK 29 (Byrd)



Richard Hall & Christopher Woodward (Organ Scholars)
David Trendell (Director of Music)

[DracoM]

Reminder: today @ 3.30 p.m.

[Simon]

Caught last 20 mins. Smooth, professional, concert-style singing.

Hymn - oops! Done similar, indeed far worse, myself.

[Vox Humana]

I caught the end while driving home this afternoon. They were already well into the prima pars of Tristitia. How lovely it was to hear such apparently heartfelt singing. I am looking forward to catching up with the whole service sometime tomorrow.

[Simon Biazeck]

This was exquisite from start to finish. Healthy, free, and musical all round – the best mixed collegiate sound I’ve heard for quite a while. Byrd’s Tristitia et anxietas was a tour de force – so beautifully shaped! There was great dignity in the spoken word too making for a truly prayerful service. There is hope!

[DracoM]

Liked the pacing, and for a collegiate choir, enjoyed some surprisingly resonant basses and decent tenors too.
That is a pig of a way to have to start a service with that a cappella Miserere Mei, but quite nicely pinged.
Yes, agree about the service: no fuss, no false bonhommie, straight and well-worked.
Tristia et anxietas is a huge sing because little of it is flat out, almost all is under dynamic tight control, with real demands on long breathing and phrasing.

Thanks to all.

[ardcarp]

concert-style singing.

I only managed to dip in and out of the broadcast this pm, but it sounded very good. I just wonder what you mean exactly by 'concert-style singing', Simon? I think the expression 'concert choir' is sometimes bandied about as if it were some sort of insult. Surely producing a professional and as near perfect result as possible is a desirable thing in a chapel service whether broadcast or not?

I'm not being deliberately provocative. I genuinely do not understand the distinction being drawn.

[jean]

...I genuinely do not understand the distinction being drawn.

Nor do I.

The last time this was discussed here the point was made that Westminster Cathedral choir never used to give concerts. I observed that they always made records.

But surely listening to a recording is more of a concert experience than a liturgical one?


.

[decantor]

I think the expression 'concert choir' is sometimes bandied about as if it were some sort of insult.

I think it was I, in the "Clare at Aldeburgh" thread, that first used the expression 'concert choir' contentiously. I owe an explanation, and possibly an apology, to those whose eyebrows or hackles were raised. In view of the subsequent challenges, I gave the matter some thought. Simon, I'm sure, will answer for himself.

I fear I was using a very personal shorthand that arises from a subjective (or maybe generational) perception. During my formative years - yonks ago - the liturgy was performed by liturgical choirs, almost invariably with boys on the top line, and the sound was (and still is) distinctive, even now young girls have joined the party. OTOH, concerts, largely of secular music, were delivered by mixed choirs with their own quite different sound-world. [I do not include the large mixed choruses that offered sacred music (Oratorios, Passions, and the like) that was not liturgical]. Please remember that in my early experience it was not the norm for mixed choirs to include much liturgical music in their repertoire; contrariwise, when a liturgical choir gave a concert, it rarely strayed into secular music. These early perceptions - battle-lines, if you like - have stuck with me. When The Sixteen, Tallis Scholars, Tenebrae, and the rest perform in concert music drawn from the liturgical repertoire - often lumping together works which would never be associated in the liturgy - I hear it as pure music, no longer shrouded in its AMDG aura. That's fine - I enjoy it. But when those same sounds purport to enhance a service, as in CE, I do feel cheated: my long-term conditioning asserts itself, and it requires conscious effort to relate the mixed voice sound - the 'concert' sound - to the liturgy; for me, the traditional cathedral choir has a spiritual legitimacy surpassing that of choirs in general, even those of superior quality. However - and here is the crux - I had no right to impose this very individual response on others, and to assume their understanding and sympathy. Don't tell me it's crazy: I know it, but cannot shake it off.

I thought the KCL choir today was remarkable for a collegiate ensemble: someone has already remarked on the maturity of the male voices, but the female voices also had a remarkable warmth, richness, plushness - I cannot find the mot juste - it was as if the dark chocolate timbre of the contralto had been translated into soprano. Add the musicality and technical control of the group, and I was enthralled. It was a very fine service. But..... well, see above.

[jean]

...During my formative years - yonks ago - the liturgy was performed by liturgical choirs, almost invariably with boys on the top line, and the sound was (and still is) distinctive, even now young girls have joined the party. OTOH, concerts, largely of secular music, were delivered by mixed choirs with their own quite different sound-world. [I do not include the large mixed choruses that offered sacred music (Oratorios, Passions, and the like) that was not liturgical]. Please remember that in my early experience it was not the norm for mixed choirs to include much liturgical music in their repertoire; contrariwise, when a liturgical choir gave a concert, it rarely strayed into secular music.

