In Part 1, I looked at some of the more obvious reasons why choirs begin to falter: the impact of Covid, ageing membership, toxic behaviour, over-ambitious projects, and too many concerts.
In this second part, I want to explore some of the longer-term and less visible causes — the ones that creep in gradually or hide behind apparent success.
We all know the many health benefits of singing together.
But did you know it’s also an excellent way of bonding a group of people together, even if you don’t know them?
We all like to think our choirs are friendly spaces where everyone is equally welcome.
But being in a choir can bring back all sorts of memories of our time at school. All the things we found difficult as children can come back to haunt us.
Very occasionally there comes a time when you will have to ask a singer to leave your choir.
What’s the best (and kindest) way to do this?
No matter how flexible and self-aware we think we are, inevitably we all end up becoming a bit set in our ways.
This can particularly apply to any choir or singing group who’ve been together for a long time. What happens when a new leader comes along and tries to change this?
Very occasionally a singer may join your choir who seems to affect everyone negatively.
They are somehow ‘toxic’ and affect the whole choir. Here’s how you can deal with such a person.
Here in England, we’re limited to a maximum of six singers rehearsing indoors.
When restrictions are finally lifted (in three weeks we hope), many choral skills will have gone rusty over the last year or more.
Many choirs are open-access: they welcome all kinds of voices and don’t hold auditions.
But is it still possible to keep everyone happy and be truly inclusive without making too many concessions?
People join choirs for many different reasons. Whatever those reasons might be, a choir ends up being a small community.
In fact, some consider a choir as a kind of family. But what might that mean?
Sometimes in a small group there is just one person out of step with everyone else.
In a large choir, it’s not too much of a problem, but the smaller the group, the more noticeable it is. How can we deal with this?
A choir leader asks:
“I would very much appreciate your response to something that has happened to me with a small group that I started. I have had my 35 member chorus for some years, but a couple of years ago I wanted to do something with better singers, so I auditioned a group of singers to form an eight-person a cappella group. We have sung together for two years, but now it seems now that it has all fallen apart.
The social dynamics started to take over the group instead of the singing. Also there was a kind of split in the group – with some people wanting to become more of a professional a cappella group and some people not being able to put that kind of time in. What I was imagining was a kind of a small choral group. Do you have any thoughts to share?”
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt! There are no easy answers, but I outline 12 ideas below that I think are very important.
When you’re working in a small group, any differences (musical or social) are magnified. There is nowhere to hide!
Depending on who forms the group, there is often a mismatch in what people want the group to be and how they expect it to develop. This is why you often hear of pop bands breaking up due to “artistic differences”. It is very rare for a group of people to come together and share exactly the same vision for a group. If you have a very small group – say four – it may be possible if you’re lucky. But with eight it’s very unlikely.
Like you, I have started several small groups over the years expecting it to turn magically into some amazingly cohesive group of singers all on the same wavelength. It hasn’t happened so far.
The first time I did it, I made the mistake of asking people to self-select (rather than auditioning). I soon realised that people’s self-awareness and opinion of their own abilities far outstrips the reality of what they can actually do. I had to ask some people to leave the group – which was rather painful.
I was left with six singers and I managed to knock them into shape and we ended up making a reasonable sound. However, after a while I realised that I was in exactly the same role as I had with the bigger chorus: teacher, arranger, song-finder, conductor, etc. I had imagined the smaller group would be more of a peer group and we would all share the running, but it wasn’t to be.
I also found myself having to deal with weird dynamics within the group. Sometimes there was am air of dread in rehearsals with people not wanting to talk to each other. I sometimes felt that the group could have done with some kind of family therapy!
I disbanded the group, but three of us (more or less peers) stayed together. I still did most of the sourcing and arranging, but it started to feel a little more equal. But after a while I realised that we all wanted different things from the group so I left. The other two have carried on.
Finally I started an all-women group of 12 singers for which I auditioned. I raised the bar considerably (some of the singers were already in my larger chorus) and really put them through their paces. I cranked up the difficulty of the repertoire, made demands on performance standards, spent a lot of time getting the ensemble to gel, and made it very clear that if somebody didn’t pull their weight, they were out.
In the end, the ensemble really came together and performed to a very high standard. Eventually I stopped conducting them in performances (see Does your choir really need a conductor?) and finally I left the group, encouraging them to continue on their own – which they have done successfully.
From all these experiences I have learnt the following:
Have any of you tried to start a small chorus? What kinds of problems have you come across? Are there any major points that I’ve left out? Do drop by and leave a comment.
This is inspired by a post from January 2007 about Minor Chords, the first women’s ensemble I ran.
How do mixed choirs and single-sex choirs differ, if at all? I was partly inspired to write this by an article on ChoralNet (Are women’s choirs different?). There are clearly some differences, but are they important and does one kind of choir have an advantage over the other?
