How to properly evaluate a music program
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    On the post about recruiting for choirs, Cantor writes: The situation in which I find myself is that the size of the parish choir is itself seen as a major (the primary?) indicator of the health of the music program. This is a familiar situation, although I'd say that's a false measure of the success of a music program.

    Another false indicator is how many people in the pews are singing. This is even more commonplace and groups like NLM actually promote such skewed thinking.

    Yet another perpetrated by other crowds is how much of the propers are used on a given Sunday. This completely ignores the complex dynamic most of us have to work in, not to mention the rather legalistic reading of the GIRM. At the same token, I think the CMAA is just as dedicated to fight the idea that a program can be improved because of singing more Latin (such as Panis Angelicus) or chant (O Come O Come Emmanuel).

    False measures abound, and we can probably list more. I'll leave other forum members to elaborate. But what is the true judge of success then? I'm experiencing my usual Saturday insomnia, so I'll just throw this out there and then get back to bed: perhaps the success of a program is to know what the Church asks of our liturgies and to see how close our music comes to that. When you can look at your music on a given Sunday and say "yes, that's pretty close to what Musicam Sacram was talking about." That includes active (even vocal) participation from the laity, proportional amounts of volunteers, usage of the propers, valuing of Latin and the chant heritage, and balancing all those as one can. But it seems to me that one should seek after all of those only so far as they are what the Church wants, and not as though something like congregational singing were a total end unto itself.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Do you mean NPM?
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    yes I do mean NPM!
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    This is an excellent question! If the goal were numbers of singing people and numbers in the choir, that can be achieved by singing Happy Birthday or Take Me Out to the Ballgame every week.
  • AOZ
    Posts: 369
    Here's something else that is impossible to measure, even by the NPM: how many people are praying while the propers are being chanted?
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 762
    Jeffrey wrote:

    If the goal were numbers of singing people and numbers in the choir, that can be achieved by singing Happy Birthday or Take Me Out to the Ballgame every week

    Jeffrey ... you shouldn't give people ideas. "Happy Birthday to Jesus" at the entrance on Christmas Day? And what might we fit to the tune of "Take Me Out to the Ballgame"? How about "Agnus Dei, qui tolis"?

    ps who'll be first to tell me they've already been done?
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Although if choir numbers are the measure of the quality of a program, I'll happily accept part of the parish budget for a beer tap to be installed in the loft...

    That does hit the nail on the head though. The problem with the means of evaluation I mentioned is they're all artificial. Someone once said (although another parishioner immediately pointed out that it's 100% false) "people sang well before you came along!!" Well it's easy to get a lot of singing when you use the same 20 songs all the time...
  • G
    Posts: 1,400
    Well, Ian, I can't remember if it was Aristotle's idea, or if his blog simply hosted the first discussion of what I believe was referred to as "The Stadium Mass," which used musical motifs from the venerable "Na-na-na-na, Na-na-na-na, Hey, hey-ey, Goo-ood by"
    Perhaps he would favor us with a PDF of the score?

    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • Jan
    Posts: 242
    I am a newly appointed music director for small group of persons who celebrate the EF Mass in our area. Of course my goal is to build a
    music program of high quality. The singers (men) have none to limited music training and limited time for rehearsals but have been singing chant anywhere from 10 years to a few months. They (approx 6 men) want to 'sing it all' (seasonal ordinaries as suggested in the Liber, gregorian propers & polyphony)...great goals but not immediately realistic without adequate rehearsal time. The priest, board and congregation want high quality music with emphasis (of course) on good chant front and center. This EF Mass is one of only 2 EF Masses in the county. How would you approach this? Limit the ordinaries to 2 a year (which has been suggested to me by some)? If so, which ordinaries?
    Pick 4 a year? Go for the ordinaries that the PIPs know (ie: Mass of the Angels)? Right now I'm more concerned about the ordinaries.
    The propers are going ok with a combo of the Liber, Rossini & psalm tones. What would you do?
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    One question would be do you want the congregation to sing or not? If you do want them to join, I'd suggest Mass XVI with Gloria XV when used, and then use Mass VIII for high occasions. And throw in Mass XVIII for funerals.

    If you don't want them to join, I'd suggest Mass XI (or whatever is Orbis Factor) for ordinary usage and then Mass V for solemn occasions. Then again, the men might like the challenge of learning a new ordinary every now and then, so I'd say ask how much work they want to do. Alternatively, you could learn 2 Mass ordinaries and use them alternating each Sunday, so the congregation doesn't get tired of it.

    I would tend to approach such a project with an eye for "building" up the intended liturgical choir, whether congregation or schola. Make a transition from Mass XVI to Mass XV to XVII to XI for the congregation. Or for the schola start out at 2 ordinaries a year and try to teach them a new one or two the next year and shoot for increasing how many you can learn.
  • RobertRobert
    Posts: 343
    Jan, I would stay away from Mass VIII unless the people really know it and it would guarantee participation. Although even then if they are that good maybe they'd be up to the challenge of learning something new.

    Better off starting with the "Missa Mundi" or "Missa Primativa" or whatever you want to call it: Kyrie XVI, Gloria XV, Credo I, Sanctus XVIII, Agnus XVIII.

    For another one, if people get bored, I would suggest Kyrie XI B, the Ambrosian Gloria, Sanctus X and Agnus XVI.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    I'm familiar with the "size of the choir"option and the "volume from the pews" method as well. And everyone is quite right - they're meaningless. Who hasn't heard large and hideous "karaoke choirs"? Or the congregation that alternates between "Here I am, Lord" and "Holy God, We Praise Thy Name," adding "Silent Night" on Christmas Eve?

    Singing all the Gregorian propers could be great - or it could be deadly. I think Gavin is right. Progress is particular to each parish - where they are starting from, what the resources are, and the catechetical level of the priest(s), people, and singers.

    Now, we all just have to convince Father of that. :)
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Arlene wrote:
    Here's something else that is impossible to measure, even by the NPM: how many people are praying while the propers are being chanted?

    This may actually be the most important criterion, though again, it may be impossible to measure. But it does raise the question: Is there any validity in surveying parishioners regarding their "worship experience"? In other words, is it worthwhile to simply ask the PIPs if they pray during the propers?

    I realize that this sort of see-which-way-the-wind-is-blowing approach is hardly pastoral leadership at all. But ignoring outright a potential "data source" may not be much better. Otherwise, we rely on word-of-mouth, or second- or third-hand opinions passed from one to another, or the occasional opinions (positive or otherwise) shared with us by particularly bold people.
Add a Comment