I regard the "cantor" as a specific liturgical role: the one who sings the Psalm and the Alleluia (in the OF, of course). The "songleader" is another species. In my experience, the best songleader is the organist. At liturgies where there is no organist and no choir, then someone has to step up to the plate and start the singing a capella, keep the tempo from dragging and help to maintain the pitch. This would be, IMO, a legitimate use for a songleader.

I think you're wrong, Charles. I'm on John's side, Cantors are an important and particular role in the Roman Rite. Developing and forming a competent and educated core SHOULD BE your job as a Roman Rite musician. The way things are now, I have some cantors working every other week with myself included. I could use more.

I'll also add to John's definition that a cantor can also have any other singing role requiring antiphonal singing. I arranged an antiphonal version of the Vidi Aquam for Easter, I use a responsorial psalm at the late Mass and 2 propers at the early one. My cantors are busy, God bless 'em!

"...the OF form seems to be "ministered" to death."

That is true, but the profusion of invented ministries need not downgrade those actually represented in the liturgical books. It seems pretty clear that the cantor is a legitimate role, at least when his or her activities are limited to what is called for in the rubrics.

Wow, MJ. That is so true (and soooo telling!)

Charles

Thanks for expanding on your original post. I think I got your point the first time, which is why I too was careful to distinguish between a cantor and a songleader.

This relates to something I just experienced today: EWTN's live broadcast of Mass for the Annuciation from Marquette. MI, at the cathedral which I once served as DoM. The entrance hymn was Immaculate Mary. The cathedral choir was present, with a competent organist. And I am still asking myself why in heaven's name they insisted on having a songleader bellowing Immaculate Mary into the microphone, completely obliterating the sound of the people and the choir. What is it that makes musicians think that people cannot sing Immaculate Mary without a plugged-in soloist, especially when backed up by a decent organist and choir? This brand of songleader is clearly superfluous.

I think a case can be made for an "unplugged" songleader at liturgies where the choir or organist is not available, such as a small parish or mission which lacks the funds to fairly compensate a trained director or organist. I am thinking of a tiny mission church with which I am familiar in the northwoods of Ontario, which, unless there is a singer willing to lead the congregation, would have no music at all otherwise. But a songleader in the situation which I viewed on EWTN today is patently ridiculous.

I think there is a different problem that you are hearing with broadcast Mass. It's not so much that the "song leader" needs to step back from the mic. It's that, probably for lack of funds and possibly expertise, the PA system is simply the audio channel of the broadcast. There are probably not separate mics to pick up the sound of the congregation, much less the ambiance of the building. The organs tend to be overbearing in these broadcasts as well.

Francis - does that offer include a Mighty Wurlitzer? :-)

Charles, I'm 100% with you on dumping "song leaders". I'd just caution about terminology; the cantor is an important role, and as I said there is much music they may do, but singing the congregation's parts for the congregation is not one of them.

I am wondering if someone could post on the most correct position from which a cantor should cant the Psalm. My instincts tell me that the choir loft is more than fine if the sound is clear. The communication between the cantor, the choir, director and organist would be much better and the contrary would have more confidence, if that were an issue as well. Also, I don't think that it is necessary to be seen if the sound is clear.

However, some of the other musicians in our Parish want the cantors to "move" downstairs at the ambo to sing. I am afraid that from there, they will want to install a "song leader" at the front and then...?!?!

Could anyone help me? Are there any directives from the rubrics of the Church? I imagine both are permitted, but perhaps there is a historical reason why the choir loft is better or a liturgical reason for one or the other. Thank you for responding!

Jeffrey, didn't I see you up there cantoring yesterday with a sign that said, "I can't HEAR you...." ???

;-)

Jeffrey, I beg to differ about the location of the Psalmist. While the GIRM is flexible about the location (Hence, the psalmist, or the cantor of the Psalm, sings the verses of the Psalm from the ambo or another suitable place.) I don't think anything is gained by the Psalm wafting in from the ether. For many it would be a greater distraction and for some turn into a liturgical Where's Waldo? game.

When serving as Psalmist I don't hesitate to make eye contact with the congregation. The Psalm is a period of meditation but that does not exclude any particular method of the words being heard by the congregant. What it needs is to be presented with great dignity.

No doubt my hackles go up at some Psalmists' actions. I am disturbed by those (predominantly women) who feel no reason to dress for the occasion: short skirts, clam diggers, low cut tops, and shoes whose sound on the marble would do the Clydesdales good. I find it equally disturbing to see those who drag along some dogeared stapled papers, do a little head bob as they pass the altar, and "establish" themselves at the ambo like Kirk in the captain's chair.

The musical presentation that some of them give is another source of irritation. A few are obviously hoping that there's an agent out there waiting to sign them up for the next musical, or opera, or garage band, or whatever. Some toss in a vibrato that should send most folks diving for an air raid shelter. And worst of all are those who are demonstrating their skill - more or less - at sight reading. Never having looked at the Psalm until just before Mass pretty much ensures that it will not be proclaimed as it should.

Sadly our church building, about 10 years old, was designed by a satanic acoustical engineer. Seating 1800, the room is tough to fill with sound. The organ is electronic, and is truly magnificent as electronic organs go, but it has speakers fore and aft with which a voice must contend. Add to that the half pipe architectural element running the length of the roof, guaranteed to trap sound and never let it go, and you have a true need for microphones (which I heartily despise!). So the "unseen singer" would take on the character of a recorded voice, which is not what the church needs.

All things considered, what is really needed more than moving the voice to somewhere behind the curtain is adequate training for Psalmists and a continuous maintenance of expected behavior. You may well vilify the "Pcertified Psalmist Psociety" but somebody was onto the right idea. The fault that it has gone astray can best be set on the shoulders of those who have not engaged the program and worked to improve it.

pirorstf, I can fully understand why and how acoustics could change everything. Must be very frustrating for you.

I think a great deal of the difficulty with cantors (as opposed to song leaders) lies in what they're given to sing. Whether it's Respond & Acclaim or Guimont, etc., the music often doesn't make sense. The congregational "response" is inconclusive, being neither modal nor necessarily tonally "complete." The part for the cantor hops up and down with wide interval leaps and mysterious "modern" harmonizations running along underneath, especially in the more advanced settings. And no, I won't even talk about the quality of the translations.

That's why the Chabanal project and Paul Ford's work are so valuable. They are straightforward and text-focused.

mjballou hits the nail on the head....and I cannot get that across to the cantors who love to sing the OCP psalms, and often end up doing them poorly, in their own opinion....

Placement...we are going historic...either from the loft behind the people....or on a step at the altar....never from the pulpit, and not when on the step. facing the people, but facing across the sanctuary, slightly tilted toward the people....

At choir mass we will be singing them antiphonally across the transepts.