ChoralNet

The professional networking site for the global online choral community.

You are here: Home / Others / Helping your singers feel like their contribution is important

Helping your singers feel like their contribution is important

by Leave a Comment


Hi everyone,
 
Many thanks to Philip for the invitation to share with you through the ChoralNet blogs! Let's get to it.
 
Since coming to the University of North Texas in 2009, one of my choirs was a chamber choir (24-32 voices), the 2nd of the 3 mixed choirs at UNT. This year, for a variety of reasons, Jerry McCoy and I decided to make it a larger choir, around 65.
 
My own background, especially in the past 12 years or so, has had me conducting chamber choirs, often around 24 singers, not larger groups (unless guest conducting). So this forced me to think of more ways to make sure each member of the choir understood and felt that their contribution is important. Instead of being one of 6-8 in a section, now they're one of 15-17. So it's been a fun process to work to create an atmosphere that says to each singer in the choir: you're important and what you do is crucial!
 
When I took over the Choir of the West at Pacific Lutheran University, I inherited a number of practices from Maurice Skones, my predecessor. One was that he almost always had the choir in quartets–and in fact, always in double choir (both sides balanced as to divisi and color/weight of voices), since the traditional opening piece while on tour was for double choir. Even though I hadn't studied with Maurice, I knew (or learned) a fair amount about his methods.
 
Of course, simply singing in quartets makes the singers much more independent by itself–they can't "lean" on someone singing their part right next to them. So I put them in quartets very early (I know this isn't possible for everyone–you may have to do a lot of work in sections before moving them into quartets). Furthermore, one of Maurice's rehearsal techniques was to sometimes work with one choir (of the double choir) at a time–this has several benefits: the other half of the choir gets to listen to what's happening, and can more easily hear for themselves what I'm talking about (are they together? was that chord in tune? was the phrasing musical?), start to make their own musical judgements as well, and there's also a small element of competition (each choir wanting to outdo the other).
 
I've taken this a bit further, often having just the front or back two rows of choir 1 or 2 sing, or even one row. That exposes the individual singer even more–which means it's important that I give positive feedback about what I hear. I don't want to shut them down or have them fear singing in front of others! I've also had just a quartet, or in a couple of cases, just one singer come up in front of the group to sing and work on a passage. All of this reinforces the importance of what every single singer does . . . and also gives each singer a chance to show what they can do. More about this process later, since I have a few models in mind who have done this extraordinarily well.
 
Finally, this week I started rotating the rows, so the same row isn't always in the front or back–this means I hear the individual voices much better and know what they're doing–again, it's harder to "hide." And since they're in quartets, it works perfectly well, although it could work to rotate in a sectional formation so that the same group isn't in back or front all the time.
 
As I say, it's been a fun process! I've enjoyed re-thinking my approach to rehearsals, it keeps me creative, and from falling into the same rut I've done for . . . well, a lot of years!
 
Thoughts?
 
 

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Thanks, Lori!
     
    Yes, I realize my situation is quite different than that of a Junior High/Middle School, small church choir, etc. So I’m so glad you got some useable ideas out of it. I’ll have a post coming up in the next couple weeks that will discuss getting singers to sing individually, partly based on what some JH/Middle School/HS colleagues have done incredibly successfully.
     
    All best!
     
    Richard

  2. Maria and John,
     
    Thanks for the comments!
     
    Maria: yes, the smaller the choir, the smaller the problem with helping people be independent, and sections vs. quartets becomes less of an issue. This was really about my finding ways with my current (larger) choir to help singers be much more independent and know that their contribution is crucial. Blend can absolutely be an issue and, particularly with a smaller group, I tend to move singers around to find the arrangement that gives the best sound. How much space you put around singers makes a difference (and of course, the acoustic you're in!). I love a U shape and my Collegiium Singers at UNT often sing in a single row in a U shape. All of those are elements that can be experimented with to good effect.
     
    John: Yep, I realize my situtation at UNT is different than most! My University Singers, even though it is the "second" choir, are all music majors, all read (to some degree!), and are quite accomplished individually. Very lucky, really! Although when I was at Pacific Lutheran University, my top choir was always at least 1/3 or so non-majors, and sometimes my best singers were not music majors. But I do know my situation is not typical.
     
    I certainly don't think of 24 as a minimum for a chamber choir (or chamber vocal ensemble). That was the choir I inherited when I came to UNT in 2009 and Jerry McCoy and I had various reasons for making it a larger, non chamber choir this year. Some of the rep I'm doing (3 Bruckner motets: one a cappella, one with 3 trombones, one with 3 trombones and organ) was chosen with a larger group in mind, along with a Peter Hallock piece with 3 trumpets, horn, 2 trombones, 3 percussionists, and organ. But I'm also doing some rep (Sven-Eric Johansson's Fancies I and the Brahms op. 112 Gipsy songs) where I needed to get my large group to listen and have a sense of ensemble like a smaller group. That's in part where these ideas come from.
     
