Choirs: is old age an issue?

This post is part of a series of occasional Questions and Answers. Just use the contact form if you want to submit a question.

After reading my post Over-rehearsed or under-prepared: which is better? Dawn contacted me about a problem she has with her choir.

Dawn writes:

“Enjoyed reading your article. As usual.

My problem is slightly different as we only meet once a month, and all the members are over 60. Often they tend to forget the points we worked on the previous month, or they are anxious to move on to other songs (or both, to be honest).

Where do I go from there? Any ideas would be gratefully received.”

choristers are getting older

The fact is that singers in choirs these days are getting older. For some reason singing in a choir seems to attract 50-somethings and people who have retired. In all the community choirs and singing workshops I have run, the majority of people are at least in their mid-forties and older. We are all finding it hard to recruit younger members.

Does this matter? Does it affect the way that a choir is run or its repertoire? Personally, I don’t think it makes a difference.

forgetting things from session to session

Dawn says that her singers tend to forget points that they worked on the previous month. Well, some of my singers forget what they were doing the previous week or at yesterday’s rehearsal!

The longer the gap between sessions, the more likely that people will forget what they did. If you do have to have long gaps between sessions then there are two obvious solutions:

1. make each session self-contained and don’t depend on anything needing to be remembered from one session to the next
2. give aids to people to help them remember, e.g. recording of parts or written outline of what happened in the session

wanting to move onto new material

This taps into my recent post on specialist versus generalists. Some people feel that they’ve done enough of one song thank you very much and want to move onto new songs. Whereas some of the group might want to keep on working on the same song until it’s perfected.

In this case you need to steer a course between the two extremes. Maybe leave a song for one session, and bring it back in the next one so it feels fresh.

Some people just come for fun and don’t really want to work on a song too much, they just want an opportunity to sing. Maybe they’re in the wrong group and need to go to a ‘songs from the shows’ kind of choir where lots and lots of songs are sung each session to a piano accompaniment. Learning a song properly is a different kettle of fish.

If you are clear about the kind of choir you want to establish, then you need to stick to your guns. People sign up to your choir because they like what you do. You need to decide exactly what kind of choir it is that you want to create.

If you don’t want to keep moving onto other songs, then don’t. People will respect your authority and you will eventually end up with a choir of singers who agree with the way you run things. Don’t stand for any nonsense!

songs for a particular era?

Many people seem to remain stuck in the music of their youth. I can’t relate to that myself as I’m always on the lookout for new stuff. But the fact is I know people in their 50s who still only listen to early 70s bands and people in their 60s who only like rock and roll.

But this is to stereotype people. Just because somebody is old, does it mean they only want to sing ‘White cliffs of Dover’ or ‘It’s a long way to Tipperary’?

In fact, unless it’s a simple sing-along session, trying to learn an arrangement of a well-known song can be very hard (see my post: It’s hard to teach songs that people already know). Why not find material that is fresh and new for everyone in the group?

we’re not that old!

There are so many offers and schemes out there for the “over 50s”. I don’t know about you, but that makes me feel like I’m OLD and on the scrap heap at 57 (I know, I know, I don’t look that old ...)!

Age is in the mind. I know 16-year-olds who behave like 80-year-olds, and we have an 84-year-old woman in my choir who acts like a spring chicken. It’s all about attitude. The fact that your singers are over 60, Dawn, is irrelevant I believe.

do you work with older singers?

Of course, working with singers who might have health issues (limited mobility, dementia, breathing problems, etc.) can be problematic, but generally I don’t think that age is an issue.

What do you think? Do you work with older singers in your choir? Do you find that they are more forgetful or want to keep moving onto new songs? Do leave a comment and share your experience.

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Men and singing 1: 15 myths debunked

A few weeks ago I started a discussion here on Why men won’t sing.

At around the same time I sent out an email to everyone on my mailing list asking for advice on how to get more men singing.

time for another song by willposh

I have been overwhelmed by the responses I got, so many, many thanks to all of you who took the time to respond. Many people wrote long and thoughtful replies which it is taking me some time to read through.

I did promise that I would feedback the responses as a post on this blog. Well, it’s coming, but it might take a little longer than I thought!

This will be the first in a series of posts analysing all the responses I received and throwing some more ideas into the pot.

First off I thought I’d identify a few myths (in no particular order) that seem to keep cropping up. Do let me know if you agree or not!

myth 1: men sing at sports games

Men don’t sing at football matches or rugby matches or ball games, they chant – sometimes in rhythm (which is quite tricky to do). Another way of describing it is shouting (roughly) in tune . But it’s not singing as we know it. It’s rather like that scene in Cabaret where Liza Minnelli stands under a railway bridge and screams her head off as a train passes above her. It’s just a way of letting off steam.

myth 2: bass parts are always boring

Many men complain that the bass parts are just a drone or a load of ‘dum dums’. “Basses never get the tune” they moan.

I did a little survey of the 30+ songs we did in our recent concert. Hardly any of them were drones, in several cases the men got the tune. In any case, with a well-written arrangement, every part will feel like the tune. And if it’s not a familiar song, who knows which bit is the tune any way?

myth 3: men’s confidence is easily destroyed

And women are supremely confident all the time? Both men and women are often under-confident about singing or any other thing that they don’t think they’re very good at. But the women step forward and give it a go regardless. Why not the men?

myth 4: men are shy, vulnerable creatures ...

... who are afraid of getting things wrong or standing out in a crowd

Yeah, right! You really believe that men (who will posture, compete, show off, be loud, draw attention to themselves, etc. at the drop of a hat) are shrinking violets?

myth 5: men are scared of women

At least they seem to be scared of women en masse. I hear this a lot. I have spent most of my life being in the minority in mixed groups. So much so that I don’t notice it any more. What is there to be scared of exactly? This is just another myth that perpetuates the ridiculous idea that men are small frightened creatures who need to be protected from the harsh world out there!

myth 6: men don’t leave the house much ...

... and if they do it’s to go down to the pub.

Apparently 52 pubs a week are closing in the UK. More men than women tend to go to pubs, so it’s clear that men are deserting pubs in their thousands. Where do they go? Do they stay at home and open a six-pack? Are you seriously telling me that men don’t need stimulation (evening classes, cinema, fishing) and are happy to sit in front of the box every evening?

myth 7: singing is not a macho activity

Try telling that to the New Zealand boys doing the haka! Or the Shouting Men from Finland. Or Only Men Aloud. Or the Zulus surrounding the British at Rourke’s Drift in the movie Zulu. Or the seriously macho Corsican guys in their quartets. Or the Sicilian tenores who look like they should be in the mafia.

myth 8: there are ‘men’s songs’ ...

... and there are ‘women’s songs’

Oh, please! Don’t get me started!!! Women like pink and fluffy and men like blue and rugged? Most of the male group songs that have topped the charts have been wishy washy ballads (see Westlife, Boyzone, etc. or Il Divo and the like). Women who top the charts tend to be raunchy and gutsy (Lady Gaga, Beyonce, Madonna). You think men like hard rock and women like ballads? Think again!

myth 9: men only like challenges ...

