|
Post by billhammond on Jan 25, 2015 23:06:26 GMT -5
A retired Strib reporter who is a dear friend of mine organized a gathering of mostly singers at his place in south Mpls today, and we wound up with three guitar players, one uke player, five female singers and three male singers. There was coffee, wine, cheese and beer, but it was mostly about singing and playing. Using old chord/lyric sheets and occasional iPad assistance, we worked our way through Sixties pop, '50s-'60s folk, a couple of Swing Era standards, etc., and we introduced several of the participants to Eva Cassidy (always fulfilling to we us Believers). Then .. at some point, the host's daughter, a fine singer and advocate for Americana music, started steering our Try List to gospel stuff. We nailed "Angel Band," even though several singers had never heard it before. All the harmony singing was just working so naturally, and then I recalled this beauty, which no one in the room had ever heard before, but I swear the next time we gather, it shall be done in a beauteous way. Until then, savor this:
I was off duty, Russ, but now I am back on the clock.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Jan 26, 2015 1:07:20 GMT -5
"to we Believers"? We?
O the humanity!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2015 1:23:39 GMT -5
<Beliebers>?
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jan 26, 2015 6:23:11 GMT -5
I just last week got into a long discussion about church music again. Very few things have divided the church (and created a mass exodus) quite so effectively as differences of opinion about the music used in church services. But the argument (seems to me, as one who has left the church in large part not because of the music, but because of what the music says about the church) seems to always center around the obvious -- the right or wrongness of updating the music -- when that's really not the issue.
The issue, seems to me, is one of simple functionality. It isn't just familiarity that allows for choral singing -- as your gathering illustrates. It's music that is made for choral singing with predictable harmonies and structure. Church music used to act as a wonderful symbol of corporate worship -- the coming together of different gifts, melting together into a whole that exceeded the sum of its parts. The contemporary model is that of a concert in which the band performs for the people -- and the people can participate if they wish, but they add nothing, bring nothing, and sing what is essentially a solo in the midst of a group of 100 or more other similarly solo "performers"....in other words, nothing symbolic, nothing corporate, and nothing that couldn't be done at home.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jan 26, 2015 9:04:33 GMT -5
Well, I'm sorry you see it that way, John. There have to be congregations that still do it your way. Our church has 2 services. One Traditional. One Contemporary. And when I hang at the Traditional one, the knock is that many of the hymns sung are not familiar, but chosen for the topic of the day (always a good idea) but are unfamiliar, too wordy, not very melodic, and when you finally hit the last verse and think you might know the song and be able to sing a harmony of sorts, the organist changes the arrangement and comes up with a bizarre combination of chords to play over the now barely discernable melody with no hope of ever finding a harmony part.
I have to chuckle. It take 3 verses to get the congregation to actually try to sing most of the song, then the 4th verse stops them in their tracks.
But your point is well taken. I would hope there's a congregation nearby that sees it your way. They probably could use some help.
We're all just seekers.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jan 26, 2015 9:09:07 GMT -5
Well, I'm sorry you see it that way, John. Don't be. There are churches for everyone. I've got a nice Episcopal church a mile from my house that has maintained their crusty old ways.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jan 26, 2015 9:15:08 GMT -5
PS - My wife, who is NOT musical, says the Tradtional service music is as I discuss above. But the Contemporary Service has way too much singing. She always shows up 10 minutes late so she misses the first 2 or 3 praise songs.
Me, I'm somewhere in between. I think CCM has become too formulaic anymore. Similar poppy melodies with the same message. Pretty boring, actually. Personally I'd be more interested in:
I always wanted to do this on Maundy Thursday. But nobody pays attention to me
Or Bill's AKUS tune would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jan 26, 2015 9:18:24 GMT -5
We tried the Reformed church last year and finally calculated that we needed to come 25 minutes late. If we still heard the drums outside in the parking lot, we knew we were too early.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jan 26, 2015 9:22:46 GMT -5
My pastor friend, Steve, gave me a CD for Christmas. "The Story of Your Life" by Matthew West. I'm liking it a lot. Some of it is overproduced with a typical rock cacophony. But 1/2 are not. And all the songs are pretty solid. Real people dealing with real life in a Spiritual manner. The guy has a great voice. I may try to work up a song or two and play them in the bars I hang out in.
