No More Organized Singing?
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 866
    "I'll sum up for those who couldn't attend the ACDA/NATS/ChorusAmerica/BarberShop national Pandemic webinar:

    1) There is no safe way for choirs to rehearse together until there is a vaccine or 95% effective treatment in place, most likely 1-2 years.
    Perhaps occasionally outside in small groups, but only when the wind is not at your back.
    Masks and spacing DO NOT protect your singers from contagion, and singers are super-spreaders

    2) Though there may be some mitigation using a combination of UV lights and fan/atmosphere scrubbing inside, it is not 100% effective and the UV in particular may be both expensive and dangerous

    3) No concerts or public performances this fall, and frankly, maybe not for 1-2 years, though we actually don't know.

    4) Once rapid testing becomes available, possibility to rehearse with immediate testing before every rehearsal with iron-clad agreements from choir members.

    5) AUDIENCE: liability insurance for your arts org. Temperature checks at the door and required masks.
    US government Phase THREE recommendations for actual safe return to public performances."

    - - - - -

    Thoughts?
    Thanked by 1sergeantedward
  • davido
    Posts: 256
    Insanity. What virtue signaling BS. And all this is based on what virus statistics?

    Calling all “bubble boys”, join the choir!
    Thanked by 3tomjaw dad29 trowland87
  • Schönbergian
    Posts: 554
    Frankly absurd assumptions at this point, though I've never taken the ACDA seriously anyways. If it's safe enough to partake in other social activities as normal, it's safe enough to hold choral rehearsals (within reason). Obviously not the case right now when safety precludes us from too much close contact.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw Elmar
  • ACDA?
  • Schönbergian
    Posts: 554
    American Choral Directors' Association, presumably.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,308
    The presentation is on-line at: https://youtu.be/DFl3GsVzj6Q?t=370

    It was hard to watch, since the presenters struggled to use their video conferencing software.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Earl_Grey
  • Nats? (gnats?)
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,510
    No more organized singing? Who said we are organized?

    ACDA and NATS - National Association of Teachers of Singing, if I remember correctly, mean well. There was a chapter at my school when I was in college. I never took them too seriously because I was more focused on the organ world and its related organizations. I think I will wait for a bit of advice from those with medical credentials. I am practicing the best of anti-social distancing - my normal state anyway.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Elmar
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,596
    Does the ACDA realize that they've just signed their own death-warrant with this? After two years there won't be any Choral Directors in America to Associate with!

    They, under the cover of The Virus, have now basically given permission for schools to shut down their music programs indefinitely "because it's unsafe"---a great idea, now the chorus director's salary can be budgeted toward getting a third assistant football coach and a fancier score-board.

    To say nothing of the myriad pastors and finance councils who are just champing at the bit for a way to dismiss their troublesome music directors who demand a (not very just) salary and want to do good music, and get an old biddy who can barely read treble-clef and chord symbols to volunteer to play all of the Hagen-Daasz music---if they haven't done so already, because of The Virus.

    I'm with CW, and will wait for an actual medical opinion---of course that opinion all depends on who is pulling the strings in the background, but that's a different discussion. As it is, I'm sure that my Bishop* will 'take this into account' (if it gets back to him) when he draws up directives for re-opening the churches next summer. (Yes, I'm already preparing for 2020 being a Year without Christmas, and 2021 being another Year without Easter.)

    *Rozanski, Springfield, MA. The one whom you may have read about on Fr. Z.: who, having given "permission" for nurses to anoint patients while priests say the formula from the doorway, then, when told by The Powers that Be that it wasn't kosher, decided to ban all sacraments, etc. until further notice: No Mass, No Confession, No Anointing/Last Rites, No Marriages, No Baptisms, No Funerals (just burial--priest, undertaker, corpse, grave-digger), No Adoration---but full-page ads in all of the newspapers saying "In these difficult times, please remember to mail-in your Sunday collection envelopes, or consider doing on-line giving."---with no mention of religion. (Yes, I'm bitter. Sue me.)
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 1,838
    The problem with this is we are relying on experimental data about spread of droplets during different types of activity. It is all very well saying that people shouting, singing or undergoing heavy exercise, are spreading more droplets, but this is only part of the risk. A major part of the risk is transmission because of those droplets, the concentration will also make a difference depending on airborne pathogen.