... and are very competitive

Sure, they might have that tendency. In which case why not try singing. They seem to think it’s difficult so there’s a challenge for you! And why not compete to be the best (singer, choir, performance)?

myth 10: men don’t like being part of a group

Try telling that to a bunch of football supporters – or bowls club or stag party or army squad or stock exchange floor or rugby team.

myth 11: men don’t like commitment

In which case there would be far less marriages out there! Again it’s assuming that men are wishy washy and can’t make their minds up or put their money where their mouth is. If that were the case, businesses would be folding daily. Maybe they don’t like certain commitments. I guess it’s about priorities and men don’t prioritise singing (or the arts or socialising or sharing their feelings).

myth 12: men are put off singing when their voices break

I’ve talked to loads of blokes about this and most of them can’t remember their voices breaking. Most of us go through this quite quickly and move on. The idea of a squeaky uncontrollable voice that wavers up and down for months on end to the ridicule of all your mates is a bit of a stereotype and tends to happen just in movies (or to a minority of lads). In any case, it’s just a small thing in a long life and soon forgotten.

myth 13: men have more work commitments than women

I have met loads of high up female executives, consultants, and business leaders in my choirs and singing workshops. They attend regularly and are always keen and on time. On the other hand, I often hear that a bloke “can’t make it tonight, I have to work late”. How come there’s one rule for women and another for men? If the blokes really want to come singing, they’ll find a way.

myth 14: men find harmony singing harder than women

Oh, yeah??!! Nonsense!

myth 15: if you introduce singing to boys at primary school they will continue to sing throughout life

I sang at primary school. We had loads of music and singing at school when I was a kid. I joined the primary school choir and I was in the local church choir. When I went to big school at 11 I pretty much stopped singing (except for the school song on founder’s day and a bit of camp fire singing at boy scouts). I only took up singing again in my late 30s. I meet lots of people – both men and women – who start singing again in their 40s and 50s even though they sang regularly at school.

do you agree?

Well, that’s a few myths debunked I hope. Do you agree? I’d love to hear from you.

Next week I’ll share some of the ideas that you came up with for how to get more men singing (Men and singing 2: your collective wisdom).

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Two approaches to choirs and singing: specialist or generalist?

Last week I wrote about whether it’s better to be over-rehearsed or under-prepared. I talked about people who like to spend a long time working on one thing in order to perfect it versus those who like to do just enough work on a piece before moving onto something new.

We can characterise these two kinds of people as specialists (focusing in depth on just one thing) and generalists (having a wide range of interests and influences). I want to look at how these apparently opposing approaches affect singing and choir leading.

two kinds of person

There are two kinds of people in the world – those who divide the world into two kinds of people, and those who don’t!

You can divide the world up in lots of ways like this. Here are two different approaches to life, music, the universe and everything:

1. single minded – a deep immersion in one thing: this requires a narrow and focused approach which involves constant working away at a single idea
2. broad interests - trying lots of different alternatives: this involves a wide and eclectic approach and looking at many different ideas

We can think of these two kinds of people as:

1. specialists – they know a lot about a small range of things
2. generalists – they know a little about lots of different things

east vs. west/ deep vs. wide

I was once told a story about these two different approaches. It was to demonstrate the basic differences between how we do things in the West, and how those in the East tackle the same problems.

Two people are in a field looking for buried treasure. One is Japanese, the other British (sorry, it’s racial stereotype time!).

The Japanese person chooses a likely looking spot in the middle of the field and starts digging. And keeps on digging in the same spot, the hole becoming deeper and wider with time.

The British person also chooses a likely looking spot and begins to dig. But after a reasonable depth, it is clear the treasure is not there, so they choose another spot and try that.

Slowly the Japanese person turns the whole field into one big hole, and finally uncovers the treasure. In the meantime, the British person has dug many, many holes which cover the entire area and also finds the treasure.

Specialists will tend to dig in the same spot, going deeper and deeper into a topic, becoming more expert in one particular area in their chosen field.

Generalists will look at a wide range of possibilities, checking each one out until they get an overall view of the whole field interest.

the specialist

The specialist will want to know a lot about the song that’s being worked on. They will find out all about the meaning, where it comes from, what different versions there are. They like to spend a long time rehearsing the song in order to tease out all its subtleties and to really go deep into the music.

Over time, the specialist will slowly increase their repertoire until they have a small body of songs within the same genre. They will know a lot about the performance styles of these kinds of songs and will always attempt an ‘authentic’ performance.

upsides

• knows a great deal about one specific area
• is an expert in their chosen field
• goes deep into the subject
• pays attention to details (lyrics, dynamics, meaning, pronunciation, etc.)
• rehearses a lot until the song is perfect
• can result in ‘authentic’ performances within a specific genre
• tends to stick at the job at hand until it’s done
• focuses on  product rather than process
• disciplined in rehearsal
• offers a lot to those interested in a specific genre (e.g. gospel, Bulgarian)

downsides

• can lose sight of the bigger picture: individual singers can sound great, but the overall sound of the choir might not be that good
• as a singer, can become self-absorbed: only focusing on your part can mean you freak out when the other harmonies are introduced
• singers can end up being control freaks: they complain that the people around them in their part are not singing exactly what they’re singing
• choir leaders can end up being control freaks: they try to realise the perfect performance of a song and forget they’re dealing with human beings
• rehearsals can end up being too much like studying and not enough fun
• restricted diet of songs: like having a gourmet meal, but every course is made of smoked salmon
• songs can end up being over-rehearsed
• has limited appeal (i.e. to those interested in just the one genre)

the generalist

The generalist often choose songs that simply speak to them and move them. They tend not to be too interested in the background of a song, but are more concerned with bringing it to life in the here and now. They rehearse quickly and effectively until the song is pretty much up on its feet before moving onto the next song.

Over time the generalist will build up a huge repertoire ranging over a large number of different styles, genres and cultures. Performances will always be rich and varied with songs presented in interesting and different arrangements and formats.

upsides

• knows about lots of different styles, genres and cultures
• sees the overall picture
• offers variety and an introduction to a wide range of music
• tends to be concerned more with process than product
• makes songs their own, not as concerned with ‘authenticity’
• more interested in the sound of words rather than their meaning
• rehearsals are fun and relaxed
• good at making connections between different genres
• doesn’t get bogged down, but moves on when necessary
• offers something for everyone

downsides

• approach can be seen as too lax: some people like more discipline
• not enough attention paid to details or to individual singers
• choir leaders can end up feeling burnt out as ‘song factories’ always having to offer something new
• never quite get to grips with one genre, always moving on
• rehearsals can be fun, but performances might not be polished enough
• too much focus on the overall sound might mean you don’t pay enough attention to learning your own part well
• laid-back leadership might mean singers don’t work hard enough
• singers may get confused by lack of clear instruction and not sure what song they’re working on or what style they’re supposed to be in

what type are you?

Personally I’m always looking for new challenges, new kinds of song, new adventures. I can get bored quite easily so I’m very much in the ‘generalist’ camp.

Of course, this division into two types is very artificial. The ideal choir leader or singer is always a mix of both these approaches.

But which type do you tend to be? What about your choir leader? What if there’s a mismatch between singers and choir leader in their approach? Can you think of anything I’ve left out in my upsides and downsides?

Do drop by and leave a comment!

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Trust me – you know it makes sense

This is a revised version of a post which first appeared as In you I trust in March 2007

The idea of trust has come up quite a few times in my last few posts.

