The building is beautiful.
Far more beautiful than Houston's co-cathedral, which is redeemed only by its Pasi organ.
I was holding my breath to see if an organ would appear.
How nice that one did, and that it's a Fisk! (or will be.)
Nice also, to see that there is a large real carillon. (Fifty bells, yet!)
Nice, too, the preservation of fine glass from dis-used churches.
Nice, too, the neo-classical architectural vocabulary, and the refreshingly correct use of its elements.
As for the music - none of it merits comment or notice - except for Thaxted and Parry's great jubilation.

Yikes. Not a note of Gregorian chant? So much for pride of place.

Strange to have such foursquare pedestrian music on such an occasion in such a glorious space.

In that case, we pray that the diocese will in the future choose music fitting of the Mass, the beautiful grand setting it has established and the Fisk to come.

These things are ALWAYS planned by committee so I would be inclined to cut anyone some slack.
The lack of chant, however, really stood out, and not only for obvious reasons of principle. If nothing else, it would have been a welcome foil to the dense and busy orchestrations. Yes, may times less is more!

I agree with Jared-I would like to look at the positive. There is obviously some priority placed on music in that diocese. This is Fisk's FIRST Catholic installation. Somebody in Raleigh (and not just the musician) had the vision to make this happen. I'll be interested to see how the cathedral music program develops in that new space.

MeloChas

The liturgy of dedication is probably the most exhausting of any in the ritual books: it can make the Easter Vigil seem like a cakewalk (especially because liturgy folks have annual experience of the latter in a familiar space, but a dedication typically takes place in a new space that people aren't used to working in yet and is rarely experienced frequently except in unusual demographic blips).

There's an enormous amount of theology distilled and condensed into dedication rites; it's almost like a meal entirely of a flight of foie gras preparations. This might subconsciously provoke a reaction in planners to break it down, as it were. As opposed to taking a more leisurely and spacious tack that allows savoring and digestion. (An American versus Latin mindset towards feasting.)

The forum =/= CMAA.

Also, I’ll bite and say that the tabernacle shelf–altar is too narrow for anything but that, a seperate chapel is preferable, and an arrangement with three or five steps and a baldachinno much further back (but because of politics, accessible from both sides) is preferable. The throne at an angle impedes this.

The quibbles found about comments made in this thread have nothing to do with the personel orchestrating the event, or the politics involved, etc.

We should be free to honestly assess objectively a program like this of such significant proportion without fearing retribution of our colleagues. This is the very subject we are supposed to be learned and trained to do right and do well. We all understand quite well the dynamics at play within any organization especially one of this magnitude. It is a given. Since the diocese is also trying to do right and do well, they would probably welcome some constructive criticism. A number of us who have been at this for decades are pretty much saying the same thing. Sometimes the truth is difficult to swallow.

I cannot speak for the moderator of this forum hosted by CMAA, (which has a significant contribution from its participating body) but I would imagine comments made here do not necessarily represent the views of CMAA. But perhaps the moderator will chime in.

I do not claim to speak for CMAA but only my own observations. I suspect this is true of almost everyone who posts here.

One other observation I would make is that comments made incognito on any forum are certainly easier to dismiss since the individual does not stand on their own credibility.

All in all, I would never base my membership to CMAA upon what is said in this forum. I have been harshly treated by people posting here and although sometimes it causes pain, it comes with the turf. Ya godda have a thick skin. CMAA represents a cause to uphold and promote sacred music. You should join if you believe the same thing. END RANT

The building is beautiful and one would hope the new DM can bring the level of music up a bit. I noticed in the credits the usual names, Joncas, Haas, Toolan, and company whose contributions to Catholic music are infamous. I know about those committees and they can be a handful to deal with.

Let's be cautious about the words we speak about our colleagues. The new director in Raleigh is a friend of mine from Note Dame. I have no doubt that he has done the best job he can, no matter what many of us consider the "ideal." I find this board to be considerably elitist and dismissive of many people's best, which is the primary reason I am no longer a paying CMAA member.

Elitist? Hardly. We just want good music - seemingly a thing too much to ask from some quarters. The DM may have presented the best compromise he was able to put together from the various factions. I suspect he is capable of better and time will tell.

I have certainly seen spiteful, cruel and uncalled for comments on this forum (as on every other). I don't see anything out of line or ad hominem in this thread, though.

This was the dedication of the most significant new-build cathedral in the country - perhaps for a generation (can anyone think of something bigger recently?). The dedication liturgy is posted publicly, and is certainly a worthy topic for discussion and critique. I'm afraid that goes with the territory when you're a cathedral music director (a public leadership position)! If there is a common failing in the CMAA and often on this forum, it is a lack of understanding of where a parish has been, and what is possible at this particular moment in a particular place. Something may be a vast improvement on the recent past, while still falling short of the ideal.

