My choir is contemplating leaving the gallery in our church and coming downstairs.
This is for health and safety and liturgical reasons. (Our spiral staircase poses a serious issue for some of our aging members in the event of an emergency). The liturgical issue will present great opportunities to develop active participation on lots of levels.
We are considering having an architect design a proper stepped platform which will face 'side-on' into the congregation. Our church is cruciform in layout.
Most of our congregation sits towards the top of the church so our ability to lead will be greatly enhanced and any issues of time lag will no longer be a significant.
Has anyone veered down this road in the recent past? I would like to hear viewpoints on this subject - negative and positive are equally welcome!
Choir Location
Moderators: Dom Perignon, Casimir
Re: Choir Location
Do you have organ or instrumental accompaniment?
Where will accompanist(s) be?
Will you lose valuable congregation seating?
We considered this, but the building is small and seating downstairs is limited and the choir would be too far from the organist.
Where will accompanist(s) be?
Will you lose valuable congregation seating?
We considered this, but the building is small and seating downstairs is limited and the choir would be too far from the organist.
-
nazard
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 7:08 am
- Parish / Diocese: Clifton
- Location: Muddiest Somerset
Re: Choir Location
Try it out before you commit to it: it could be a disaster. Two things can go wrong:
(1) It is acoustically unsuitable. In a cruciform church you sometimes get an echo from transept to transept and nothing gets into the nave. That seemed to me what happened when they tried it at Downside for a bit a year or two back. If there is a dome over the crossing you can get odd rumbling effects. I believe St Paul's suffers from this, and I have experienced it myself in the Birmingham Oratory.
(2) The choir being on show becomes a show in itself and distracts from the mass. A bit of a screen can help with this, but it is rather anti current philosophy of the choir being part of the congregation.
Good luck with whatever you choose.
(1) It is acoustically unsuitable. In a cruciform church you sometimes get an echo from transept to transept and nothing gets into the nave. That seemed to me what happened when they tried it at Downside for a bit a year or two back. If there is a dome over the crossing you can get odd rumbling effects. I believe St Paul's suffers from this, and I have experienced it myself in the Birmingham Oratory.
(2) The choir being on show becomes a show in itself and distracts from the mass. A bit of a screen can help with this, but it is rather anti current philosophy of the choir being part of the congregation.
Good luck with whatever you choose.
-
Psalm Project
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:35 pm
Re: Choir Location
There is a dome - we have tried singing at ground level, successfully - the area will need to be platformed for sound projection (The dome is hugely flattering in this situation!).
The organ will be a new Phoenix digital and will be centred in the platformed area - I assume the dual role of organist and conductor! The platform will also more easily accommodate instrumental ensembles as the need arises.
The choir would not be immediately visible to a good proportion of the congregation. I am aware of various documented arguments concerning the perception of the choir being seen as performers - I would never have them face the congregation directly, as in a concert for that reason.
I've been at this church for 30 years. The gallery is a good distance away from the altar. There is a significant time lag - especially if a cantor is leading from the ambo for the Psalm etc. The assembly have always been the proverbial 'meat in the sandwich' - depending on where one would sit, the delay effect would be different. It contributed a significant difficulty to synchronize everything.
Singing downstairs will eliminate the time lag issue. Everything will also be much closer together and the choir will, for once, be able to see more clearly what is going on. They will also have to cut out the 'informailites' and camaraderie one usually associates with being in a gallery!!!
Anybody actually make the move permanently? Anyone got horror stories about such moves?
The organ will be a new Phoenix digital and will be centred in the platformed area - I assume the dual role of organist and conductor! The platform will also more easily accommodate instrumental ensembles as the need arises.
The choir would not be immediately visible to a good proportion of the congregation. I am aware of various documented arguments concerning the perception of the choir being seen as performers - I would never have them face the congregation directly, as in a concert for that reason.
I've been at this church for 30 years. The gallery is a good distance away from the altar. There is a significant time lag - especially if a cantor is leading from the ambo for the Psalm etc. The assembly have always been the proverbial 'meat in the sandwich' - depending on where one would sit, the delay effect would be different. It contributed a significant difficulty to synchronize everything.
Singing downstairs will eliminate the time lag issue. Everything will also be much closer together and the choir will, for once, be able to see more clearly what is going on. They will also have to cut out the 'informailites' and camaraderie one usually associates with being in a gallery!!!
Anybody actually make the move permanently? Anyone got horror stories about such moves?
-
docmattc
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:42 am
- Parish / Diocese: Westminster
- Location: Near Cambridge
Re: Choir Location
Just before my arrival in my current parish this move was made when the organ in the gallery died and a digital was installed. The church is cruciform, but with very shallow trancepts (not more than about 6 feet) and the organ console is in one of them, speaking from speakers in both trancepts. I'm told they discovered that the delay from organ to gallery was too great to be workable.
Now we would certainly have problems evacuating many of the choir down the spiral staircase, and I doubt if all of them could get up in the first place. Certainly the tenor on crutches, (before he joined the heavenly chorus last year, God rest him) would never have made it upstairs.
The choir moved to sit in the trancept next to the console which works well practically and acoustically when we sit not facing across to the other trancept, but tilted slightly towards the congregation. The tenors and basses on the front row feel exposed, but we are out of direct line of sight from congregation to sanctuary. Good behaviour is needed more than would be in a gallery, but I still have to persuade the back rows that the homily is not the best time to read the newsletter!
I would say there are a couple of draw backs- the space is a tad cramped when the choir are at full strength and only the front and back rows can actually see the altar, for the rest its behind a pillar.
Only a very few people object to this position of the choir, but the objections are not liturgical, its to do with a mentality that as a listed building we should maintain it as a museum piece rather than a living, working space. I've never heard anyone suggest we are perceived as giving a performance.
I once tried putting a cantor up in the gallery for something- I think it was Stephen Dean's "Hosanna to the Son of David", and to my surprise the sound didn't carry at all.
Given the geography of the building, I think we're in the best compromise place we could be. To acheive anything better we would need to demolish the building and start again.
Now we would certainly have problems evacuating many of the choir down the spiral staircase, and I doubt if all of them could get up in the first place. Certainly the tenor on crutches, (before he joined the heavenly chorus last year, God rest him) would never have made it upstairs.
The choir moved to sit in the trancept next to the console which works well practically and acoustically when we sit not facing across to the other trancept, but tilted slightly towards the congregation. The tenors and basses on the front row feel exposed, but we are out of direct line of sight from congregation to sanctuary. Good behaviour is needed more than would be in a gallery, but I still have to persuade the back rows that the homily is not the best time to read the newsletter!
I would say there are a couple of draw backs- the space is a tad cramped when the choir are at full strength and only the front and back rows can actually see the altar, for the rest its behind a pillar.
Only a very few people object to this position of the choir, but the objections are not liturgical, its to do with a mentality that as a listed building we should maintain it as a museum piece rather than a living, working space. I've never heard anyone suggest we are perceived as giving a performance.
I once tried putting a cantor up in the gallery for something- I think it was Stephen Dean's "Hosanna to the Son of David", and to my surprise the sound didn't carry at all.
Given the geography of the building, I think we're in the best compromise place we could be. To acheive anything better we would need to demolish the building and start again.