Acoustics: addressing the desire for clear speech
  • princehalprincehal
    Posts: 50
    I read "Sing Like A Catholic," which had a chapter entitled "Tear up those carpets!" The basic thesis was "There are tons of huge benefits to acoustic resonance. Therefore, your church should install as much hard, resonant surface as it has money for."

    Our parish is about to break ground on a second church (29-foot ceiling). Our pastor appreciates beautiful music, is a trained architect, and as such understands what carpets do better than I ever will.

    I casually asked him: "So... will we use acoustically reflective surfaces in the new church?"

    Said he: "Somewhat. They're great in some spaces; for example, the basilica in St. Louis has amazing acoustics. However, in some buildings they create echoes that make spoken words very difficult to understand. So we'll have some brick and tile, as well as some carpet and sound-absorbent ceiling tile"

    "Ah." said I.

    I tried to learn more about the nuances of his point, but I only found more one-dimensional articles about
    what
    carpets
    do,
    and was surprised that none of these articles addressed my pastor's objection, even in passing.

    Am I the only one who has run into this argument? Is there any material that speaks to this objection? If anyone else has had this discussion at their parish, I'd love to hear about it.

    Thanks! Thomas
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Tell. Your. Priest. To. Tell. Every. One. Else. To. Stop. Mumbling. And. Speak. Clearly. With. The. Dignity. That. Befits. A. Resonant. Acoustic.
    Thanked by 9princehal JL eft94530 M. Jackson Osborn francis Liam ClergetKubisz Aristotle Esguerra Casavant Organist
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Curious, indeed, that he was concerned about echoes making intelligibility difficult, but not about carpeting and (non-)acoustical tile making intelligibility impossible - a matter which must be addressed by the further purchase of expensive PA systems.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Tell him we don't need to hear what he is saying. As far as the readings go, we will follow in our missals. We just want to hear the music in all its glorious splendor in an authentic church acoustic which makes up half the sound of the choir and organ. (Maybe God agrees?)

    BTW... this will also eliminate any extraneous comments made by anyone on the altar.
  • JahazaJahaza
    Posts: 468
    I have been in some churches that (at least to me) are (seem) so echoey in their acoustic that they make choral music muddy. I find St. Paul the Apostle in New York City to be this way. (However, it may be a result of current positioning of performing groups in the nave rather than in the choir loft or the sanctuary, which I expect might sound better.)

    But carpet and acoustic tile? That hardly should be necessary in new construction! Though carpet (not wall-to-wall!) is traditional in the sanctuary to spare the feet and/or knees of the sacred ministers and/or servers.
  • JahazaJahaza
    Posts: 468
    This is a great summary of Catholic Church acoustics with suggestions for further study from the Diocese of Columbus:

    http://www.colsdioc.org/Portals/0/Departments/LIT/Documents/GuideAcoustics.PDF
    Thanked by 2princehal CHGiffen
  • princehalprincehal
    Posts: 50
    @Jahaza: Boom! That article is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks so much. I will pass this to my contacts in the building committee.

    And Adam, MJO and Francis: Good points. I may not have the nerve to say them, but I will happily think them ;)
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    I find St. Paul the Apostle in New York City to be this way. (However, it may be a result of current positioning of performing groups in the nave rather than in the choir loft or the sanctuary, which I expect might sound better.)
    Been that way since the beginning, played the organ in 1966 and with about 11 seconds, glorious for the organ and choir - but as they do in Europe, the repertoire of the choirs singing must take this into consideration.
  • donr
    Posts: 971
    We installed ceiling acoustic tiles in our new church and its has ruined the acoustics. I tried my best to change the minds of the architect, sound engineer and pastor but they all thought it would be best.

    After it was built the pastor and sound engineer both said they think the acoustic is too dry. The pastor complains all the time that he can't hear the choir. We need to get closer to the mics, he says.

    Do NOT put in acoustical treatment!!!
    IMHO.
    Thanked by 4M. Jackson Osborn princehal Liam CHGiffen
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    postle in New York City to be this way. (However, it may be a result of current positioning of performing groups in the nave rather than in the choir loft or the sanctuary, which I expect might sound better.)
    bingo. choirs are meant to be raised up so that the sound waves are evenly distributed up and down as they go out. if you put a choir on the floor you actually destroy a good acoustic.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    While it's often true that raised locations for choirs help more evenly distribute sound waves as compared to being located on the main floor, it's not always true. Don't need no loft in Santa Maria Maggiore, Santa Sabina, S. Clemente et cet., where the older traditional location of the choir (on the floor between the sanctuary and the congregation) works perfectly. And I've been in my share of lofts with not-great acoustical effects. Much depends on the specifics of a space.
    Thanked by 3M. Jackson Osborn princehal CHGiffen
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    I agree with Adam above. People are lazy when they speak, and also when they read from the Lectionary. This is the majority of the problem, not the live acoustic.
    Thanked by 2princehal CHGiffen
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    Clerget,