I do not like the siting of the tabernacle. Firstly it is not in the tradition exemplified by St Peter's or St John Lateran. Secondly it is too far removed from the people to admit of private devotion, which church documents say is an important consideration. (The placing of a tabernacle on the altar was a development after the Council of Trent, not envisaged by the first editions of the Tridentine Missal.) Thirdly, it is the ideal site for the choir, not a loft at the back far from the sacred action of which it should be an intimate part.
Westminster Cathedral shows that the choir can be placed here without it becoming a visual distraction.

My comment was an observation about the music, not about the personnel involved. I understand that the person in charge of the music certainly did the best he could with the resources he had.

For the record, my name is Samuel Schmitt, Director of Sacred Music and Organist at the Cathedral Parish in Bridgeport, CT.

Maybe Jackson, but he's....

Acchhh!
Charles, how could you?
This is a baseless injustice, a cruel slur.
Why, we are not elitist, we are just Ordinary folk.

Acchhh!
Charles, how could you?
This is a baseless injustice, a cruel slur.
Why, we are not elitist, we are just Ordinary folk.

I haven't found anything ordinary about the Ordinariate. A pretty special group, I think.

Hear, Hear!
Charles likes Fisk!
Now that's rich.

The Fisk instruments have a good sound. Unfortunately, you are buried in the pipes, so to speak, and don't have the flexibility of a console that can be moved. You never hear the instrument from the vantage point of the congregation. Oh, you say, but we love doing things the pre-technology hard way. It gains us credibility as serious organists. Yeah, right. Sounds like a bunch of old Calvinists who like to suffer for suffering's sake and think it will gain them points in heaven. Not so!

The Fisk instruments have a good sound. Unfortunately, you are buried in the pipes, so to speak, and don't have the flexibility of a console that can be moved. You never hear the instrument from the vantage point of the congregation. Oh, you say, but we love doing things the pre-technology hard way. It gains us credibility as serious organists. Yeah, right. Sounds like a bunch of old Calvinists who like to suffer for suffering's sake and think it will gain them points in heaven.

Well Charles... I guess there is no saving you. The organist should be one with the instrument, so to speak. Burried in the pipes is how it is supposed to be. If the organ is built correctly, then it will not be speaking in your face, but overhead. One does not need or desire to move a console. One does not need to hear the instrument from the vantage point of the cong if it is voiced correctly. I would "suffer" to play a Fisk, Pasi or a Fritz any day of the week over any electropneumatic.

I would "suffer" to play a Fisk, Pasi or a Fritz any day of the week over any electropneumatic.

Yeah, but you ARE one of those purists. "Suffer" is a good word choice. Besides, Calvinists don't go to heaven in the first place. ;-)

But Jackson, I am catching on to Francis. He would probably play Bach on it. LOL.

That particular organ is near enough that I may actually get to hear it.

Actually I am playing a small Bach chorale prelude tomorrow. I try not to make a habit of it. I will be playing some Peeters and an anonymous French piece from the Limoges Organ Book for balance. Our "anthem" for tomorrow is "Eucaristica" by Pablo Casals. How's that for diversity?

...model...

...for he is the very model of a modern major gen- diverse organist.

If we don't criticise the bad , how can the bad improve, or even find out how awful they are. Too many "so called" church musicians continue to play the worst music of the 1960's and 70's, but because they live in an echo chamber they think this is popular, when all they are doing is emptying churches of those with good musical taste, quality musicians, and almost everyone else.

WE MUST always point out what is bad... or even what is not good enough. If we do not we will be stuck with what we have.

An EP console! O dear God, no! You can't play square notes on it accurately! It won't clatter and rattle as it ages! Oh the humanity! Aieeeeeeeeeeee.

It is possible and rather common to have detached tracker consoles. Not that anyone in the congregation would ever notice the difference or remotely care.

I understand it, but fully realize no one else in the building knows the difference. It is possible to build some of those features into computer assisted actions. Whether anyone would spend the money on it is another issue.

Jackson, you are totally full of it. I know the difference, but find the conveniences of electronic actions outweigh the supposed "nuances" of tracker performances. Unless one is playing for AGO, no one likely does know the difference. Secondly, you tracker nuts pontificate like you have found golden tablets in the back yard and are somehow enlightened beyond what the rest of us organists know. Again, you are full of it. I have played both good and bad tracker actions. I would much prefer electronic to some of the bad ones I have played. Having trackers does not create a superior instrument. It can still sound like hell and be unnecessarily difficult and unwieldy to play.