Paid Soloists
  • JDE
    Posts: 588
    What is the general opinion here, especially among my fellow DOMs, about the use of paid (and not necessarily Catholic) soloists to bolster the choir? It is shameful, IMHO, that out of my parish of 500+ families the choir only has four men who are willing to give their time -- and they can all cash out their IRAs without a penalty, if you know what I mean.

    There is a university town not far from here that has a music school. Singers are often impecunious and desperate creatures, so you know they need the money, and some of them can even read music. Aside: Ezio Pinza and Luciano Pavarotti couldn't; they reportedly learned every note they sang from their répétiteurs. So this seems like the perfect marriage of need and availability.

    The problem is, how do you justify using them? I had two paid soloists some years ago, and the parish accountant/head of the finance council scotched the whole thing after just a few months. Perhaps my approach was wrong (there's something off-putting about a DOM who acts as if the parishioners should fall at his feet in gratitude for his presence), and I'm looking for a better way to get the musical "horses" we need to do the kind of music that is worthy of the liturgy, including the Roman Gradual.

    Any advice or input is welcome, even if you are opposed to the practice. You see, it is time to prepare the budget for the coming FY, so now is my chance to include a trip to the Colloquium, wherever that may be next year, memberships in the CMAA for the organist and myself, and enough copies of the GR and the PBC for the choir, schola and contemporary ensemble to have their own.

    While I'm at it, I may as well ask them for a fortnight's holiday at Versailles or a fillet of Bigfoot grilled over moon rocks. It might not happen, and I might get shot down in flames, or receive the customary horselaugh when asking for more money, but I know this much: it definitely won't happen if I don't ask for it.
  • David AndrewDavid Andrew
    Posts: 1,204
    May I suggest that rather than presenting them as "paid soloists," why not work with the pastor, etc., to establish a "choral scholar" program. This would be for the purpose of providing experience to young potential choir directors and organists from the local university you mentioned who may have a future career in church music.

    There's a twofold benefit to this approach: 1) the students make some cash while they're gaining exposure to the "real world" of church music; 2) the parish is contributing to education of future musicians but in a way that ensures that these choral scholars aren't just "hired guns," they're real people for whom the parish has taken responsibility. Perhaps there would even be the opportunity for individual donors to donate or endow a particular scholar's position. (The "Yurovidi" Scholar, the "David Andrew" Scholar, the "Jeffrey Tucker" Scholar . . . you get the picture).

    Because they're receiving a "scholarship" and not a stipend, they would need to apply and be interviewed and auditioned annually. Even if a particular candidate isn't Catholic, it can at least be established that they understand and respect the work they're being called upon to do.

    If the pastor won't get behind it, then I'd suggest going home, opening a bottle of Chateau Thames Embankment and sitting down to a Bigfoot fillet.
  • JDE
    Posts: 588
    Not long ago, I had to make dinner for the brother-in-law and his family (wife+two kids). I made pizzas, and one of them was topped with sauteed spinach, garlic and mushrooms. I started to say, "have some of the spinach..." and before I could finish, the mother said, "Don't say spinach. Say Florentine." And they liked it.

    Thanks for the suggestion -- I'm too blunt. My dad used to tell me I was "as diplomatic as a brick in the face." So this is exactly what I am looking for.
  • WGS
    Posts: 299
    Keep in mind that the university students are likely to be at home or otherwise out of town for the Christmas and Easter seasons.

    Also, it has been my experience that choir members never object to having the benefit of paid section leaders. It truly makes it easier and more enjoyable for the average follower when he can home in on a secure rendition of his own part.

    Make sure that your choir members express to the pastor and finance committee their own enthusiasm for paid soloists or section leaders.
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 757
    In the UK, choral scholarships are sometimes provided for for members of college chapel choirs, to help towards singing tuition. Given the usual expense of tuition and students' desire for experience, a church with an interesting music program might be able to emulate this approach. A practical way forward would be to discover the average cost of hour-long lessons from good teachers in your area, then multiply it by four. If you think your parish accountant won't suffer major trauma, you can then put your business case together. Otherwise, you can fall back on the Chateau Thames Embankment and Bigfoot fillet.

    That's given me a thirst. I think I'll head for Pommeroy's.
  • priorstf
    Posts: 460
    My experience has been that introducing paid soloists can be problematic. Most church choirs are based on volunteer membership, so paying a select few will cause some hard feelings. This is particularly true if the paid folks are brought in to sing their solo but are otherwise not active with the choir.

    The real profit to your program is having good voices to help through the rehearsals so the others can learn from the more musically talented and trained. WGS spoke of paid section leaders, and I agree - so long as they really are. Not just the college kids with the big voices, they should be at all rehearsals, occasionally lead section rehearsals, participate in sessions with the choir director outside the choir time, arrive early, organized, and prepared to sing, etc.

    It is easy to fall into a trap, however. Few students focus on choral music singing. Voice teachers are more often than not working to bring out the operatic solo performers. And for the solos that's great. But when you're doing a Palestrina choral trio they will have to learn to be part of the group. Which is another important reason that they must be part of the choir on a regular full-time basis.