In 2001 I set up a women’s singing ensemble called Minor Chords (a weak pun based on the fact that all members are also in the bigger choir Woven Chords). The group consisted of 12 women who had the singing skills and commitment to meet alternate Saturdays for three hours to tackle more complex and difficult material than the main choir.
I didn’t hold formal auditions, but required members to be able to hold a part on their own. Over the years the standard of the group rose considerably and it became harder and harder to find suitable new material which was sufficiently challenging.
In 2007 I decided I wanted to raise the bar even higher and work with a group to develop performance skills rather than simply teaching songs each session. I disbanded Minor Chords and formed a new group (by audition this time) called Vox Mondiale. It was still a women-only group.
Over the next couple of years I helped develop the group’s confidence and performing skills. Last year I took off the training wheels and handed over the group to its members to run without me.
In 2004 I decided to run a men-only workshop in an attempt to get more blokes singing. Over the next few years this became an annual fixture attracting between 20 and 40 men each year. It was a great opportunity to do some of those real blokey songs from Georgia mixed with a few sea shanties, chain gang songs and songs from other male traditions such as Corsica and South Africa.
I’ve also been involved in a couple of workshops where we’ve invited both men and women, but then split into gender groups to learn songs separately. We began with a joint warm up and taught a song to everyone, then split up for the rest of the day. At the end of the workshop the women sang what they’d learnt to the men, and vice versa.
Over the years I have noticed certain differences when running a men-only or women-only workshop.
When it’s men-only, there tends not to be any chit chat when lunch is being prepared (and no chat whilst songs are being learnt either!). One year a bloke who usually sings with a mixed choir pointed this out: “Quiet, isn’t it?”. The savoury course tends to be pies and quiches bought from Morrison's, whereas the sweet course is home-made cakes (made by the men themselves). Washing up and tidying up is quick and efficient.
With women-only groups there is plenty of animated conversation during breaks. In fact, it’s hard to get them back after tea breaks! There were always lots of cakes in the break when I used to run Vox Mondiale. In fact, I think it became a little bit competitive and the singing was maybe just an excuse to come and eat cake!
In a women’s workshop, the savoury course for lunch tends to be home-made healthy salads, etc. whereas the sweet course is almost always shop-bought gateaux and cheesecakes. Washing up is effective, but takes time (with all the chat going on).
Just my observations!
In the Balkans it is typical for girls to form close friendships at school from a very early age. They will sing together with their friends in groups that will sometimes last a lifetime. Imagine how well they get to know each other’s voices and abilities!
Male groups of singers tend to be based around occupation (in Britain at least): coal miners, police, fishermen, etc.
All my community choirs have been mixed (when I took over Woven Chords it was women-only because the previous director thought men were too loud and disruptive!). Although men have always been in the minority.
There is nothing really to compare with a full-on four part (SATB) arrangement of a song with a meaty bass part. It’s nice to vary the diet every now and then so we do occasionally slip in a women-only or men-only song.
... of being in a mixed choir:
... of being in a single-sex group
... of being in a mixed choir:
... of being in a single-sex group
Does the gender of the choir or workshop leader make a difference?
Bill Henderson of the Forres Big Choir reckons that the reason they have roughly 50% men in their mixed choir is that they have a male and a female leader.
Simon said that although his choir was lead by a husband and wife team, the husband made jokes at the men’s expense whilst the wife was more supportive and encouraging.
When the choir leader is of a different gender to the singer, there can be problems with pitching and giving starting notes (see Singing the same note – differently!). This can easily be overcome though. Women in my choir are used to automatically singing an octave higher than the note I give out. But when Michael Harper came to give a workshop (he’s a respected counter tenor) he gave the notes at pitch and the women freaked out when they couldn’t sing an octave higher than him!
Have you had experience of being in (or leading) both a mixed choir and a single-sex choir? Did you notice any differences? Does the gender of the choir leader make a difference? Can you think of any other issues that I’ve left out? Do drop by and leave a comment.
This is a revised version of a post which first appeared as Vive la différence! in April 2007.
Over the years I have run choirs and singing groups all based on the same principles, but in different locations. The general mix of genders, ages, backgrounds, etc. tends to be very similar.
Yet each group ends up with a very distinct personality of its own.
I have run three adult community choirs (WorldSong, Global Harmony and Woven Chords) as well as four smaller singing groups (Minor Chords, C-Section, Vox Mondiale and Foot and Mouth voice-theatre). In each case I have had to think carefully when choosing which songs to do. It’s great to be able to do big, lush arrangements with an 80-piece choir, but it’s just as wonderful to be able to do more subtle, quieter material with just 12 voices or less.
The choice is made more difficult when I run a one-day singing workshop as I usually have no idea how many people will turn up, nor what the male/ female mix will be. I usually assume that we won’t have many blokes, so I always adapt the tenor line so women can sing it. However, at one workshop a couple of years ago about half the group (20 or so) turned out to be men! I had some quick re-arranging to do.
