This statement shows a total lack of understanding of the role of the organ as an accompanist and came out of a discussion which dismissed chant as being impossible to sing unaccompanied since a "congregation cannot sing the Pange Lingua without going flat."
If a congregation sinks to a more comfortable pitch when you are chanting, then possibly the problem is the pitch that you choose, not the limitations of the congregation. This applies if the pitch rises as well. And...really, who cares if the pitch changes?
But that inspired a guitarist to jump in and complain about composers who insist that their songs appear without chords....so he respects that request by writing in chards and playing them anyhow.
The idea that a guitar can adequately support singing of a choir and congregation is as weak as the idea that a piano can replace an organ.
Pitches
The guitar has a limited range of pitches it can play. It cannot play as low in pitch as the piano does and the piano cannot play as low in pitch as the organ can.
A guitarist can only play 6 pitches simultaneously. A pianist 10. An organist can, on an average-size instrument, play 132.
The guitarist can play a chord up an octave or down an octave, but not at the same time. The piano can play melodies in octaves in either hand, but like the chords on an guitar, can only play chords up or down an octave. An organist can play a chord at normal pitch, plus up an octave, another octave, another octave, an octave and a fifth, another octave, two octaves and a third…and more.
Tone Color
The guitar, depending upon the point on the string that is plucked, has a limited palette of tone colors, but more than a harpsichord, which only has one per string set, plus one when a buff is used. The piano tonal palette relies upon touch to modify the tone color of the note played, along with the una corda pedal and use of the sustain pedal. But a piano is never confused with possibly being another instrument except for the harp.
The organ has at least 4 distinctly different tone colors with many variations within them.
Voice Leading
Guitarists, unless extremely talented, frequently play parallel fifths and fourths when accompanying. Pianists and organists rarely, if ever, play parallel fifths and fourths when accompanying church music. Pianists and organists can easily play melodic lines against each other that provide a subtle harmonic support and direction for sung melodies.
The organ's ability to play in octaves permit a bass line to be doubled an octave or even two octaves below, but more importantly, pitches above the melody in octaves or other pitches of the harmonic series can be played to make it easier for the singer to hear their own pitches when singing. Using the organ in this manner more fully supports a singer/singers. The only practical option for a guitarist or pianist is to play louder.
Sustain
The sound of the guitar and piano begins to die shortly after the strings are plucked except in the finest instruments, which bloom in sound before dying. The sound of an organ is constant as long as the key is being depressed. Singers are driven forward or held back by the percussive sound of the guitar or piano. The organ can be played in a "choppy" style to lead a congregation or singer, but most often it leads by the flow of the changing harmonies of the music that is played Resonance
The guitar resonates from the ability of the wooden box to amplify the loudness of the strings. The piano sound is limited to the ability of the soundboard to resonate within the case. The lid on a piano may be raised to permit more of this sound to be heard as it is reflected by the lid out into the room. The organ is designed to use the room itself to resonate, filling the entire room with sound, no matter whether the organ is playing softly or at full volume
A church organ is built to fill a room with sound. A piano is built to be listened to in a room, as is the guitar.
The organ is not the choice of the church because it sounds more "holy" than the guitar or piano, but because it fulfills the role of accompanist more fully than any other instrument except the symphony orchestra.
The guitar and piano are both instruments that can play music of great beauty, but putting them into the role of accompanying church music as we know it limits the singing in many ways including eliminating much music that can only be played on the organ, great church music that cannot be played on any other instrument.
I'd go all the way back to the beginning here and say: My congregation (which, being Episcopalian, had never sung Pange Lingua and is not accustomed to singing unaccompanied plainchant) sang Pange Lingua just fine without any instruments of any sort this past Holy Thursday. They did not go flat. They also didn't drag the tempo.
I note that you're assuming the acoustic guitar here. Some of your criticisms don't apply to the electric guitar, and you can't say that electric is bad because the organ (in most parishes) is also an electric instrument. [ducks, runs]
You are absolutely right, the amplified guitar can play as loud as a church organ and can, through tone distortion, change its tone. Using a MIDI guitar, it can even play an organ....but it ends up sounding like a guitar with really, really excellent sustain.
The electric organ ;<) is designed, like the "real" organ to fill a room, but in the style and manner of an organ. If it sounds like an organ, it succeeds!
Noel, we have some common ground there- no doubt organ can be thrilling.
Can't wait to meet you at the Colloquium. I'm thinking Charles can introduce us an play referee for tug of war or something. :)
chant with interspersed improv? Interestingly enough, we had something like that for our deaconate ordination. I've never heard this before with chant, and I think for the people who think chant is evil and old, it could change hearts and minds, and show people it's not that bad.
Noel, this might whet some of your interest. I have a former student, world class jazz saxophone (played Grammies, with many top echelon jazz artists) whose formal degree was composition under Morton Lauridsen at Thornton, USC, who is back in town in residence at parish. We're collaborating on some interesting projects including a parish Mass setting for MR3. But, back in his HS days we used to listen and discuss the collaborative works of European jazz master sax artist Jan Garbarek with the Hilliard Consort that was chant-based. Anyway, when he came back (he's 25 now) we have occasionally used, as preludes, the GMissal introit chants, with interpolated improvisation by my protege at "apparent" moments within the chanted phrase junctions. It's rather amazing how attuned his "medium" is to the chant "medium." It is, after all, about listening and inspired response. We don't do this often, but when we do, oh my.....it's like Mary Ann's flying. There's a determined destination, but the wind can change directions for a brief, sublime moment. What do you, and mon amis, think about this?
Since you seem interested, here was the entire musical lineup, with some notable pieces in bold, and a recordings of a few of them. I have more recordings, if you want to hear them.