I don't know how old you are, decantor, but when I started singing in London in the mid-1960s the choirs I sang in (and there were quite a few at the time, until their turf was invaded by professional groups such as those you mention) all gave concerts in churches, and rarely sang any secular music at all. The Renaissance Singers had been doing this since they were founded 1944, which was a bit before my time.

...for me, the traditional cathedral choir has a spiritual legitimacy surpassing that of choirs in general, even those of superior quality.

And even those of other sorts of church, which have had mixed voice choirs for many years* - some of them not of very high quality, true, but surely with a degree of spiritual legitimacy?

*At least since the West Gallery people were summarily sent packing by the liturgists, anyway.

[BBMmk2]

Didnt Morales compose compose a rather lovely setting of the Miserere Mihi Domine?

[ardcarp]

I thought the KCL choir today was remarkable for a collegiate ensemble: someone has already remarked on the maturity of the male voices, but the female voices also had a remarkable warmth, richness, plushness - I cannot find the mot juste - it was as if the dark chocolate timbre of the contralto had been translated into soprano. Add the musicality and technical control of the group, and I was enthralled. It was a very fine service.

I have just listened in full on i-player. It was IMO outstanding singing, some of the best I've heard on CE. I do know that KCL attracts some very good student singers...maybe those who want to be in London rather than (for whatever reason) Oxbridge.

I'm afraid I'm about to wax lyrical. I agree absolutely with decantor about the soprano tone. It was clearly not a 'fake treble' sound, but a mature rounded soprano timbre...and the extraordinary thing is that Dec and Can matched up so well that for instance in the Parsons canticles there was perfect balance. And that goes for ATB too. The psalmody was exemplary. Fine diction, variable pacing to suit the changes in mood and no mannerisms. The accompaniment was discreet, and even though I don't personally favour the holding on of organ chords between all the verses, it was never obtrusive here. The crowning glory was the Byrd Tristitia. There was no overblown singing. It was controlled, with superb phrasing, dynamics and pacing. For me...perfection. A big congratulation to David Trendell and the choir.

Simon (post #3) what was the 'oops' about ? The hymn was perfection too. Did you hear the playover (lines 3 and 4) as a 'mistake'? Or have I missed something?

As far as 'the concert choir' thing is concerned, all I can say is that in addition to near perfection musically, the unfolding of this CE was dignified and spiritually satisfying (for believers and others) so it clearly wasn't a 'concert' and no-one was showing off.

[Simon]

I've heard it all now and see no reason to alter my initial impression as to the style.

That said, I fully concur with those who have praised the singing: if we can't have a traditional CE, it's good to hear these young, mixed, university groups performing so well, in good, traditional repertoire. Whether one likes the style or not, and I don't, their professionalism and skill need recognition and all involved provided us with a lovely service.

The psalms certainly had some volume dynamic, but to my ears were rushed: the timing just didn't seem natural in the way that one finds at many of our cathedrals (the obvious couple that we all know about excepted).

The canticles were well-done but to me, somewhat boring. It seemed that the striving for good tone, balance and clarity - admirable aims, of course - had overridden the naturalness of the setting and the emotional content.

I fully agree, however, that the anthem was a gem - very beautifully sung and clearly the centrepiece of the service.

As to the hymn - having listened to it again several times, I cannot hear what I heard on Wednesday in the playover. I'm not sure why that is, and can only assume I made a mistake, or that something here at home interfered with the broadcast. I wonder if anyone else heard something amiss - I thought there was an incorrect chord. I unreservedly apologise if my comment was based on error.

bws to all

S-S!

[ardcarp]

Just as an afterthought, I got the impression of a mixed alto line...can anyone confirm this? It was beautifully blended whatever.

[Vox Humana]

As to the hymn - having listened to it again several times, I cannot hear what I heard on Wednesday in the playover. I'm not sure why that is, and can only assume I made a mistake, or that something here at home interfered with the broadcast. I wonder if anyone else heard something amiss - I thought there was an incorrect chord. I unreservedly apologise if my comment was based on error.

I hear what I heard on Wednesday, though it took me aback at the time. Since I was expecting a playover of the tune from the start, the phrygian semitone effect caused by starting at the third line (in octaves) sounded like a wrong note and was just plain confusing. I didn't cotton on properly to the tune and key until the last couple of bars - something I experience quite frequently when an organist plays over the end of the tune rather than the beginning.