    I've done smaller groups before and love to work with them. I took 14 members of my UNT Collegium Singers to the Berkeley Early Music Festival this summer to sing the Victoria Requiem and loved it (as did they!). If you're interested, you can hear it at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUBIxg6ZpKE
     
    But educational needs often trump performance practice ones–my Collegium Singers (which is our "early music" ensemble) are larger (currently around 21, but have been as high as 26 or so) than I might ideally use for certain repertoire. But then we also perform with a period-instrument orchestra that's also much larger than most (strings 6-6-5-4-2). I did Bach's Jesu, meine Freude last year with the full, 26-voice group (no instrumental doubling, just with organ), more than I might think ideal, but on the other hand, didn't want to leave some of my singers out (we had to in Berkeley, mostly for budget reasons, but also because it made sense for the festival). We're currently doing Tallis Spem in alium (with my TA conducting–I get to sing bass in choir I!) with added singers, Taverner Sanctus/Benedictus from the Missa Gloria Tibi Trinitas with 21, and Purcell Jubilate Deo with the full 21, plus the baroque orchestra (above strings plus 2 trumpets and organ). After this concert we have a chamber music concert (instrumental and vocal) in which singers are all doing Schütz, one-per-part.
     
    I'd dearly love to do the Bach Passions with mostly one-on-a-part voices, and certainly the Monteverdi 1610 Vespers with about 10 singers. Maybe someday–who knows!

  3. I really like the ideas you have presented.  I don’t teach music majors, but junior high students, but it is often difficult to have everyone feel “important” in larger choirs.  I love the idea of placing my choir into a double choir formation.  Even if I can’t place them in double quartets (imagine that fiasco in a beginning Junior High Choir), I could still halve my choir and make two smaller groups within the whole and work that competition thing.  They thrive on competition, so that could work well.  I think with rotating between the two groups every two weeks or so, I could get them to be more independent and realize that they will be more individually accountable.  Thanks for the tips!
     
    Lori Hayward

  4. Richard:  Forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but an auditioned chamber choir at North Texas is not exactly a “typical” church choir, community choir, or even college choir!  But with that said, just a couple of points.
     
    Following up on Marie’s comment, it’s absolutely true that most experienced singers have a background in singing as soloists (at least in voice lessons, if not in public), and a background in singing as part of a section in fairly large choirs.  But very few have any experience in what I would call vocal chamber music, with only one, two, or three singers on a part, even though that is the kind of enemble that a huge proportion of our choral heritage was conceived for.  For my university Early Music Enemble I would love to have a vocal consort/chamber choir of at least 16, and some years I have had, but more often I’m lucky to have 10 or 12 singers, and the lack of experience in singing vocal chamber music really shows up for rookies who have never had to take individual responsibility for their own part before.  So I thoroughly agree with the practice of dividing into quartets (depending on how many voice parts there are in a given piece, of course), and of sometimes standing in quartets as well.
     
    But I have to ask, why do we seem to think that 24 singers is the MINIMUM size for a “chamber choir,” and that bigger is going to be better.  Bigger is certainly going to produce a louder sound and a different kind of blend, but better?  Let’s just recall that Bach and Handel got along just fine with choirs of about 20 at most, with boy trebles rather than women, and Marie’s 8-15 singers is MUCH closer to historical reality.  And that the iconography of choirs from the 15th through the 17th century often shows “choirs” of much smaller sizes, quite often around 8 or 10 singers at most!  Of course we’re talking about well trained, professional singers who could fill a church, but when you are paying people you never hire more people than you really need!!  And the payroll records of St. Mark’s in Venice, where they regularly hired in additional singers and instrumentalists for the major feasts for which the large scale polychoral works were written, make it clear that taking singers and instrumentalists TOGETHER there were seldom more than two on a part at maximum.  A choir of 65 would have been HUGE by their standards, and certainly wasteful in terms of the payroll.  (Just check out how many singers Handel wrote his Chandos Anthems for if you want a shock!)
     
    Now I’ll also readily concede that in educational situations we have two additional factors that are pretty important.  First, we want to give as many students as possible the choral experience that we feel they should have.  (Bottom line:  we have to provide ensembles for all the singers we accept as voice majors and minors!!!)  And we can’t afford to have our programs fall apart because of the inevitable illnesses that goes along with tightly-packed classrooms and student life styles.  The ONE time I tried to put together a viable 6-voice vocal consort for madrigals our rehearsals were decimated by illness and it proved to be a really bad idea.  So yes, we have to allow for the necessary backups or understudies, which in fact is also just good teaching and experience for those involved.
     
    All the best,
    John

  5. I conduct a community chamber choir–the Midwest Motet Society.  I suppose we are really semi-professional, since most of my singers have degrees in music or make their living in music (we have choir directors, organists, elementary music teachers and an engraver for G.I.A.!).  They are good musicans and we make wonderful music together.  That being said, I have 8 to 15 singers, depending on the concert or gig.  This concert cycle, I have been doing something different in rehearsals as far as who sits where–I used to have rows, sometimes in quartets, but often in sections.  This cycle, with only 11 singers (due to family and health reasons), we sing in a U or circle, sometimes in sections and sometimes not. Since several of the women are going back and forth between soprano, second soprano and alto, depending on the piece, it hasn’t mattered being in sections.
     
    Adults singers in this situation, know how important they are to the group as a whole.  It is obvious when one of two tenors had a root canal and couldn’t sing.  It was obvious when one of two highest sopranos (and then the other one) had whatever creeping crud was going around the elementary school where she teaches music. When I began this group, most of my singers hadn’t sung in this kind of group since college and forgot what a small group means–everyone is a soloist at times.  They really love singing together and that makes it possible.
     
    The U seating has made a difference, especially singing Byrd ( and Rossi and Monteverdi).  I was very unhappy last concert cycle with blend–doing Itailian madrigals and German partsongs–but it’s been like a different group this time.  Just moving the chairs made a difference!
     
    Marie

Leave a Reply

© 2024 American Choral Directors Association. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy