Choral Vespers from Westminster Cathedral Oct 9th 2013

[subcontrabass]

...mind you, I do wish they'd ditch that awful Lord's Prayer setting which seems to be churned out all the time. No doubt it's hallowed by some.

Yes, it is a very poor adaptation of Rimsky-Korsakov's setting. If they must use that setting there are much better English adaptations around.

[Thomas Kelway]

A similar version is used at Portsmouth and Winchester, it's a well known tune that the congregation can join in with.

[Simon Biazeck]

A similar version is used at Portsmouth and Winchester, it's a well known tune that the congregation can join in with.

Quite so.

[ardcarp]

The congregation joining in? Heaven preserve us.

[Simon Biazeck]

They certainly do when we sing it at Vespers - that's the point. The congregation also sings the appropriate Marian antiphon (e.g. Salve Regina) at the end. I think they also sing the Missa de Angelis and Orbis Factor for Mass, or are encouraged so to do on the Mass sheet (Yorksbass will confirm). Dominican Vêpres Paroissal (New Rite) at Notre-Dame is a rather delightful collection of 17th century antiphons (in the vernacular) and Gregorian Chant with organ improvisation throughout from the titulaire.

[subcontrabass]

A similar version is used at Portsmouth and Winchester, it's a well known tune that the congregation can join in with.

I know it is well known. I hear it every Sunday, and have done for the last fifteen years, but in a slightly less unsatisfactory version than that used at Westminster Cathedral. There are serious problems with that version, both in itself and for use as a congregational setting.

First, it is a very unsatisfactory arrangement. I am familiar with at least five adaptations to English text of Rimsky-Korsakov's setting, none of them entirely satisfactory. This is the poorest of a poor bunch. It does not respect the original in terms of linking musical phrases with the phrases in the text. Putting multiple syllables on to the last note of a phrase is not consistent with the style in which the original was created. The placement of the English text to the notes is at times very odd. I could offer a better arrangement than the one that we heard, but to produce something really acceptable would need a different English text.

Second comes the question of what the congregation should sing alongside something which in origin is a choir piece. Outwardly it sounds much like any traditional Russian chant from the nineteenth century. Much that is still used today is based on a very simple method of harmonization. To the original melody is added a parallel part a third above (or a sixth below), then a simple bass line to give mainly root position chords, with the option for a fourth part to fill in the harmony. For monastic choirs (male or female) this gives a simple three-part version, with the melody in the middle line. For small village choirs (where tenors might be in short supply) the women and children would sing the melody and the third above, with the men singing the bass (and possibly a tenor part). For the Moscow Synodal Chorus, which until the Russian Revolution remained an all male choir, the boys would sing the top two parts in parallel thirds, with the men adding the full harmony. Rimsky-Korsakov, in this setting of the Lord's Prayer, produces what sounds like a version with the parallel third above the melody (note that the top line starts and ends on the third of the scale), and a full set of harmonies below, but missing what would have been the melody in traditional simple chant. Kastorsky produced a version which "back fills" the missing melody, and it is this version that is used for the basis of most of the versions currently in use. The question then is, should the congregation singing in unison join in with the top line (which is really a descant rather than a melody), or should they be taught to sing the "missing" melody a third below, or what? I know of no satisfactory answer to that question.

[Roger Judd]

Just caught up with this service on iPlayer. Wonderful and characterful singing from boys and men. Lovely shaping of the music and a glorious dynamic range, fully exploited. The Stanford Magnificat is a vocal tour-de-force and sounded totally secure, with each section assuming its own individual character immediately and seamlessly - beautiful direction. The two motets by Poulenc and the one by Stanford also received fine performances of great sensitivity.
No-one has yet mentioned Peter Steven's part in the broadcast, which seems a serious omission on the part of the message-board. IMO his accompaniments of the plainsong are models of that art, doing just what you expect and then adding something, almost risque, that brings on a smile. His Bruhns Præludium was brilliant, with most imaginative registrations on the great Willis in the West gallery.
RJ

ps. Incidentally the BBC website credits the organ scholar with playing the Bruhns - not so!

[ardcarp]

Roger. I take your point about no-one mentioning the organ playing. In fact the standard of organ playing and accompaniment at cathedrals (and colleges) in the UK is of the very highest standard; so much so that one seldom feels the need to comment. It is rather taken for granted. I wonder if you share my view that it is harder to find choir-trainers of exceptional talent? Those with the necessary charisma to communicate and inspire both children and adults, to cope with recruitment, administration, and in addition to bring profound musicality to their direction are rare indeed. Because of this there have recently been several appointments of non-organists. Do you approve of this trend?!

