Live stream and careers
  • davido
    Posts: 434
    Have any of you had discussions about the quality of your work being constantly displayed and archived on the internet in live streams? For better or for worse, potential employers can now evaluate nearly all of our church music output.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,942
    Yes and no they can evaluate. Many musicians are working with very limited resources and are able to do just enough to get by. It is not an indication of what they are capable of or what they would actually do in more normal circumstances.
  • One thing I like about it is that it is very easy to get recordings of organ solos. It is very easy for us to pull the audio recording as a separate file. It saves me from having to set up a separate microphone and equipment.
    Thanked by 1madorganist
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 596
    Are you all mostly using cell phones for the livestreams or do you have special equipment?
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Charles,

    May we safely assume that a pastor (or his hand-picked committee) won't be hiring well trained musicians to build or expand a beautiful music program if he sees the present conditions as "normal" for the foreseeable future?
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,942
    I suspect even the lord may have trouble determining what pastors will do. My point is that a musician working under extreme conditions will not be seen in a favorable light. It may not be his fault.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • davido
    Posts: 434
    When I was in school for voice, we were advised to only allow things on the internet that were representative of our current technical level. However, as we now know, more and more the internet is forever. Live-streaming archives makes it hard to judiciously show one’s self to potential employers.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • PaxMelodious
    Posts: 343
    Live streaming in 2020 / 21 shows what you can achieve under difficult circumstances. It's likely you will be under difficult circumstances anywhere that you are hired for now. If 2020/21 videos are reviewed later, they have to be analysed in terms of the conditions at the time.

    If you are a volunteer, then you have a right to object to your work being used in this way.

    If you are an employee, then the employer owns the output of what you product on work time. You don't get to dictate what they do with it. Unless your contract explicitly says otherwise.

  • MarkB
    Posts: 483
    According to the terms of the ONE LICENSE streaming agreement, videos of music performances covered under the license must be removed within one year of original production/release.

    Of course, that doesn't apply to performances of music in the public domain.

    I think it would be wise for every parish to delete videos of ordinary Masses from the online library or YouTube channel after no more than two months. Really, who is going to watch a Mass from January or February again?
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 620
    I built our livestream system. So even the worst musical faux pas recorded redound to the credit of my ability to hobble together workable technical solutions to pastoral problems under high pressure, desirable in a parish organist...

    Besides, the organist is not visible, and we have plural accompanists. After long elapsed time, I can just disclaim specific knowledge of who played when.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen CharlesW
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 1,382
    I think it would be wise for every parish to delete videos of ordinary Masses from the online library or YouTube channel after no more than two months. Really, who is going to watch a Mass from January or February again?


    A lot of people. It's the only way to effectively learn, for example, the old Holy Week or even some of the finer points of the traditional Mass, and Vespers streamed from Saint-Eugène is the only audio source of the Magnificat antiphon cycle.

    In any case, while the license would almost surely not be necessary in such a context, as trads usually don't need one, the terms are, uh, unrealistic, even if One License doesn't have much of a choice; people don't just delete, whether because they forget or because it's proof that people actually take care of the parish's communications… maybe it's because I'm relatively young, but I scoff if I can't see evidence that the parish is consistently posting things, whether that's streaming when streaming is advertised (as much as I wonder about the practice), the bulletin and other announcements, photos from events, and so on.

    But that's just me.
  • GambaGamba
    Posts: 322
    I have several thoughts about this.

    1) It will be a net blessing, I think, allowing churches to quickly tell if an applicant has been honest about conducting the best choir in America and playing better than anyone since Schlick.

    2) It shows who can really play a Mass; anyone can send in good takes of three contrasting pieces of different styles, but now we can see if an organist is even remotely aware of what’s happening at the other end of the building.

    3) In some cases, I can see how it could be negative, especially given the horrendous quality of some streams (organ mic’d close, cantors fed directly from the soundboard, the whole thing distorted to death and mixed by a monkey). But I think this would be more of a poor reflection on the parish, which doesn’t care about the most important thing, than on the organist, except by association.

    4) 1-3 assume that those hiring an organist have the technical proficiency, time, and interest to actually find old livestreams, which are probably hidden on the parish website behind a photo gallery from a bingo game in 2007 and news of an ethnic dinner to be held in 2013....
    Thanked by 1MarkB
  • Catherine, we have a couple cameras the pastor bought just for the livestream. We then just pull the sound right off the sound system. We use an omnidirectional mic pointed to the chapel to pick up the sound of the congregation's responses along with the organ. I should add the my pastor is kind of a tech nerd when it comes to video production and photography, so that's probably why he bought the extra equipment.
  • mikevp
    Posts: 12
    I'd recommend having a discussion about having these videos deleted after either the day of, or a week later, whichever you feel is more appropriate.

    I think it does us a disservice if we give the impression that the liturgies are shows, available to anyone at any time of day. Maybe it makes more sense to only live stream it, instead of having it posted afterwards.

    What happens if you sleep in? Well you miss it Mass or you find another one later in the day.. not sure why a live-stream should be any different than that - live.

  • davido
    Posts: 434
    Good insight mikevp. I think the live streaming + lack of sunday obligation is training folks that mass is a come if convenient event: this morning we had heavy rain in our area, and attendance was 2/3 of what it had been before Easter.
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 596
    I've been more wary of the disruption it causes in the live Mass itself, such as:

    -Worst issue: priests interrupting the Mass to go fuss with the cameras
    -priests behaving differently than normal because they are talking to the camera
    -instituting behaviors in the congregation for the sole purpose of appearances (who can sit where, required postures, etc.)
    -having cameras located in places that distract from the celebration (right next to the Communion rail during Communion, or inside the sanctuary, for instance)
    -I guess I don't think the camera should show anything you wouldn't see if you were sitting in a pew assisting normally. It's not supposed to turn into a show with drone view and close ups and soundtrack. It's supposed to be an emergency aid to help you pray at home and not forget about going to Church.

    Thanked by 1Carol