    So if the risk of spreading droplets is high, but rate of transmission is low, the overall risk could also be low.

    Until we know how high the rate of airborne transmission is, and the concentration needed to cause reliable transmission, and the percentage of people that could be infected via an airborne route. We have no idea of the risk. Risk does not add it multiplies (so multiply a high risk with a succession of very low risks will give a low risk).

    My suggestion is to look at the cause and the death rate of singers (soloists) compared to singers in choirs. We could also look at Anglican congregations vs. Catholic congregations! Is the death rate of singers due to respiratory illness really statistically significant?

    If the Swiss experts are correct that children do not pass on the virus (we have seen they are effectively unharmed by Covid c. 0.00016% of cases?) what its the point of closing down children's choirs?
    Thanked by 1a_f_hawkins
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 459
    Every day offers opposite conclusions. I was just reading an article this morning saying children may be more contagious than adults despite not showing symptoms.
  • ryandryand
    Posts: 1,640
    Opinions about this virus outnumber the opinions on quilisma interpretation at a ratio of 63:1
  • Catherine,

    They may acquire and pass on the "virus", but they may not (themselves) get sick.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 866
    Perhaps occasionally outside in small groups, but only when the wind is not at your back.


    So, no Celtic blessing, then, eh?
    Or do we just stop singing when the wind turns? *eye roll*
    Thanked by 3CHGiffen chonak Chrism
  • davido
    Posts: 256
    Instead of losing our minds, here’s a novel idea. Let’s treat this virus the same way we’ve treated very other sickness in history: if you’re sick STAY HOME; if you’re afraid of getting sick: STAY HOME.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,369
    I hope not, but we may have lost things like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxLbmnvMWM0
    Thanked by 1CCooze
  • GambaGamba
    Posts: 275
    More detailed notes from the presentation, which, to be perfectly clear, was given for the ACDA et al. by two specialist doctors, and was not just musicians being dramatic.

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/10zLES6zlmtqwh3hj_n73zYpsFVWgfW3HSYGE7NsR3Mw/mobilebasic
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,510
    Who knows? There have been areas like New York with high infection rates, and places like my own corner of East TN where it hasn't been bad at all.

    The local Episcopal cathedral has placed 6-8 or slightly more singers around their sanctuary - six feet apart, of course. They all have good voices and sing for their televised services.

    WWTBD? What will the bishop do? Again, who knows? At this time, we are planning on returning for Pentecost.
    Thanked by 1cesarfranck
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,596
    What we've more likely lost is this:
    https://youtu.be/3FLbiDrn8IE
  • TCJ
    Posts: 696
    My choir should be unaffected. They never open their mouths to sing anyway!
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,369
    You can have a nice day, or you can help your children with their math homework. But you can't have both. - CORONALATIONS 3:30.

    Edit: Oops, that was supposed to be in the humor thread.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,308
    Every day offers opposite conclusions. I was just reading an article this morning saying children may be more contagious than adults despite not showing symptoms.

    This has been reported for some time, e.g., in this February 2020 article: https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/27/coronavirus-kids-what-role-transmission/
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,308
    @Salieri, if it's any consolation, your diocese has graciously expanded permissions to allow up to 10 persons to attend burial rites, and that's in addition to the staff of the funeral service.
    http://diospringfield.org/directives-for-confronting-the-coronavirus/
    They're just glowing with pastoral solicitude; well... a little is better than none.
    The sacraments can be dispensed with, but apparently the non-sacramental burial rite is essential.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW Salieri
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 866
    If a burial doesn't bring to mind possible deadly scenarios, I don't know what does.
    They should be allowed to have as many people as are willing to attend.
    Thanked by 1CatherineS
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,902
    *Rozanski, Springfield, MA.