[DracoM]

But in the Forum's defence, how are we to know who by name precisely plays what when TWO organists are credited for a service?

[Roger Judd]

Ardcarp - you pose an interesting question, and one that must give Deans and Chapters some anxious moments when recruiting. Do I approve of non-organist directors of music? Well, yes I do, or perhaps I should say that I don't disapprove! However I do have some caveats. A few recent appointments bring those concerns into sharp focus, I think. In no particular order, I think they can be summarized as (i) rapport with the boys/girls; (ii) familiarity with a daily work-load, and an understanding of what is realistic (in terms of repertoire) and what is not; (iii) an understanding of the stresses their organist is working under - especially as non-organist DoMs may not have advanced keyboard skills; (iv) how to work with Deans and Chapters; and (v) working alongside the school, if attached, or local authorities, and the parents of the boys and girls.

We've seen, in recent times, where this has worked well and where it has not, and I think it fair to say that in all cases the individuals concerned had/have all the right credentials, but that does not guarantee success. Of course, exactly the same can be said of fine organists as directors of music - just because you can play well does not automatically mean that you can run a choir well.

There are, thank goodness, assistant organists around who, given time and experience, will step up to the top jobs and fill the post with distinction, but I know that the non-musical aspects of the job will deter a few from making that move. Time will tell!
RJ

[Roger Judd]

Draco - the continuity announcer told us at the end of the service that 'the organ was played by the assistant director of music, Peter Stevens'. I don't know whether Edward Symington had a part in the service - it was good that his name appeared in RT as an important member of the Cathedral's music department.
RJ

[ardcarp]

Thanks, Roger, for your reply. (Post #25) Your five-point checklist applies equally to organists and non-organists, with the exception of No iii, concerning keyboard skills. Given the pressure of rehearsals it would be very difficult, IMO, if one did not have a sufficient ability to thwack out both parts and accompaniments (accurately) on the piano at the drop of a hat....unless that is one were assured of the presence on every occasion of an assistant, and surely this would be a big strain on resources. Thanks for being so candid about some 'recent appointments' !

[Roger Judd]

re #25 - I fear I didn't express myself well enough! I think my list of points was based on this thought. It is conceivable that a non-organist DoM might not have had direct experience of working with, or in, a Cathedral environment, and so would not have the knowledge of how those organisations work that someone already steeped in the system (as assistant organist, for example) would have. A lot of very basic knowledge in the running of a music department that is taken for granted, would suddenly be found lacking, with obvious and audible results.
RJ

[Magnificat]

[QUOTE=Roger Judd;342666

We've seen, in recent times, where this has worked well and where it has not, and I think it fair to say that in all cases the individuals concerned had/have all the right credentials, but that does not guarantee success. Of course, exactly the same can be said of fine organists as directors of music - just because you can play well does not automatically mean that you can run a choir well.

There are, thank goodness, assistant organists around who, given time and experience, will step up to the top jobs and fill the post with distinction, but I know that the non-musical aspects of the job will deter a few from making that move. Time will tell!
RJ[/QUOTE]

Roger,

How are Deans and Chapters going to know if a fine assistant organist will in time become a fine choir trainer?

In my opinion any applicant for a cathedral DoM post as well, as you say, as having the necessary background experience of a cathedral music department must be able to demonstrate proven ability as a choir trainer ( of boys especially).

Assistant organists can only do this, in my opinion, if they have run a choir of boys and have the necessary recordings etc to show what they can do ( including most importantly these days evidence of recruitment skills ) and they must find the opportunities to do this. If they want to become a cathedral DoM it is never again going to be enough to be always a cathedral assistant and just to expect or hope for eventual promotion.

Otherwise it is all just a big gamble for a D and C even with references from a respected DoM. Sometimes they'll get it brilliantly right and other times disastrously wrong or more often than not the appointment will just be mediocre.

As regards this broadcast from Westminster Cathedral. I don't like their distinctive sound anyway I find it inherently unmusical so, unlike someone above who said he/she thought Martin Baker ( undoubtedly a brilliant organist ) had now become of age as choir trainer, personally I should like to hear him conduct a choir of boys and men in a less helpful acoustic before giving an opinion.

VCC

[Lordgeous]

Roger,



As regards this broadcast from Westminster Cathedral. I don't like their distinctive sound anyway I find it inherently unmusical so, unlike someone above who said he/she thought Martin Baker ( undoubtedly a brilliant organist ) had now become of age as choir trainer, personally I should like to hear him conduct a choir of boys and men in a less helpful acoustic before giving an opinion.

VCC

Try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y9yM53TowA