substituting instruments for vocal lines
  • mrcoppermrcopper
    Posts: 653
    In the discussion on oboe, a digression began about replacing vocal lines with instruments. It may or may not be a good thing to do in specific cases; this post is about, specifically, replacing a bass voice with organ.

    I tried to upload example files, but the limits are too small, so I put temporary recordings on soundcloud as linked below.

    I hope you can hear the muddiness the organ introduces into a vocal texture. Three versions: the original. The same recording simply eliminating the bass voice, so an SATB piece sung as SAT. And a version with the bass line replaced by organ, and all tuning of the voice eliminated. For me, the SAT sounds ok, the organ-bass sounds unclear and unsatisfying.

    For the sceptics, yes, it's my piece so maybe I know it too well: survey: does the muddiness seem more 'natural' to you? (the first 20 seconds of organ intro should be identical in all three).

    Edit: recordings deleted, til another day.
    0575_o_my_deir_hert.pdf
    1M
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Of course, if the missing Bass voice were replaced by a 'cello or trombone/sackbutt, or any other melody instrument capable of fine-tuning, would be able to preserve the intonation you intend. Granted, in some cases, it is not ideal, but there is a long tradition for these substitutions. (Lasso's double-choir Missa Osculetur Me is a good example.)
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    I would say that something like that would be completely acceptable, so long as it blends with the voices. A soft-toned diapason, or gedeckt would be perfect for that. Using that registration with a soft 16' in the pedal (playing the bass in the pedal with 16') would work nicely. Of course, you really want to try to fill the missing voice part with a capable singer (or find a singer and make him capable!), and eventually cut out the instrument. In the short term, using the organ to substitute for any missing voices can work well. Think about it: we do this for congregational singing all the time: "cantor" sings the melody, and we play the accompaniment (usually the "melody" (soprano part) plus the other three voices parts).
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • mrcoppermrcopper
    Posts: 653
    Well, ClergetKubisz, I appreciate your comment, but I was really arguing the opposite point of view: that it may well be better to simply leave out a line, than to double it with an inflexibly tuned instrument like the organ. I know it's done, but my orientation is to try to reduce the usage. Just like some here would like to eliminate, or at least reduce, certain music choices! Salieri, no argument about those kind of replacements, based on tuning anyway. Timbral issues may still remain.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    I see what you're getting at, and I do the same thing as well, as do many of us. If I've got SATB, normally T will be left out (as we have a self-proclaimed T at our parish, but he's really B), and if I've got SAB, but I'm playing the accompaniment, not singing (I'm the only B who can carry the part by himself in our 5-person chorus), I will have it as SA with the other guy singing melody. I've done both ways and had success in each.
Add a Comment