What I have found really surprising though is the difference in flavour of the community choirs I have run. Each of the choirs have been mixed and of roughly the same size and composition. They were all founded on the same principles (i.e. that anyone can join regardless of experience and all songs are taught by ear), covered the same sort of repertoire, and met for the same length of time each week on a weekday evening from 7.30pm. They also each ended up being a performing choir.
Yet each choir has its own distinct personality and dynamics.
Some songs work really well with one choir, but not with another. One choir might be able to cope with a tricky rhythm or harmony, yet another choir (which perhaps has been going for longer) finds it just too difficult. One choir may love folk songs whilst another may hate them.
Over time I started to realise which songs would appeal to which choir. So when I am sourcing material, it is usually quite obvious which choir I will teach a particular song to – regardless of mix of voices or size – just because that choir will appreciate it and enjoy it more. Some songs which have not worked with one choir, will come alive with another.
Why is this? How come two groups of adults formed in exactly the same way can end up having such a different group personality? The only difference being the geographical location!
The gender and age mix of each choir is very similar; the tastes of the singers is similar (i.e. they’re all attracted to the kind of repertoire I offer – generally world music in unaccompanied harmony); everyone enjoys the way that I teach and is now very much used to it; there is the same mix of members who have been with the choir for some time together with people who have joined this term. So why the difference?
Can the demographic of a town account for such a different group dynamic? Or is it that within a choir, a very small group of individuals can have a big effect on the larger group?
I remember once doing a theatre show which was very funny (all audiences so far had laughed a lot each time we’d performed the show), yet one night we got hardly a titter. There must have been about 40 people in the (capacity) audience (it was a very small venue!), yet hardly any audible laughs.
When we talked to some friends about it afterwards, they said that although they had found the show very funny, they had felt that the atmosphere in the room somehow meant that they couldn’t laugh out loud.
Similarly, when we played to around 120 people at a Christmas concert one year, we walked on stage to complete silence! Not a single person clapped. It was as if they had all discussed it beforehand and come to an agreement. And another time performing in a church, nobody clapped after the songs until I pointed out that it was allowed!
I find group dynamics endlessly fascinating. It may be that when I have tried to blame it on the weather, it was simply the group dynamic having a strong effect on one particular evening.
I wonder how many individuals it takes to affect a large group? Can one person influence a whole choir or does it need a small group? Are local demographics that strong to make a difference?
What do you think? Do drop by and leave a comment. I always enjoy hearing what you have to say.
Following on from my recent posts on men and singing, next week I’ll be writing about my experience with women’s singing groups. How do they differ from men’s groups, and how do single sex groups differ from mixed choirs?
I don’t like rehearsing. I’d much rather turn up on the day, trust the singers I’m working with and just busk it.
But some people love to rehearse. They worry away at a song for months until they feel that they’ve perfected it.
Neither of these extremes seem to be ideal, but which is better?
I really, really don’t like rehearsing. Neither as a singer nor a choir leader. I get bored easily. Once a song is pretty much up and running, I’m done and want to move onto the next thing.
Personally, if I go over something too many times it becomes stale. Sometimes it even gets worse!
I used to play squash from time to time. When I first went out on the court after not playing for a while, I was really quite good. But if I ended up playing several days in a row, I got gradually worse. I work very much from instinct and if I repeat something too many times, I become analytical which gets in the way.
Similarly the choir might have been having trouble getting a song right. We rehearse it week after week and it just doesn’t gel. Then we have the summer break. First week back we give the song one more try and it’s perfect!
The same thing’s at work here: if you worry away at something too much, your intellect gets in the way and stops you from doing it well. Rather like the amateur golfer who is asked to analyse their swing. As soon as they focus on what they’re doing, it all goes wrong.
I’d much rather rehearse just enough then leave the rest up to a mutual trust of the other singers and their musicianship, and being focused and in the moment.
The positive aspects of this approach are that the performance can be:
The negative aspects are that it can end up being:
Some people like to rehearse a lot and go over a song many times. They feel that this in-depth treatment improves their understanding and performance of the song and also enables the singers in the group to get to know each other better and hence work better together.
The positive aspects of this approach are that:
The negative aspects can be that:
I’ve nailed my colours to the mast, but what about you? I’m of the opinion that, like seasoned session musicians, you can work with complete strangers after just a few rehearsals as long as you trust their musical abilities.
Do let me know which of these two camps you belong to. Or maybe there’s a middle way that I’ve not thought of.
Following on from this topic, in next week’s post I’m going to look at the notion that people are either specialists (focusing in depth on just one thing) or generalists (having a wide range of interests and influences) and what effect this has on the choirs they lead or the singing they do.