Trust that you will eventually learn the song; trust that, even if you’re slightly under-rehearsed, your musical director will guide you through the concert OK; trust in your co-leaders if you teach with others.

trust your choir leader

When you join a choir, you give a huge amount of control over to the choir leader. You sign up for their particular vision and approach to choral singing.

Gradually you get a sense (I hope!) that the choir leader knows what they’re doing. As you encounter tricky songs and difficult songs, but come through unscathed, you begin to trust your director more and more.

In an earlier post I introduced the idea that your director is rather like the leader of an expedition: they know how to map read, what to do if you get lost, and they have all the right equipment. But they don’t necessarily know where you’re going to end up. You have to trust that they will lead you somewhere interesting. (see What the job of choir leader involves: your MD may know the ‘how’ but not the ‘what’)

trust in the process

The concert is fast-approaching and you’re not 100% confident with some of the songs. You’re not sure which song comes next, where you enter, whether you’re doing the third verse or not, and plenty of other details seem very fuzzy. It all seems to be a mess and it looks like it’s going to go horribly wrong.

But you’ve been here before. Remember that you’ve done lots of successful concerts and they’ve all turned out OK. And if you think hard enough you’ll remember that you had exactly the same misgivings the last time you did a performance! Trust that it will turn out OK – it usually does.

The song is really, really tricky. You just don’t seem to be able to get it. The structure is complex and the lyrics are particularly difficult. Maybe you should just let this one go and not bother learning it.

But remember all those other songs when you’ve felt the same thing. And now they’re some of your favourites and you can sing them with no problems at all. Just trust that you need to go through some learning pains to get there, but you will eventually learn the song well.

This song is just awful! You really, really don’t know why your choir leader chose it. It’s a dirge and will never sound any good. The tenors keep messing their bit up and your part is really, really boring. The audience will hate it!

But think about all the songs in your repertoire. Did you like them all equally at first? Almost certainly not. And there’s just one song you don’t like (even though you love all the others), that’s not a bad percentage. Somebody else is bound to like it. Trust that your choir leader has taste and an overview of what songs will work for your choir.

trust your fellow singers

As I pointed out the other week, there do tend to be some control freaks in the world! There are also people who focus on the details (I’ll be writing about this next Sunday) without getting a good overall picture.

These people often worry about the other people singing the same part as them. They notice if someone gets a note wrong, or forgets to sing a passage quietly. They begin to notice the other singers (and parts) more and more and stop focusing on their own singing and learning. This makes them quite tense and means that they can end up focusing on the wrong thing and not pay attention to the conductor.

You need to trust your fellow singers. They are all in the same boat as you and are all as competent as you, it’s just that they may learn and develop at different rates. You can’t control them individually, so stop trying, trust they will do their best, relax and enjoy your own singing!

trust (and believe in) yourself

I’ve had people come up to me who are convinced they are the worst singer in the world. They feel under-confident, insecure and insignificant (although feeling that you are the worst ever singer is rather arrogant and self-centred!).

These singers are often convinced that they shouldn’t be in the choir. They are obviously spoiling the overall sound and making it difficult for the other singers who are much, much better than them. Actually, it’s probably best if they leave the choir altogether – after all, nobody will notice that they’re not there.

But what if every singer thought this? There would be no choir at all!

You need to believe that every other singer is the same as you. They all have their doubts and difficulties, you’re not the only one. Trust that you will do your best (like everyone else), that you are as important as every other singer, and believe that you can deliver the goods.

do you have to earn trust?

Some people find it difficult to trust until someone has really proved themselves in all sorts of situations. Even then, they might not trust them 100% (ah, yes, those control freaks again!).

But instead, what if you trusted people on sight and gave them the benefit of the doubt?

What if, when you first join a choir, you assume that the director knows what they’re doing. Trust them totally from the off and see what happens. Similarly, trust your fellow singers even if they’re strangers. After all, you’re doing your best, so why not assume they are too?

I often say to my choir that they should behave as if they know what they’re doing and the rest will follow. Behave as if you know the song well and you will surprise yourself by how much you DO know AND you will look confident.

Behave as if you are relaxed and enjoying yourself and you will soon find that it all feels like so much fun.

Behave as if everyone else is 100% trustworthy and you will find that they seem to rise to your expectations and prove themselves worthy.

having an off week

What prompted my original post In you I trust was that I had a bad choir session. These happen when I’m not feeling very well, or I’m distracted, or it’s just one of those things, like the weather. Or when you have a ‘difficult’ rehearsal, nothing seems to go right, and the choir seem to have collectively forgotten everything they ever knew.

You can either panic, throw the towel in, or trust that it’s all going to work out OK.

All we can do is trust that we have done our preparation, both collectively (I have taught the songs well and we have rehearsed them sufficiently) and individually (choir members have done their homework, learnt their words and know their part). That is all we can do: prepare well. We then need to trust in the process and try to relax and enjoy the performance.

This same notion of trust comes in when people don’t think they can ‘sing’. If I behave as if everyone can sing and the song we are learning is not difficult, then it’s as if am giving permission for people to be their best. It is handing over responsibility to the individual, giving them space fully to be themselves, trusting that they can do it. And the results are usually marvellous!

Trusting people doesn’t mean becoming complacent and not trying. You do have to do the work and make sure you prepare well. It doesn’t matter how many times we have performed well, I still need to make sure that we work hard to make the concert the best it can be (maybe even better than last time!). Otherwise we will just rest on our laurels and the whole thing may be a disaster.

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Over-rehearsed or under-prepared: which is better?

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.

 

                photo by Prestwick                             photo by ~BC~

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?

under-prepared?

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:

• fresh and new – as if for the first time
• exciting and alive
• with a sense of total focus (and slight danger!)

The negative aspects are that it can end up being:

• unpolished and rough round the edges
• amateurish
• full of mistakes
• a display of fearful and under-confident singers

over-rehearsed?

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:

• everyone always knows exactly what they’re doing
• subtle nuances and depths of songs can be brought out
• the singers can be playful with the song and each other because they feel totally secure with the material

The negative aspects can be that:

• the performance can feel tired and uninspired as if the singers are just going through the motions
• the song is too polished and soulless
• the singers appear to be over-confident and arrogant

which do you prefer?

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.

specialists vs. generalists

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.

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Learning songs by ear

This is a revised version of a post which first appeared in February 2007 as Papa’s got a brand new song.

Many people have no idea how a song is learnt by ear. They assume that written music is a must. But don’t forget that people have been singing (and learning) songs for thousands of years without music.

my listening ears by niclindh

But what is the best way to go about learning a song by ear? How long does it take? Are there any shortcuts? Why bother?

new season, new songs

The beginning of any new season with the choir is always shaky as I usually start three or four new songs at once. We never finish a song in a single session, but keep a few on the go for several weeks at various stages of completion. I personally believe that this variety is a better way of learning (but what do I know?!).

In the first few weeks singers often don’t have a clear grasp of where a song is going or what the final version will actually sound like. Some people have suggested that I play the choir the full song before I start to teach it, but often I don’t have a recording or perhaps it’s a new arrangement that I’ve not tried before. In any case, I want people to keep an open mind about how we might end up presenting the song, rather than slavishly trying to reproduce what they’ve heard on a recording.

it’s new for me too!

