The Organ Forum

Just got my hands on a copy today of the brand new "Baptist Hymnal" -- the latest thing from Lifeway, intended to replace the 1991 Baptist Hymnal. Frankly, I'm skeptical, but open to the possibility. I've grown to appreciate the BH91, with its nice blend of our grandest traditional hymns with a sprinkling of the best new music (as understood by those who put it together in 1991, of course). We've used BH91 in my church for 10 years and have yet to plumb its depths. It has been a great resource, and I just wonder if this new one will equal it.

First impressions -- nice crisp pages, just enough info at the bottom of each selection, a LOT of optional final stanza re-harmonizations and choral endings (which look very useful to me, though I haven't played them yet).  It's about time we got some of those and don't have to turn to the "Celebration Hymnal" to get them.

I notice that many hymns have been lowered by a half-step or even more. I noted at least one hymn that was in E-flat in BH91 has been lowered all the way down to C (!) --  I suppose the editors now believe that people just won't sing that high any more, and we have to make it so easy for them! Just another indication of the poor state of singing in many churches today.

But the biggest change is certainly the content. There are scores of "new" songs -- some quite tacky and tawdry to my taste, meant to throw a sop to the rock and roll head-bangers who lead music in some of our churches. But others appear to be quite interesting, some new honest-to-gosh "hymns" written in classical style.

I was almost aghast, though, to see "I'll Fly Away"  -- and I am NOT KIDDING -- and I haven't been through the whole thing  yet, so there may be other such drivel. (But I have to admit that about 3 or 4 times a year we actually sing that at church as a fun-time greeting song, putting the words on the screen since it isn't in BH91.)

Anyone else seen this new book? Any comments?

John

 

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

I confess to being entirely unfamiliar with hymnals other than Episcopal 1940 and 1982 and the Christian Scientist hymnal. But it sounds to me like the new Baptist hymnal might go over well for Kawai and Allen at Twin Creeks. I find the difference between the Episcopal hymnal of 1940 and the hymnal of 1982 startling. The 1940 edition has numerous hymns either written, arranged or harmoniized by Leo Sowerby (he worked from an Episcopal church most of his career) while the 82 has only one or two. Also the 1940 edition contains nothing that is slap happy or particularly stupid, like Abba, Father (I could havecome up with that in Pre-school), also the 40 always provides the entire 4-part harmonization, with measures, while frequemntly the 82 only provides the Cantus Firmus, which when you're trying to learn hymns without the musicians ed. is really irritating. So, this may be similar to what you find, although, I suppose about 10 years versus forty years may result in less drastic changes.

But I find in general much hymnody has moved away from actual hymn writing to songwriting, nashville style, it's very formulaic, nothing actually musically or theologically interesting, just unabated corn.

---

Once you can tie your arms into a pretzel and your legs into a knot, you've got it under control

Austin,

Interesting contrast in the two Episcopal hymnbooks. Some of the same kind of regression noted here.

Thankfully, the new Baptist, as all former editions, retains the full four-part scoring for all hymns, and the "pew" edition is perfectly usable as an organist edition, complete with the re-harmonizations, etc.

John

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

I don't know jbird.....I was never fond of that 91 Baptist book.  In fact out of all my hymnals, the Baptist was the ONLY one that fell apart early on and it was the least used book I own.  I was getting ready to pitch it in the garbage so maybe I'll replace it with the new version.  Truth is I can find almost anything I want between the Methodist and Celebration hymnals.  I sometimes still use the old Broadman Hymnal.

---

"The Organ is in truth the grandest, the most daring,
the most magnificent of all instruments invented by human genius."

Don,

I'd be willing to guess that your BH91 came apart just after #16, "O Worship the King." I have a stack of them at church that suffered the same fate, the first section just fell out after a few months use. A couple of others I have just sort of came unglued and broke up into 5 or 6 pieces.

For the traditional/classical purist in me, no Baptist Hymnal has ever surprassed the old 1956 edition, with its clean fonts, bold titling, adherence to the traditional keys in which hymns were written. It had excellent indices and adequate information about meters, etc.

The 1975 edition, which came next, was truly idiosyncratic, a child of its time, with so many disposable songs in it that it was dated almost before it was published. Left out some great hymns too. The 1991 restored some of those left out in 75, got rid of the flotsam, and looked almost as good as the 56, so I was really pleased with it. Just wonder if I'll really get my head around this new one.