    Is part of the problem with "lazy"-ness that we've never been taught to speak for proclamation?
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    Yes. It's the same as diction for singers: the way singers pronounce, especially vowel formation, makes the text clear, even in a large, echoey hall.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    What too few lectors seem to understand is that their task is not to stand before the congregation and read their ritual text. Rather, to be effective, they should employ all the rhetorical skills of an orator. Liturgical roles, whatever they may be, should not be handed out to just anyone who will conveniently 'do that'. This happens for the same reason that choirs are filled with people who aren't devoted - because 'we are lucky to get someone to do it' (when they consider it convenient).
    Thanked by 3ClergetKubisz CHGiffen princehal
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    MJO

    While I agree with your first sentence, I would modify the second significantly. "All the rhetorical skills" strongly implies a much fuller quiver of tools than are appropriate for the proclamation of readings.

    First and foremost: the content is already determined. It's not creative oratory.

    Second, use of dramatizing stylings should be limited - especially anything that interposes the personality of the reader into the reading.

    This is more about elocution than rhetoric, although an understanding of *Scriptural rhetorical forms* would illuminate elocution.
    Thanked by 4M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen princehal CCooze
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Liam -
    Agreed, without reservation.
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,152
    In my parish, many of the lectors are unintelligible. This is not due to lack of training. (We have to retrain every other year.) I think it is because they are not sure of themselves and tend to go through it too fast and halfway mumble. The first parish I was trained at, the priest told me to read slowly. He said if I thought I was going too slow I was probably going at the right pace. He also told me to say a Hail Mary between the final sentence and the phrase 'The Word of the Lord' (or as it was said back then 'This is the the Word of the Lord'.)

    I have also noticed that the acoustics are vastly different depending on if there are just a few people in the congregation or if the church is full.
    Thanked by 1princehal
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    "I have also noticed that the acoustics are vastly different depending on if there are just a few people in the congregation or if the church is full."

    Indeed you would if you are paying attention. If you live in a church without complete climate control in an area with four pronounced seasons, you would also likely notice a difference between midwinter and midsummer. Not only because of humidity and temperature but because of very different seasonal attire of PIPs.
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    I used to be a lector. Our "training" consisted of the layperson in charge of the "ministry" explaining to the group when to come up to do their readings, where to find the book in the sacristy, and had us say a few words into the microphone. That was it. Done. Fully trained lectors, I guess.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Perhaps this would be a good time to ask: should the "cantor"/"psalmist"/"leader of song" proclaim the announcements he is commanded to give, or state them discreetly?

    (Yes, I know that there shouldn't be such announcements, but skip that, please. If your comment says only that, it will be tedious.)
    Thanked by 1princehal
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,152
    Announcements should not be proclaimed. They are not the Word of God, nor part of the Mass.
    Thanked by 3chonak M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Well, the actual truth is that it is the announcements that are tedious - but, alas, we shant belabour the point. So, directly to address Chonak's question, the announcements should be stated discreetly - as discreetly as is possible, and with some apparent shame at besmirching the ritual text with them.
    Thanked by 5chonak tsoapm CHGiffen princehal CCooze
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,694

    with some apparent shame at besmirching the ritual text with them.


    I will agree with this.
    Thanked by 1chonak
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    Chonak,

    Do you mean, "When a [fill in title here] proclaim the announcements of hymn numbers and such" or do you mean "After everyone has finished kneeling, and given thanks to God for the Sacrament received, where appropriate, the [fill in title] proclaims the announcements such as "there will be a pancake breakfast following Mass""?


    I think the answer differs depending on the case.

    In the first case, the announcement should be clear, brief and not repeated. These should be done "discreetly" because to do them otherwise is to draw attention not to the information but to the messenger.

    In the second case, the text should be written out beforehand, NEVER improvised, clear and as brief as intelligently possible. These should not be done discreetly, for the simple reason that if they are, their delivery defeats their purpose.
    Thanked by 2Spriggo princehal
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Agreed. As it happens, someone other than the cantor reads the pancake announcements, but it's a good distinction.
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    So, you intended the first, not the second?
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    I think the person should just give out the pancakes right there and then and dispense with the announcement altogether.
    Thanked by 2princehal CharlesW
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    Throw in some coffee and I'm all for it. ;-)
  • Reval
    Posts: 180
    Well, the priest gives the pancake announcement directly after the birthday blessing, of course!
    Thanked by 1ClergetKubisz
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    Sung after "Happy Birthday" to the same tune: "May the good Lord bless you..." No kidding, I know at least one church where they do that on the first Sunday of the month.
    Thanked by 1Reval
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    We once surprised a choir director on her birthday when it fell on a rehearsal day in Holy Week: we sang Happy Birthday (with straight faces) to the simple chant melody for Pange Lingua (just repeating "Happy Birthday" and adding "to you" on the Amen melody). She was in stitches.
    Thanked by 1Reval
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Sung after "Happy Birthday" to the same tune: "May the good Lord bless you..." No kidding, I know at least one church where they do that on the first Sunday of the month.
    ooooh! a new first Sunday devotion!
Add a Comment