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on Jan 26, 2015 9:34:11 GMT -5
"to we Believers"? We? O the humanity! Hey, sometimes on the weekend, I just go crazy with the rule-breaking!
|
|
|
Post by theevan on Jan 26, 2015 9:47:25 GMT -5
I just last week got into a long discussion about church music again. Very few things have divided the church (and created a mass exodus) quite so effectively as differences of opinion about the music used in church services. But the argument (seems to me, as one who has left the church in large part not because of the music, but because of what the music says about the church) seems to always center around the obvious -- the right or wrongness of updating the music -- when that's really not the issue. The issue, seems to me, is one of simple functionality. It isn't just familiarity that allows for choral singing -- as your gathering illustrates. It's music that is made for choral singing with predictable harmonies and structure. Church music used to act as a wonderful symbol of corporate worship -- the coming together of different gifts, melting together into a whole that exceeded the sum of its parts. The contemporary model is that of a concert in which the band performs for the people -- and the people can participate if they wish, but they add nothing, bring nothing, and sing what is essentially a solo in the midst of a group of 100 or more other similarly solo "performers"....in other words, nothing symbolic, nothing corporate, and nothing that couldn't be done at home. That's brilliant, John. It's certainly the way I see it. Unfortunately, I pine for a time that is past and doesn't seem recoverable. If it was ever really there. We church-hop some and have made some random observations. Much of the new music has little melody. The damn things drone. The songs are not in a hymnal so there is no sheet music. If you don't already know the song you're SOL. So it's skewed toward the insiders, especially the younger insiders who are likelier to have the CD or otherwise know the tune. Oh, and it would be useless to have most of them in the hymnal. Why? Because almost all are syncopated. Verses don't start on the downbeat. They are difficult to notate and harder yet to read. So really, it's exclusionary except to those on the inside. IE, it's exclusionary. The problem with my observations is general music education for the general public has gone to shit. I was taught basic music reading and singing in grade school. Not now. Not anywhere, unless you join glee club...or choir at church. My Mennonite friends in Kansas do it right. They teach their kids to read music before they can read English. They they teach them how to sing in parts, blend and how to maintain a clear, unaffected voice. We went to "The Response" Saturday, a prayer rally put on by AFA and I suppose some other Christian groups. We had a nice experience and there were times of prayer, but mostly it was a concert with lots of jumping around and hand-waving. It got to be too much for us. "Worshiptainment"
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Jan 26, 2015 9:47:55 GMT -5
In Luther League we would always laugh at the congregation dragging its way through "Rrrocka vaages cleff for meeee."
Then again, we visited one of Melva's cousins recently and she had a contemporary Christian radio station on. The low point was rewritten lyrics to "Friday Friday" (remember that one?) abut Jesus dying for me on Good Friday Friday.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on Jan 26, 2015 10:08:47 GMT -5
My cousin sang Angel Band at my Mom's funeral. It was powerful.
|
|
|
Hootenanny
Jan 26, 2015 10:56:00 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by drlj on Jan 26, 2015 10:56:00 GMT -5
I avoid church religiously and listen to the music I like at home. All secular, of course.
|
|
|
Post by fred sterenberg on Jan 26, 2015 11:02:47 GMT -5
When you live in Grand Rapids, Michigan there is a church that suits your style, convictions, schedule, you name it! The gradations are even sliced very fine. That is all assuming that your religion is Christian.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Jan 26, 2015 11:04:31 GMT -5
PS - My wife, who is NOT musical, says the Tradtional service music is as I discuss above. But the Contemporary Service has way too much singing. She always shows up 10 minutes late so she misses the first 2 or 3 praise songs. Me, I'm somewhere in between. I think CCM has become too formulaic anymore. Similar poppy melodies with the same message. Pretty boring, actually. Personally I'd be more interested in: [ :: snip the vid :: ] I always wanted to do this on Maundy Thursday. But nobody pays attention to me [ :: snip the vid :: ] Or Bill's AKUS tune would be nice. I stopped playing in my church group a couple of years ago. No particular reason. Just got bored. It had become a grind, plus we played at the 5:00pm Sunday service, which interfered with the family dinner I put on every Sunday (which, frankly, is more important to me than church). So I guess I DO have a reason... Anyway, I used to sneak in a few songs like that. After communion, there was always an extended pause, so if we wanted to toss something in, we could. Most of the time, we didn't. Occasionally, I's just do one anyway. I did "Unchained" once (same song I did at IJ a few years ago) and no-one blanched. It was a nice change of pace from the John Michael Talbot stuff (which I don't mean to denigrate...that's good stuff, if a bit over-done) we usually did.
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Jan 26, 2015 11:11:27 GMT -5
Anyway, I used to sneak in a few songs like that. I remember when you wanted to slip in "Hallelujah" but they wouldn't let you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2015 11:40:39 GMT -5
hootenanny?
That made my day.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Jan 26, 2015 11:41:44 GMT -5
Anyway, I used to sneak in a few songs like that. I remember when you wanted to slip in "Hallelujah" but they wouldn't let you. Lesson learned. Never ask permission.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jan 26, 2015 12:07:51 GMT -5
Anyway, I used to sneak in a few songs like that. I remember when you wanted to slip in "Hallelujah" but they wouldn't let you. I think we've done Hallelujah. There are sanitized versions of lyrics that flip it back to a church-appropriate song. There are many such songs from the popular secular realm that can be easily cleaned up and turned into a pro-culture instead of counter-culture meaning. It's a nice trick to flip a song that is a flip to begin with. Listeners are on edge, until they hear the reversed message. Just another trick in the book. I don't get involved in the selection process. I'm kind of there for the fellowship with fellow musicians, and to work the craft and support the church.
|
|