Musical Lineup 1. Introit: Qui mihi ministrat (ac) (done during the procession, not before) 2. Hymn: O God, beyond all praising, Thaxted, Gustav Holst, arranged by Proulx (b,o) 3. Gloria: By Calvin Bower (all, choir ac for middle section) 4. Responsorial Psalm: Psalm 89 (Forever I will sing), Robert Carroll (w, with the horn from brass quintet also playing, for additional harmony) 5. Alleluia: Chant Mode II (b,o) 6. Litany of the saints: Chanted, in Latin (ac) 7. Handing on of the book of the Gospels: Psalm 84 (Beati qui habitat), with english verses, from the rite of ordination (ac for antiphon and verse, o for second repetition of antiphon) 8. Kiss of Peace: Laudate Dominum, Christopher Walker (b, o) 9. Offertory: Come, my Way, my Truth, my Life (w, ac) (alternating between woodwinds interludes, and choir a cappella) 10. Sanctus: Mass for the City, Proulx (all) 11. Memorial Acclamation B: Mass for the City, Proulx (all) (Melody and "feel" is nearly identical as sanctus, see recording above) 12. Amen: Mass for the City, Proulx (all) (see note on the mem. acc.) 13. Pater Noster: Chanted, Latin (ac) 14. Lamb of God: Agnus Dei from Missa de Angelis, with interludes by woodwinds (w, o) 15. Communion Psalm: Psalm 96 (Proclaim to all the Nations), Haugen (w, o, cantor) 16. Motet: If ye love me, Thomas Tallis (ac) 17. Hymn: The strife is o’er (with alleluia refrains) (all)
I'm going to share a whisper with FNJ as it means so much to what I believe about what we do in CMAA and letting the union of art and sacral music take root in our own vineyards.
You meant Paul Winter of Misa Gaia fame, but you're right. Actually, and I'm dead serious, my guy plays Paul Winter under the table, and Kenny G is just a tip to the waiter. Yeah, that good. And I like and respect Winter and G. My guy is pure genius, that which I would covet, if I were of the world. And Paul Halley is a real Mensch: I did his choral stuff when I taught HS choral. No one in choral knows how inspired Halley is. I love being a trailblazer now and then. It's very special, the unworthy mentor and prodigal student relationship. Words are really an encumbrance in such a relationship. He popped into my office today, end day of parochial school year, and wanted some more input on the next movement of our Mass. So, I tried to capture a concept's essence in words about a three-fold repeated "Alleluia." A melody that isn't beholden to meter, that has an impetus and integrity obviously apparent that could then be taken up by any congregation on the face of the planet: Find me that setting and deliver it. I couldn't describe it in terms without compromising the goal by imposing more parameters. So, basically, "find me your melody" that is worthy of "Praise God." His smile affirmed "Got it, on it." You're right, Noel, it's a situation that only comes around by grace. Must be honed and valued. And that's why the Church will ever continue to treasure real and informed inspiration given life through composition. This ain't about "Shine, Jesus, shine" level stuff and the P&W soft sell. This is still about art consummated with worship.
Dad29, I'll cop to lousy song-leading if you want, but my former parish dropped a full step on the Our Father, (and sang at their own tempo.) It did not matter which priest began it (one's default reciting tone was F, another's G and another's A flat,) which Mass time, flu season or not, what cantor was near (not on,) mic', whether it was a packed nave or a sparsely attended weekday Mass, or anything else. Flatting over the course of the first four lines was a given, was so before I arrived, and remains so. I think perhpas congregations are entitled to whatever pitch and tempo they choose on unaccompanied chant.
The cantor should be able to hold HIS/HER pitch throughout the piece, period. If they can't, they need remedial singing lessons. The cantor should have a strong voice and USE it.
Congregations will follow the cantor who leads. Some may drop out for pitch problems, others may not sing on-key, but they will be the distinct minority.
I've found that it takes about 1 year of work to rid a choir of pitch-problems, most of which work consists of stopping and re-starting and giving the hairy eyeball to offenders, along with 'remedial singing' sermonettes.
Prolly takes as long to fix a congregation, but there you can't use the hairy eyeball; it has to be by force of voice.
We really, really diverge on this point. A Cantor/The Cantor should only sing introductions and then drop back to normal singing voice when the schola/congregation joins in.
Having one singer try to lead a congregation is way to Vatican II for me. A small group, even three....
The ideal here is what gets the congregation to sing/pray the Mass - the "ideal" is a liturgical consideration, not a musical one. That's the bottom line. In some places accompaniment works, in others it may not. Its the responsibility for those entrusted with these considerations to explore them fully in their parish and to see what works.
Darrharis, you speak the truth! Sometimes, that imaginary "ideal' doesn't sound ideal at all. I say "imaginary" because that ideal may have been rare in practice, existing mostly in someone's imagination of a perfect musical world.
There is nothing worse than a congregation floundering because a director insists they sing unaccompanied/sing music they do not know/sing when they would rather pray silently.
First off, we don't necessarily diverge; I think a "cantor" is generally a useless appendage added only because some twit in the USCCB/MAB-Music Gang decided, one day, to insert the word into some "official document."
If there is a genuine and acceptable need for 'cantor,' it's only as the verse-singer between refrains of the Psalm/Alleluia. However, having a group of people become "the cantor" (unless they're in a choir loft) is even more distracting and "busy", detracting from the role of the priest in the sanctuary.
Anyhow, following the USCCB/MAB document, mayhem ensued.
How-some-ever, the original post led me to believe that the parish was using such a person, in which case either:
1) The organ (or piano, or kazoo) was not strong enough to help the congregation maintain its pitch, or
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.