Another issue is that I might not be familiar enough with the song, despite the fact that I’ve spent ages on it at home!

I practice and practice and think I know it inside out, but then in front of the choir when everyone’s a bit tired and we’ve already begun two new songs that evening, I suddenly realise that I’ve not totally nailed a particular interval or part of the harmony and it all goes pear-shaped.

This can also happen when choir members are learning or revising songs on their own. You practice at home and think you know it perfectly, but once you’re at choir with a bit of pressure and all the other singers around you, it all goes out the window.

My advice is to practice the song in as many different contexts as possible: whilst doing the washing up or driving or cooking or gardening ... in fact anywhere other than just sitting quietly doing nothing. This will help to prepare you for the many distractions when you’re back with the choir.

repetition, repetition, repetition

Unlike most people in the choir, I get to learn all the parts of every song. This is mainly due to simple repetition. I now know all the parts to over 600 songs!

People often ask: “how do you manage it?”, “how do you remember them all?” Maybe I have some talent for it (I know I have a good ear) but the main thing is that I get to repeat each song or part at least four times when teaching a new song – that’s four times more than most people.

So here’s a hint when learning a new harmony song: listen to the other parts attentively while they’re being taught (resist the temptation to natter!), you then learn the words more easily and can also sing your part in your head at the same time and see how the harmony works. In short, you get to repeat the new song or part many more times.

we’re no longer an aural or oral culture

In many of the cultures that I source songs from, people start “learning” songs when they are children. They repeatedly hear others singing the same song, over and over again from a very early age. Even if there’s no conscious effort to learn it, a song will get into the brain of those who hear it despite themselves.

We see a similar effect with the children of choir members who hear their parents singing their part around the house. Before we know it, they know the song better than we do!

Basically, we are trying to short circuit years of repeatedly hearing a song in different contexts, so what we are doing is slightly artificial. To make things easier, musical notation was invented and people started using written scores instead of really listening and relying on their own memory. But then you never really get the song inside you.

it takes time

It turns out that some people believe that they can’t sing because they think that ‘proper’ singers only have to hear a song once before they’ve learnt it perfectly. It often comes as a surprise when I tell them that even professional singers take a few months before they really get to grips with a new song.

So be patient. It will take many weeks before a song is really under your belt. I teach a new song for several weeks, then have a little gap before revisiting it. I also try to revisit it after a break, and again at regular intervals thereafter. Finally, after several years (!) the song will have finally bedded in.

why bother?

Sometimes when I explain to people what it is that I do, they find it hard to understand that I don’t use written music (or a piano). It is beyond their comprehension that songs can be taught and learnt without these aids.

Occasionally somebody joins my choir with music-reading ability and finds it a real struggle at first to learn by ear. But music is an aural medium and not a visual one, so why do we insist that people look at bits of paper instead of really listening?

That’s one reason I don’t use written music: I want people to develop their listening skills. But the main reason is that I want singing and music-making to be accessible to as wide a range of people as possible, regardless of any musical training or experience they might have. Consequently I don’t assume any prior knowledge and thus teach by ear.

Being in a choir is about working as a team and paying attention to the hand-waver out front (or musical director if you prefer!). It’s much, much easier to do this when you’re not looking at a piece of paper.

I believe that singers who learn by ear develop a better sense of musicality and aural awareness. So just put that score down and listen!

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

I’m a control freak and that’s exactly how I like it!

Some people lead their choir or singing workshop with another person. I’ve tried it, and it doesn’t really work for me.

Control freak by .m for matthijs

I like to be in full control and I think I do a better job of it as a consequence.

two heads good?

Don’t get me wrong, I can and have worked with other people. I used to regularly lead theatre workshops with a good friend of mine and it was wonderful. We’d come up with a rough plan for the workshop, who would be leading which bit, and then we’d just riff off each other and go where the action took us.

But the whole nature of a theatre workshop is that you work in the moment with what is happening with the group. You can end up going off to really interesting, unexpected places. You can bounce ideas off each other and come up with ideas on the fly because the end product is not important.

four heads bad!

But singing is an entirely different kettle of fish.

I’ve team taught songs with one leader on each of the four voice parts. Before the workshop we agree on how to break up the song and which order to teach the parts in. Then we just teach the part we’re responsible for whilst the other parts wait their turn.

The trouble with this is that there is no scope to respond in the moment. If it turns out that one part is having a particular difficulty, or you realise as you’re teaching that one section of the song is much harder than you realised, there’s not much you can do as you have to stick to the plan.

I can’t see any particular advantages in having one person leading each part. The only plus is that a person can lead one of the harmonies quietly in the background while you’re focusing on teaching your part. But in large choirs there are already people who do that: section leaders.

I did it my way

When I’m teaching a song on my own, I have complete freedom to change the way I’m teaching as I go along. I plan how to ‘chunk’ the song in advance and which order I’m going to teach the parts in, but I can also respond in the moment if things don’t go to plan.

I might find that one phrase is more difficult than I thought, so I can teach it to all the parts and try different combinations singing together.

I might realise that I’ve split the song into chunks that are too large, so I’ll change that as I go.

I might have planned to teach in one order, but suddenly realise that it makes more sense to bring the voices in in a different order.

I might find that people waiting are getting a little bored, so I find a way to bring them in sooner than I’d planned.

Nobody can plan everything in advance. There needs to be a lot of leeway to be able to change things as you go. If you’re on your own, this is easy.

If there are two of you who work very, very well together, then it might just be possible.

But if there are four of you, I’m not sure that it can be done. And if things do change and all four leaders don’t pick up on that, or disagree in some way, then it doesn’t look good in front of those you’re teaching!

and your way is ... ?

Of course, many large choirs have several leaders and it works very well. I’m the first to admit that I don’t have much experience of team working in this way. Do you have good reasons why more than one leader is better? Or maybe you have stories of how it didn’t work out. Do leave a comment and share your experiences.

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Why men won’t sing: a discussion

This is a blog post with a difference. I want to start a discussion using the comments facility.

closed mouth by loungerie

I sent an email out recently to everyone on my mailing list asking advice on how to get more men singing. Now I want to invite suggestions from you lovely readers out there.

Why do you think more men don’t sing? How can we attract more men to singing workshops and choirs? How can we get more young men interested in singing? Is it uncool, not macho enough, too non-competitive?

This is not the first time I’ve tackled this problem (see Where are all the male singers and The problem with men: getting them, handling them, keeping them), but I’d like to get some different takes on the issue, so ...

Let me know what you think by leaving a comment and I’ll try and keep the discussion going. Even if you’ve never left a comment before, now’s the time to join in the debate. Let’s tap into all that collective wisdom and experience out there!

I’ll gather all the responses from this, and my email list, and write it up as a blog post in a few weeks’ time (see Men and singing 1: 15 myths debunked, Men and singing 2: your collective wisdom, Men and singing 3: seven ideas to get more men involved).

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

New comments feature

Just a short post today as I will be in France when you read this!

Comments book by thath

I recently added a new comments feature to the blog which I hope will improve your experience, make it easier to leave comments, and increase the interaction between you, me and other readers of the blog.

The comments system is run by Disqus and allows you to choose your identity with Facebook Connect, OpenID, Yahoo or Twitter Sign-in, when you leave a comment. You can, of course, continue to remain anonymous if you want to!