    My sympathy on the upcoming death of your Diocese.
    Thanked by 1Salieri
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,902
    if you’re afraid of getting sick: STAY HOME.


    Wrong(!!!) Cuomo released a random survey of 1,000 C-19 patients today. Of the 1,000, approximately TWO-THIRDS were 'sheltered at home.' They didn't travel, no subways, no work, nothing (except maybe groceries and pharmacy).

    This will drive everyone nuts.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 1,981
    dad29 can we have a link or reference please
  • Ken of Sarum
    Posts: 386
    Just a thought to meditate on - from the moment you're born, you're dying. Only GOD knows your departure date, time and mode of transfer. And since He knows every hair on your head, he knows every illness you've had or will have. So, live your GOD given life to the fullest with praise, thanksgiving and love. Your life is but a twinkle in the span of eternity. Let you light shine forth and give glory to GOD.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 1,981
    Each one of us ought to contemplate the four last things, at least once a day. I cannot say that I do, but I am aware that I am nearer my death each day.
    COVID-19 is dangerous, but no more dangerous than everything else put together. And we know that it is more dangerous to those with a life shortening condition already, so it does not simply double the death rate. Statistics are always tricky to understand without a clear definition, we have NO definition of 'random' or of 'C-19 Patient' in dad29's quote, it conveys nothing without knowing what the sampling population is (which does indeed drive me nuts).
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 1,629
    The ACDA has been social-justice-warrior-converged for years. It was kind of them to take time from pondering the problems of transgender choral singers in order to have this presentation. And (more seriously) I'm glad they addressed the mask issue. I might as well spray down the empty 500 feet of pews below me with my auto-fire Evil Black Rifle of COVID Death.

    There won't be an effective COVID vaccine for the same reason the flu vaccine is not effective: mutation. Which means there won't be choral music, ever.

    Unless this culture accepts that people die, and it isn't the end.
  • Chrism
    Posts: 687
    Wrong(!!!) Cuomo released a random survey of 1,000 C-19 patients today. Of the 1,000, approximately TWO-THIRDS were 'sheltered at home.' They didn't travel, no subways, no work, nothing (except maybe groceries and pharmacy).


    In other words, they didn't actually stay home.
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • On the whole idea of singing being a spectacular means of transmitting Wuhan flu..... does it matter what we're singing?

    Case A: "Alleluia" is not explosive.
    Case B: [Anything German-opera-ish] . It is said that newcomers who sit in the front row of an German opera house need to bring an umbrella.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,825
    @Chris Garton-Zavesky

    I can now say it with socially justified, politically correct, global issues in mind... Down with Wagner!
    Thanked by 2bhcordova trowland87
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 866
    In other words, they didn't actually stay home


    @Chrism, That isn't necessarily true. People have to get food from somewhere, perhaps it was delivered... and the delivery driver spread it to them, somehow.

    As these doctors pointed out, viruses simply have to run their course until there are so many that have built up an immunity to the current strain that they fizzle out. Staying home, if helpful at all, is only delaying the inevitable. Until there is a high enough percentage of people who have been exposed to the virus, it will remain prevalent.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • JaredOstermann
    Posts: 442
    But what some more reasonable people are saying is: It is far too early to declare the end of choral music. Most choirs would be done right now anyway, and not starting up again until September. A lot has happened since March, and a lot more can happen before September in terms of our understanding of the virus, treatment, spread, antibodies, percentage already affected, etc., etc.,

    And I would add - nobody needs the ACDA's permission in order to have a choir. I do worry that some bishops/administrators will fixate too much on that talk, though.

    As with most things COVID related, some people are taking the doom and gloom approach already. I prefer to wait and see. I think if schools start in the fall, there is no reason children's choirs won't be able to start. To think that they could spend all day together in classrooms/cafeteria/playground but singing would have to be banned is pretty silly.

    FYI here in Sioux Falls-Rapid City (joint declaration from the two bishops of South Dakota): Starting Mass again May 16, with social distancing but with congregational singing, cantor, organ. Our cathedral will hold 150-180 with distancing in place. We'll see how it goes! Sunday Mass obligation still lifted, of course.
    Thanked by 2Joseph Michael Elmar
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 1,981
    Thanks @chonak - I don't see anything surprising, or even instructive, about Cuomo's quoted numbers, except for the ethnicity question. Most people who need hospital treatment are elderly, we knew that. Most of the elderly are not employed, and spend a lot of time at home, who would have thought? The worrying figure is that those in sheltered care looks to be greater than the proportion in the population in the age range (perhaps not, I don't know the numbers). As for stay at home, for many in the ethnic groups mentioned that would be in large multi-generational homes, I suspect; that would often be the case in the UK. Move along please, nothing to be seen here
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,510
    Sermons spread contagion, too. LOL
  • Can anyone else see this "problem" with singing leading to no more music at music? Could it be used to require the use of microphones?

    That makes 2 horsemen of the apocalypse. What other seriously negative consequences might come from this declaration?
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,049
    For those directors envisioning choral singing: how much leeway will be permitted for choristers to choose to absent themselves from such while they believe themselves to either pose or be at risk?

    For those directors envisioning congregational singing: will you accept graciously and without resentment if congregants choose to decline to partake?
  • Chrism
    Posts: 687
    From Denver: "Avoid the use of a choir, instead use a cantor or one or two persons singing. It has been demonstrated that singing can increase the spread of the virus, thus congregational singing is not encouraged during this time."
  • Charles,

    Explore this for a second, and see how many heads start to spin:

    1) Active participation is the goal to be considered at all times as the essential.
    2) Singing is discouraged.
    3) Holding hands is discouraged.
    4) Choirs are discouraged, but cantors are encouraged.
    5) Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.....?
    6) Hospitality ministers should greet each person, so as to make him feel welcome.
    7) Social distance must be observed.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,049
    Cantors, like preachers, will need to be at a notable distance from congregants. MOre than 2 metres.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 1,838
    We can be in the choir loft, what is very handy for us is two of our cantors, are lodging with my parents. So we have a choir of 5 adults and 3 children.

    We will see what happens... But I will restart choir practice soon, It is in my house! and if we are not needed for Mass we can meet up and sing Vespers and Compline together.
  • Caleferink
    Posts: 325
    I tuned out as soon as someone quoted Bill Gates. I'm sorry, but I'm not taking temperatures at the door. I trust my choristers. This is not the end of choral music by a long shot. The Church has survived plagues and epidemics before (with some beautiful music written during said times), she will survive this one.
    Thanked by 3CCooze tomjaw Elmar
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,255
    No more organized singing?
    Does this mean the end of organum?
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 823
    It's the end of the world as we know it.
    It's the end of the world as we know it.
    It's the end of the world as we know it.
    And I feel fiiiiine. I feel fine.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW tomjaw
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,510
    Organum. There you go talking about sex. LOL
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,902
    @a_f Hawkins: The only part of interest in Cuomo's statement is the 66% part. Nice of you to go through all the rest, but.........

    You make assumptions about the living conditions of that 66%, but you offer no evidence.

    The point? We do not know HOW they contracted the disease, but we know they got it. Not from the subway, not from going to work. Maybe from shopping? Delivery-man?

    Well, they "sheltered in place." That doesn't seem to be a solution, eh wot?
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,308
    Indeed not; though we should understand those words according to their real meaning: a policy of staying at home but allowing travel to food stores and drug stores does seem to have been inadequate. That isn't a really stringent quarantine policy.
    Thanked by 3tomjaw Elmar Chrism