    Oh - and just be careful about the non-Catholic kids you bring on board. Teach them the Catholic version of the Our Father. One of our more memorable moments was a magnificent baritone voice booming out with "For thine is the kingd...oops" into a dead silent cathdral!
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 757
    Priorstf,

    It can be a problem for the middle-aged singer, too. Though a Catholic, I sing more Anglican liturgies than Catholic, because the Anglicans want those who sing what I like and I'm largely forced to seek out real masses that do without music. One of the problems with this is that the various Anglicans have various versions of their liturgy, and I'm now forced, shame to say, to discard memory and rely on the printed text. Combine that with a love for hieratic English and a failure to appreciate our translations ...
  • Michael O'Connor
    Posts: 1,637
    I did something similar. I hired new cantors from the college I taught at. The rule, however, was that if they wanted the decent-paying cantor job, they had to be in the choir (min 2 rehearsals and 2 Sundays a month). So, they were not being paid to be in the choir, but that was actually what I most needed them for.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,955
    There is a well-heeled Presbyterian church in town that has given those scholarships for years. Unfortunately, some of those "scholars" have been in the choir long enough to retire. My own choir would greatly resent anyone getting paid, so I won't even try it. I have decided to work with what I have. I will rejoice with them on their good days, and sympathize on their bad. If they screw up, they can always redeem themselves the next Sunday.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,707
    In the positions I have maintained we have had paid soloists, paid section leaders, paid cantors and paid choral members. Catholics and non, operatic and choral minded. I always inherited the lot, and never initiated it and always regretted being tied to the consequences.

    Everyone seems to distill it down to the one fact that "THAT person gets money for singing, and I don't." This truly goes south when the paid person is ever late, doesn't know their part, makes obvious mistakes, or worse, insists on some priviledge (skipping rehearsals because they are "professionals"). Then the worst of it is when the opera singers, who certainly don't understand (or choose to ignore) the homogenous sonorities of a choral blend, have a towering voice above the choir.

    In all my years, the few good "performances" were never worth the heartache, jealousy and ill feelings, wrangling, and politics. I can't see wanting to invite those elements into a parish music program.

    When you all figure out the perfect approach to this one, please write a book. We will all buy it.
  • pipesnposaune
    Posts: 113
    Yurdovi,
    We implemented paid section leaders this past year, and it has helped me and the congregation immensely. Remember, we are there for the congregation, and if all of your sopranos are away one week...well!

    I remember reading some pros and cons on the issue I believe on choralnet. I have nothing but positive comments. You are guaranteed a 'core' sound each week, they can cover sectional rehearsals if needed, they can cover the cantor portions of the Mass, and they teach good rehearsal etiquette (which IMHO was lacking immensely before I started.) The right people are very important- choral tone (vs. opera), good readers, some Latin background, and quality/just leaders.

    At first our choir was resistant to the change, but now they fight over sitting next to the section leaders!
    We started on the medium to low pay range (in my opinion), but offered a raise if the program worked for six months. It is been so successful that we are doing paid cantors at masses in the summer while the choir is off. (Last year we had a volunteer rotation of a dozen cantors of various abilities and who may or may not show up.)

    Good luck!
  • JDE
    Posts: 588
    Wish me luck, all! I'm going to meet with my pastor tomorrow and present the idea of paid section leaders/choral scholars. The best news is twofold: first, the parish is running a five-figure budget surplus for the FY (July to June); and second, the section leaders can be revenue-neutral because I have some folks in the parish who love and appreciate what we do and are willing to shell out the money for the program.

    Did I mention it's going to be somewhere north of $10,000 for the year?

    The bass about whom I complain the most is ponying up a thousand bucks right off the bat. So how guilty do I feel about the kvetching? Pretty dang guilty.

    Anyway. Some pastors are control freaks (and not just priests -- it's found among every type of leadership, both sacred and profane). This one isn't one of those, IMHO, so I am hopeful that we can do this and make it a positive step for music.

    St. Cecilia and St. Ambrose, pray for us!
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Our first step might be working today paid directors, and perhaps then a paid (and trained) organist. Seems like sheer fantasy.
  • JDE
    Posts: 588
    JT, I'm blessed in this way because

    a) I have a couple of graduate degrees in music performance (although neither is directly related to sacred music;

    b) my organist/pianist/accompanist also has a Master's in music performance and is very active in the chamber music scene;

    c) the church is in a very old city where (as in Osaka) people eat lots of rice and practice ancestor worship. The result of c) is that there are a lot of very deep pocketses in the congregation, and some of them are quite fond of what we do. (Others are less so.)

    My main blessing, however, is that I am turning the program around from the position of DOM and not as a "Swamp Fox" picking off the stragglers and hoping the weather kills off the redcoats (or the bluechasubles, as it were). This is also a drawback sometimes because people (including choir members) will speak the Seven Last Words of the Church: "We never did it that way before." But it is definitely easier to effect change when you are (at least nominally) in charge of the program.

    In my opinion paid directors are overrated. You (and the church) are better off with an enthusiastic but well-trained volunteer, in many cases, because a paid director may have good musical skills and knowledge but lack even the basest rudiments of liturgy. And often a degree is no guarantee even of musical skill -- just that the holder can get through a degree program.

    Regardless. I'm both thrilled and anxious about the whole endeavor. I will keep everyone posted in the vaguest possible terms.
Add a Comment