It also allows comments to be ‘threaded’. That is, you can respond to a particular thread of conversation directly without simply having your comment appear at the bottom of the stack.

You can also easily share your comments with others in your social networks like Facebook and Twitter.

You can easily subscribe to the comments to any particular post and you will be notified of any new comments that come later.

If you’d like to have a thumbnail photo of yourself whenever you leave a comment, then you can upload one to Gravatar. Your photo will then appear automatically anywhere on the web where you use your email address to leave a comment. It’s always nice to see what people look like when you’re writing a reply to them!

If you choose to, you can register (free) with Disqus and create a profile (including a photo). This allows you to keep track of any comments you leave anywhere on the web which runs the Disqus comment feature.

I do hope you find this new system easy to use. I was finding that there were quite a few problems trying to use the old Blogger comments.

Do drop by and leave a comment to see how the system works, and to let me know if you find it clear and easy to use.

For those of you who receive these posts by RSS reader or email, then just click on comments below and you should be taken to the comments section of the blog (doesn’t work with Opera for some reason – you’ll have to scroll down to the comments section). Good luck!

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

My ideal community choir

Although not strictly from the archives, this post is based on an article I wrote for the Woven Chords’ newsletter in September 2005.

I want to share with you how I view open-access community choirs.

I’d like to think that the choirs I run are a bit different from most other ‘choirs’ and that my approach to singing and songs is a more relaxed and laid back (but maybe I’m kidding myself!).

it’s all about having fun!

The groups I run are primarily for people to come along each week to have fun by learning and singing songs together. I try to create a relaxed atmosphere and keep a good sense of humour flowing at all times (sometimes harder than others!).

Following the ethos of the Natural Voice Practitioners’ Network, my community choirs are all open-access: there are no auditions and anybody of any age, flavour or shape is welcome, regardless of experience or background.

Aiming to be as inclusive as possible, I don’t assume any musical knowledge at all, so I teach everything by ear and we don’t use written music. I might drop the odd musical term in now and again for those who know what I’m talking about, but it’s not necessary to participate fully.

People come to sing, so the aim is to keep the learning to a minimum but I don’t always succeed at that! Some of the most enjoyable songs to sing are the most difficult to learn.

sharing songs with outsiders

Performing is not part of the deal, but inevitably there comes a time with most choirs when people want to share what they’ve learnt with friends, family and even a wider public.

The choirs that I’ve led have all ended up performing regularly and to a high standard. The hardest thing is to balance our regular fun sessions with the drilling and rehearsal required to polish our songs.

For me, there are three important considerations to take into account when performing. IN ORDER OF PRIORITY, these are:

1. Enjoyment and fun come first. If you are having a good time, this will communicate to the audience and result in lots of happy and (naturally) smiling faces – both in the choir and in the audience. It also means that there will be less tension in your body which can only result in a better sound.

2. Getting the notes in tune and in the right order is an advantage. However, the odd wrong note here and there will not always be noticed. Don’t get hung up about it. Nine times out of ten you will be right. By not worrying too much about getting it right, the chances of hitting the correct note are much higher.

3. It would be fantastic if you didn’t have to look at your words, but I’m not going to shout at you if you do. I’d much rather have somebody with a discreet set of words in their hand which acts as a kind of security blanket, than have someone dry or go completely wrong. By not insisting that words cannot be used, it’s surprising how much people remember and don’t have to look at all. If I ban words entirely it usually all goes terribly wrong!

My thinking behind these considerations is that we’re a community of human beings often singing songs from folk traditions where people are not ‘singers’ in any formal sense. Our aim is not just to serve the music in order to make a ‘perfect’ rendition.

it’s all about team work

Being in a choir means working as a team. Every individual is important, and yet the result is always greater than the sum of the parts.

I am always listening to the overall sound, so even though you may notice the person next to you is slightly out of tune, it usually doesn’t matter in the overall mix. I’m not here to criticise or teach people how to sing ‘correctly’. I will pick people up if I think they’re getting something wrong, but usually I deal with a whole section of the choir. Sometimes I can hear that something is not quite right, but can’t spot exactly who is out!

My personal taste is such that when I hear a choir who are note ‘perfect’, all in exact time with each other, voices blending as one, then I may as well be listening to a machine. I feel that the heart and soul have been removed.

I like to hear the humanity of a choir shine through, with all its human imperfections and mistakes. I’d rather hear guts and passion than note perfection. My philosophy is that we use music as a vehicle for the soul, and are not here to serve the music regardless.

All things considered, we make a fantastic sound and improve year on year, so I must be doing something right! Sometimes on a choir night I am so tired that I’m just not looking forward to the session, but then as soon as those gorgeous harmonies begin, I am lifted and forget my tiredness and am swept away on the wonder of it all.

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

Can you ever prepare yourself for being in front of a live audience?

What is it about a live audience that throws a spanner in the works?

scared face by Kim

You’ve prepared thoroughly, you’re really looking forward to the performance, you know all your words and moves inside out, you’ve done it hundreds of times before, but as soon as you step out on stage ... something weird happens.

you can’t fake a live audience

There is no substitute for being in front of a real, live audience. You can do as much as you can to put people on the spot in rehearsal or try to ramp up the stakes, but it’s never quite the same.

You can’t predict how someone will behave in front of an audience. The coolest, most prepared person might be the one who crumbles the most. Whereas the little mouse who is reserved and always stands at the back might not be phased at all.

stage fright

Liz Garnett on Helping You Harmonise has written recently about Managing stage fright. This resulted from

“a discussion about how to help our singers go into performances calmly and confidently and be happy that they can deliver their best to their audiences.”

She covers three main themes:

1. Structure and the fear of the unknown that can throw people.
2. Director behaviour and how it can affect the singers.
3. Mindset: inner focus on our fears vs. outer focus on what we’re doing.

But even if you have a clear and well-rehearsed structure, your director is cool, calm and collected, and you are totally focused on the job in hand, it can still go horribly wrong.

audiences are unpredictable

No matter how calm and focused we are, it doesn’t take much to wake our inner demons. The way an audience responds can do this instantly.

Maybe the front row looks a little bored; perhaps you expected them to clap a bit louder than they did; maybe there’s a lot of coughing in the auditorium.

It can be a tiny thing, but it’s enough to knock you out of the moment and back into your ego-led world of doubt.

But it’s not just the behaviour of the audience. They can be the best, most appreciative audience in the world, but the very fact that they’re sitting there watching you changes things.

... and so are performers

You may have had a cracking rehearsal and everyone was firing on all cylinders. But now, in front of an audience, this particular song is just not going as well as it did before. You begin to have doubts, you slip out of the moment again, and the song starts to deteriorate even more.

When you come to the next song, it’s hard to wipe your memory of the last one, so you start off a bit hesitantly, expecting it not to go well, and indeed it doesn’t.

why the rehearsal room is different

What’s going on here? What’s different from when we did that amazing rehearsal?

The audience.

The audience changes everything. The stakes appear to be higher. Our egos don’t want to disappoint or make fools of ourselves. It’s somehow not enough to just sing the songs as well as we can, we need to prove something.

In the rehearsal room it doesn’t matter. Yes, we are trying our hardest, but if it all goes wrong, then we can just try again, nothing lost.

In the rehearsal room everyone is our friend. We’re not being judged since everyone’s in the same boat.

can we do anything about it?

No!

In my opinion there is absolutely nothing that can prepare you for being in front of an audience. It is impossible to duplicate the circumstances in rehearsal.

All you can do is make sure you are fully prepared and try not to have any expectations. You will do your best under the given circumstances and how the audience respond is out of your control.

If last night’s performance went brilliantly, you have to forget it.

If the last time you played this venue it all went horribly wrong, you have to forget it.

You have to cultivate what Zen calls a beginner’s mind. Each time you do something, no matter how many times you’ve done it before, you approach it as if it were the first time.

You set off to the performance with no expectations so everything is possible. Which is the scary, but exciting part!

how was it for you?

Do you have any horror stories to relate? What happens to you when you step out on stage? Have you discovered a way of preparing yourself for facing an audience? Do leave a comment and share your experiences.

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

 

All change!

This is a revised version of a post which first appeared as Moving on in October 2007.

In January 2008 I handed over the reins of my first choir WorldSong to a new musical director after ten years at the helm.

This September – again after ten years – I will be handing over the leadership of Woven Chords. It’s time for a change.

but it’s always been like this!

As you probably realise by now, I am very sensitive to complacency and habit (see Breaking the habit of a lunchtime).

I am always on the lookout for different ways to do things, new challenges, ways of keeping people on their toes, possibilities for development and improvement, ways of raising the bar and stretching people (myself included).

Some people resist change and would be more than happy to continue doing the same thing week in, week out. Unfortunately, I’m the leader (of the gang, I am!) and if you sign up for my choir, you sign up to my vision and my way of working.

I really do believe that by constantly reviewing the way that I do things, finding new ways of approaching familiar material, having high expectations, taking people out of their comfort zone, etc. then individuals within the group improve their skills, the overall quality of the choir is better, and we constantly improve and move forwards.

The upshot of this philosophy is that there will come a time for me to hand over to someone else.

no leader is irreplaceable

Inevitably, any group of people working as a team with a ‘leader’ can come to believe that they can only do what they do because of the particular person leading them.

Obviously, the way that any particular group functions is highly influenced by the style and approach of their leader (conductor, director, coach – whatever). That person (if they’re any good) helps to mould and shape the group, and helps them to work as a team.

But I believe that there comes a point where that person should try to remove themselves from the picture, to make the group realise their own strengths and capabilities – strengths, talents and abilities that have now become independent of whoever happens to be leading them.

In fact, in terms of being a musical director and/ or teacher, I believe that my job is truly finished when I have succeeded in making myself redundant!

the time has come ...

Whenever there is a strong leader of a group or enterprise (artistic director of a theatre, conductor of an orchestra, curator of a gallery) it is very easy to think that any and all successes and achievements are down to that leader.

It may well be the case that a particularly strong individual leader can dramatically improve a group or project, but we must also realise that the individuals making up the group are also of vital importance and help to create the overall ‘flavour’. After all, if it weren’t for the members, then the enterprise wouldn’t exist at all!

I strongly believe that any such job should only be held for around five years, after which the leaders could perhaps rotate and move onto other similar organisations. Otherwise galleries or orchestras (or choirs) can become stale and too much a reflection of one particular individual’s vision.

So now it’s time for a big change, and the choir will move forward without me onto different (and hopefully bigger and better) things.

I am very sad to be moving on, and shall miss the choir and the individual members terribly. However, I am also very excited to see the choir grow in the future and to see what further delights are in store for all concerned. I won’t be completely disappearing however, and will stay in very close contact with both the choir and the new musical director. Here’s to the future!

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

 

It’s all arranged

This is a guest post by Jocelyn Lavin whose blog is 2nd Altos like the bottom parts. She writes here about what makes a good choral arrangement. Contact me if you’d like to submit a guest post.

“The mood is right; the spirit’s up;
We’re here tonight, and that’s enough.
Simply having a wonderful Christmas time.”

I’ll never forget the rehearsal in which we first sang my a cappella arrangement of this song. (If you can’t remember how the song goes, you can listen to it here.)

arranging Christmas

My band doesn’t do many concerts - the main reason we rehearse regularly is because we love it! But we do get quite a few Christmas gigs, and over the years our repertoire has gradually added just about every Christmas song there is. And a couple of years ago, I had a moment of inspiration that resulted in the arrangement of Wonderful Christmas Time.

(In case you’re wondering, the moment of inspiration was this: previously, we’d only ever been able to do a cappella songs involving our guitarist if he was singing the tune – he’s great when he’s on the tune, but has trouble singing any other parts. But I had the song in my head, and it suddenly occurred to me that he should be able to sing not just the tune, but also the bass notes in the intro ... because they’re all the same note, and there are no other notes happening at the same time to put him off! The arrangement fell into place easily from there.)

I was delighted that we had a rehearsal planned for the next day, so I didn’t have to wait long to hear my arrangement. (I can hear very well in my head or on the computer, but it’s not the same as actual people performing!) I handed out the music, and we sight-read it, and at the end there was a brief moment of silence, after which we all looked at each other and literally laughed in delight. That’s happened a few times since then, but that night was the first. So, why were we so delighted?

Well, partly it was because we’d successfully sight-read the song with very few mistakes - it wasn’t perfect, but it was close enough that we didn’t need to stop at any point, and no-one got lost. This is quite a satisfying thing to be able to do, and we were all well aware that not many groups would be able to manage it as well as we could, so we felt very accomplished (and, yes, rather smug).

However, I think that even vocal groups who don’t use sheet music would enjoy this arrangement (we’ve loved it every time we’ve sung it, even though it’s not been sight-reading since that first time), and I want to try to identify a few of the reasons why.

1. allocating the tune

I mentioned earlier that my guitarist can usually only cope with a cappella songs if he’s singing the tune, and indeed he does get the tune through most of this arrangement - but he doesn’t have it all the way through. We all get a bit of it too.

Off the top of my head, I can’t think of any enjoyable a cappella songs in which one part has the tune throughout - variety is important. (Personally I also tend to prefer arrangements in which the sopranos hardly get the tune at all, but that’s probably because I'm an alto and I’m subconsciously trying to redress the balance!)

2. backing vocal lyrics

Many a cappella arrangements of pop songs have the backing parts singing nonsense syllables, because they’re impersonating instruments. This can actually work very well if the arranger knows what they’re doing - these parts can be great fun to sing! But I think it’s even more fun if the nonsense syllables are occasionally replaced by actual lyrics.

You have to be careful, though - this only really works if either the music is homophonic at that point (i.e. the backing parts have the same words - at the same time - as the part that has the tune) or the tune is having a rest. Otherwise, the result tends to be that all the words get muddied together and none of them can be heard.

3. interesting chords

Of course, this is usually down to the composer rather than the arranger, but it can be very satisfying to sing a series of chords that aren’t just basic triads (i.e have only three notes in them). My band particularly likes major sevenths, and there are loads of them in this song! Interesting chords also tend to result in close harmonies, which are always fun if it's a good enough group of singers. (Close harmonies are hard!)

4. appropriate vocal range and tessitura

This is never an issue when I’m writing for my band, because we've sung together for many years and I know their voices quite well. But I’ve certainly sung arrangements that I haven’t enjoyed very much because the arranger seemed not to know about tessitura (see Chris’s post But I can’t sing that high! for more about tessitura).

The actual range of printed parts is usually fine - even if you’re a new arranger, it’s easy enough to find out (from books or the internet) about the appropriate vocal range for each part. (Sibelius, the most popular score-writing software, even colours the notes red automatically if you go outside the standard range.)

But range is only half of it - tessitura has to be considered as well. If you’ve never heard the word, it refers to the part of the range that's used most in a particular song. For example, a soprano part that includes a lot of middle Cs would be described as having a very low tessitura - sopranos can sing a middle C, but it’s towards the bottom of their range, and if they had to sing a whole song in which most of the notes were in that area, they’d be quite uncomfortable. Whereas I’m a 2nd alto, so I like to sing low notes... and any arrangement which involves my part being mostly an octave (or more) above middle C is not going to be one of my favourites.

5. balance

Considerations of range and tessitura go hand in hand with the question of balance. By ‘balance’, I mean: can the tune be heard clearly, and are all the other parts audible - matching each other if necessary - without drowning the tune? In a choir, balance will usually need to be fixed by the conductor regardless of what the arranger does, because it’s very rare that a choir has exactly the right number of people in every section. But the arranger can make this an impossible task if he/she is incompetent.

Choral arrangements tend to be based on the assumption that there will be roughly the same number of people on each part - if an arrangement doesn’t assume that, it won’t work if anyone tries to sing it with one person on each part (and you never know when that might happen!)

So you might think that there would be all sorts of problems caused by the fact that most choirs have far fewer tenors and basses than they do sopranos and altos. But actually, unless the numbers are stupidly uneven, the balance should be OK, because in general men can sing louder than women.

There are further tessitura-related aspects that the arranger needs to take into account, too. If the sopranos or tenors are singing high notes, they’re likely to drown everyone else unless the dynamics are carefully indicated (and often even then!) Conversely, if the altos or basses have the tune, everyone else will need to shut up. There’s more to it than this, but you get the idea!

6. dynamics

Lots of songs don’t have many different dynamics in them – they’re sort of “loudish” all the way through - but some dramatic variations in dynamics can make arrangements immediately much more interesting; Wonderful Christmas Time, for example, has lots of sudden (and slightly corny) diminuendos. Great fun!

7. easy to sing

Well, we don’t want it to be too easy (no sense of accomplishment!) but there are ways of avoiding unnecessary difficulty.

The main one involves making the leaps between consecutive notes in the harmony parts as small as possible, unless you have a good reason not to. It’s much easier for singers to work out the next note if it’s the same as the previous one, or only one step away. Inexperienced choral arrangers tend to be quite bad at remembering this!

For example, imagine that the backing parts are singing a C major chord: the bottom part is on C, the middle part is on E and the top part is on G. The next chord turns out to be A minor. That's not too hard - they could all move down, so that the bottom part is on A, the middle part is on C and the top part is on E. (They could move up to the A, C and E an octave higher, but that would be a much bigger leap and therefore much harder - and it would sound horrible as well!) But you’ll have noticed that two of the three notes are the same in both chords ... so why not keep the bottom part on the C and the middle part on the E, and just move the top part to A?

There might be reasons why you don’t want to do that - the most likely of these would be that the bottom part is the actual bass part and it has a surprisingly big effect on the music when the root of the chord (the A in this case) isn’t in the bass part - but your default strategy should always be to let the parts move to the nearest possible note wherever possible.

8. geography

This probably isn’t such a big issue in choirs that don’t use sheet music, but I bet it’s still an issue! When I’m rehearsing with my band, if a song falls apart, nine times out of ten it’s a geography issue.

My score of Wonderful Christmas Time has no repeats - you start singing at the beginning, you keep turning the pages, you reach the end. I’m willing to bet that if it had had any repeats, we wouldn’t have successfully sight-read it without stopping at the first attempt.

It’s very easy to forget, in the heat of the moment, which page (or section on a page) you need to turn back to, and if there are alternative words for verse 2, that’s even worse! (And don't get me started on music in which the words are written under verse 1, and all the other words are in a block at the bottom of the page. Argh!)

there you go

So, there you go. Eight factors that contribute to good choral arrangements. They're not intended to be in order of priority – they’re all important. Mind you, that’s not to say that a good arrangement has to have all these features - but if it doesn’t, the arranger will have a good reason why not. What I am saying is that all these factors need to be considered.

Of course, the choir could then go on to ruin a brilliant arrangement by singing out of tune ... but that’s another story!

Jocelyn Lavin, Vamp Till Ready 

What are rehearsals for exactly?

This is a revised version of a post which first appeared as Bad rehearsal = good concert? in December 2006.

There’s a strange thing that happens in choirs just as a concert is coming up. Everything that can go wrong does go wrong.

Benny Goodman at rehearsal by Fred Palumbo

Then the concert that follows is usually excellent! What’s going on here?

bad rehearsal = good concert?

Very often, in the session the week before, or even sometimes in the rehearsal on the day of the concert, it appears that everyone in the choir has forgotten what songs they know, which parts they sing, and what they’re supposed to be doing. It’s as if some group amnesia has spread like a virus, as well as knocking the energy out of everyone.

Directing the choir in these situations is like climbing uphill through mud and always makes me despair, even though I know it’s just part of the process and everything will (probably) be all right on the night.

But that doesn’t stop me from despairing and wishing that I was somewhere else and really worrying if we’re ever going to pull the concert off. In fact, I even worry if people are ever going to remember how to sing again at all!

Then the concert arrives and (usually) everything goes swimmingly and we all forget the awful rehearsal the week before.

Afterwards, on a high and like a dog with a short memory, we start looking forward to the next concert and hope that everything will go smoothly, until that is, we get to the dreaded rehearsal the week before and it all happens again.

Then we remember: “Ah, yes, this is what happened last time”. But there is nothing we can do, and we despair again and we plod on again and we pray that it will all turn out fine. And it usually does.

what are rehearsals for?

This reminded me of something that a theatre director once said to me (I wish I could remember who it was):

“Rehearsals are the place where we find all the ways of getting it wrong. Then we’re just left with the right way of doing things.”

This seems to be the opposite of how most people view rehearsals.

It is common for people to get stressed and give themselves a hard time when they get something wrong in rehearsal. Their aim (presumably) is to get everything perfectly right, anything less is unacceptable.

But surely it’s in the concert that we want to get everything right, not the rehearsal?

That’s why the occasionally brilliant rehearsal always disturbs me slightly. Have we peaked too early? Will the concert be as good? How can we get any better than this?

In rehearsal we can actively choose to pursue all the ways of getting it ‘wrong’. (I’ve mentioned this in an earlier post Getting the best out of your choir 4: preparing for performance PART 1.) We can sing a song as if we are the worst choir in the world; we can sing a gentle ballad as a raucous rock and roll song; we can quieten our big, loud finale song down and sing it as a lullaby.

Once we’ve explored and played with a song in this way, singers tend to not be so precious about doing it the ‘right’ way. It’s as if some light and air has been let in and given people permission to experience the song anew.

And if a song goes belly-up and pear-shaped of its own accord, you just have to laugh, realise that you can now reject this ‘wrong’ way of doing it, and move on to try and discover yet more ways of getting it ‘wrong’.

what rehearsals can’t do

One thing that a rehearsal can never prepare you for is being in front of an audience.

You can’t practice this at home or in the rehearsal room. You have to have a live audience in front of you, but by then it’s too late. I’ve written about this in my post Can you ever prepare yourself for being in front of a live audience?.

how do you approach rehearsals?

How do you view rehearsals? Are they nerve-wracking experiences or a bit of fun and a laugh? Do you feel really bad when something goes ‘wrong’? How might rehearsals be improved so that the concert goes better?

I wish you many good and enjoyable rehearsal where you playfully discard all the ‘wrong’ things and end up with a cracking concert.

new way to comment

Those of you who subscribe to this blog by email or RSS feed often don’t leave comments because there’s no need for you to visit the blog’s website!

Well now there is any easier way to leave comments. At the bottom of each post that is emailed to you, you will see something like the following:

* Comments * Share on Facebook * Twit Me!

Just click on Comments and you will be taken to the comments section of the blog where you can leave your feedback.

You can also share the post on Facebook and send it to Twitter by clicking on the relevant link.

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com

It’s hard to teach songs that people already know

I seem to be running lots of pop song workshops these days. But real love is for workshops where I can teach a lot of relatively simple songs so people can spend more time singing and less time learning.

photo by Lucius Beebe Memorial Library

But people keep asking for workshops to learn songs that they already know! And you’d think that would be easier – but it’s not.

Recently I ran a pop song workshop and it was hard work. We only got through three songs in six hours (with a break for lunch). That’s a lot of time, and not many songs. We didn’t even manage to learn the whole songs.

I could see people getting more tired and disillusioned as the day went on. After all, they’d come to sing simple pop songs – what’s the problem?

I was musing on this afterwards (in proper ‘reflective practice’ mode!) to see if I could improve things the next time I taught such a workshop.

Here’s what I came up with.

it’s hard to learn a song you already know

Most people are attracted to a Beatles or a Paul Simon or an ABBA workshop because they are already familiar with the songs. And there lies the problem.

In a harmony singing workshop this gives singers just two options:

• sing the tune (a bit boring if that’s all you get to do all day), or
• learn a harmony. Trouble is, it turns out that the harmonies are very hard to learn if you have the main tune fixed in your head – you keep reverting to it!

Yes, you can get the song up on its feet quickly because people are familiar with it, but as soon as you start working in detail, all sorts of problems arise. It’s not just the harmonies, but the lyrics and the rhythms prove difficult too.

You may well find that you’ve been singing the lyrics slightly wrong for years (the well-known ‘misheard lyrics’ syndrome). But now we have a room full of people who need to be singing the exact same words at the exact same time.

Then there are the tricky rhythms. Lots of pop song melodies use off beats. Most of us find off beats hard.

When we sing along to the record, we don’t notice that we’re slightly out with the timing because the lead singer is louder than us and getting it right.

But when we’re on our own, without the rest of the band, in a draughty church hall, it all begins to sound a bit dodgy.

I thought pop songs were easy!

Lots of people come to pop song workshops because they think the songs are straightforward. After all, it’s just disposable three minute pop fluff, not ‘serious’ music. Plus I can sing along in the car, so it can’t be that hard.

Yet the reason that classic pop songs stay with us and we enjoy hearing them again and again is that they are finely crafted pieces of work, often with surprises of harmony or rhythm. That’s what gives them their charm and makes them memorable.

As soon as we start to pick the songs apart in a workshop and strip them down to their basic components, we find out that most pop songs are very hard to sing!

At the very least we come away at the end of the day with a greater appreciation of the song writer’s talent, but it can be frustrating during the day as we struggle to make the song sound like it does on the record.

what do we mean by a ‘classic’ pop song?

Another disappointment for a punter can be that the songs that I’ve chosen for the workshop are not the ones they would have chosen. Everyone has their own list of favourites, which are usually different from their friends’ lists.

What I consider to be a ‘classic’ song might be unknown to another person or their least favourite song of all time. You can guarantee that for most people in the workshop, they won’t be learning what they’d hoped to learn!

I did a Beatles workshop once and planned to teach a great arrangement of John Lennon’s Across the Universe. Trouble is, nobody on the workshop had ever heard of it, even though it was one of my personal favourites.

let’s have a sing-along!

I offer a whole range of workshops: African, Eastern European, gospel, world music, sacred songs, and so on. For people to choose a particular workshop, they need to have some kind of reference point.

When people see ‘gospel’, they might think of Whoopi Goldberg in Sister Act. When they see ‘African’ they might remember that Ladysmith Black Mambazo once did the Heinz baked beans advert on TV. When they see ‘sacred’ it might bring back memories of boring church sermons when they were young.

And when they see ‘pop’ they feel young again and remember loads and loads of songs that they know and love. So they come to the workshop with huge expectations which can oh so easily be disappointed.

I reckon what most people who come to these workshops really want is to be in the band, or at least to sing along with them. Failing that, they’d like to sing along with a bunch of other people maybe with someone on the piano, or even a karaoke machine.

What most people don’t want to do is to put in the hard work to learn the harmonies and tricky bits (that are usually played on instruments any way). They want to be instantly in the groove of the song that they are very, very familiar with and which conjures up very specific memories for them.

That would be a sing-along workshop then. And there are lots of them. But it’s not what I – and many others – do.

it’s not just pop songs that are the problem

I teach unaccompanied harmony singing. It means you have to put a little bit of work in to get the songs sounding great. It often means choosing songs from cultures and genres that people aren’t perhaps familiar with, but I know from experience that when the songs are up on their feet, people usually love them.

But if it’s a pop song, it can be a big disappointment for all the reasons I’ve outlined above.

Actually, it’s not just pop songs, but any songs that people know well. It could be a bit of swing (Tuxedo Junction), some gospel (Oh Happy Day), hymns (Amazing Grace), folk songs (Blowin’ in the Wind). They all come with the same expectations and the same familiarity. And (unsurprisingly) they’re all in English.

To sum up: in my world, often the most satisfying and rewarding harmony singing workshops are those where people have never heard the songs before and are often in languages that they don’t know. We get through lots of songs, and we end up singing more than learning.

The workshops that are the hardest, cover less songs, and are least satisfying are those which deal with songs that people already know. And you end up doing more learning than singing.

a dilemma

From my perspective I’m faced with a dilemma.

If I offer a workshop people need to know about the songs I’m offering otherwise they won’t be interested. But if they’re familiar with the songs, we run into all the problems that I’ve outlined above.

If I offer an obscure foreign song workshop, people won’t come because they have no point of reference, but if they did, they would probably have a great time.

I guess it’s a marketing problem.

I’ve decided to take a risk and not offer my pop song workshops for the time being. If my work totally dries up I might have to have a rethink!

One option is to offer pop song workshops as more advanced singing workshops, not for the inexperienced.

what do you think?

I’d love to know what you think about my rambling rant. Have you had a disappointing experience at a singing workshop? Have your expectations not been met? Have you found familiar songs surprisingly difficult to learn in four part harmony? Why are you attracted to pop songs? What would attract you to an unfamiliar workshop?

 

Chris Rowbury's website: chrisrowbury.com