John

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

John,

I also just got a Baptist Hymnal 2008 edition.  I have played through parts of it.  I, too, was shocked to see many of hymns in a lower key.  It appears that the editors wanted to keep the highest melody note to about C or D above middle C. I was shocked to see "He Keeps Me Singing" which was in Ab had been lowered to F.  This makes the lowest note for the basses a low F!

All in all, I like the layout of the new hymnal.  Although I wish they had not changed the keys for so many hymns.  I do not particularly like playing in "sharp" keys, probably because so many of the hymns were written in "flat" keys in hymnals I learned to play from.

I am waiting for the organ edition to become available.  It is still listed as "Out of Stock" on the website.  The sample PDF file on the website for the organ edition had a separate introduction, two line organ accompaniment, and a suggested registration.   However, it only includes the melody line of the hymn and the text/lyrics are not with the music .  I do want to see the organ arrangements of some of the more "modern" songs, especially since many of the accompaniments in the pew edition clearly meant for the piano or electronic keyboard.  These are not very playable on organ when using the pew edition.

In regards to the 1956 edition, I am not particularly fond of it.  Partially because I am younger (39), and when I first started playing I used the 1975 edition.  I, personally, find the music notation in the '56 small and cramped together making it somewhat hard to read.  I also like the way the '91 and '08 editions use beaming for the eighth and sixteenth notes.  This adds to the readability of the music for me.  Also, to me the text of the lyrics is slightly easier to read in the '91  It seems a little crisper and clearly to me (perhaps because of the age of the '56 edition).  It also seems just slightly larger.  This may be nice for those that have trouble reading smaller print.  I fall in that category when playing.  The music is at such a distance, I can't read the lyrics with my "near-sighted" eye and it is too close to be read with my "far-sighted" eye.  (My ophthalmologist says it will be quite awhile before I need bifocals due to the fact I do have one eye of each type.  He mentioned that my eyes are essentially like a person that has had lasik surgery.)

Don and John, you may have gotten defective hymnals.  I seem to recall that some of the first batch of '91 Baptist Hymnals did have some kind of defect in manufacture.  I do not remember what it was now.  However, the hymnals at my church have been very durable.  They are still in good condition after about 16 years of use.  In my experience, the '91 Baptist Hymnal has been the most durable of the ones I have used.  I have not seen one with a broken spine or pages coming out.  I saw this often with the '75 edition.  Our pianist uses a pew edition to play from, and hers is still intact.

Later,

Allen
 

---

Roland Atelier AT-90, Yamaha Electone 115D, Yamaha Clavinova CLP-970, Yamaha PSR-2100

Allen,

Your remarks and observations are well-taken here. I'm a little older than you, and maybe my love for the old 56 version has something to do with that. Also, my home church was using the old Broadman Hymnal (shape note version, no less!) when I went off to college and discovered the 56 Baptist, which was a huge improvement in so many ways. But it still seems like the "real deal" hymnal to me, totally uncompromised with what we have to put up with in church music today. No "praise and worship" tunes or country-western gospel or other such clap-trap, just the standard hymns and the time-tested gospel songs of Fannie Crosby and others like her.

(That last statement belies a bias on my part, no doubt, as certainly in 1956 there were critics who derided the 56 as "too modern" in comparison to their beloved Broadman. Although I believe much of the criticism aimed at the 56 said it was too "high church" for most Baptists!)

I guess my dislike for the 1975 has something to do with my reaction against the "pop" music that had begun to be introduced into SBC churches during my college years (70's), which I initially enjoyed but grew weary of rather early on. "Pass It On" was a "cool" song back then, and actually there's not anything really wrong with its message or sentiment, but it's an example of a trendy tune inserted into the 75 that was out of style before the new even wore off the books. 

I see a lot of such "trendy" songs in the 2008 and wonder just how long it will be before LIfeway is wondering why in the world they let something like "Open the Eyes of My Heart" get into a HYMNBOOK, for goodness sake! 

I'm intrigued to note that the book is tied to a new website operated by Lifeway. Presumably we'll be able to download all kinds of cool PowerPoint trinkets and stuff to use in our services along with the new hymnal. Guess that could be a plus, or it could be a real problem depending on one's perspective.

Thanks for commenting.

John

 

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

John,

I have been playing in the Baptist church in Earlestown, (Nr. Liverpool) for around 12 years now and although we no longer have a traditional church organ i have noticed how we have started to struggle with higher pitched hymns over the last few years so lowering one or two may not be a bad idea for a church like mine. Perhaps a combination of the two as a player will be ok as if you prefer the higher key and the congregation can manage it use that.

Although I have just thought in another 20 years will I want them to drop them again! I do hope not or we will be in the basement!

 Daniel

---

Daniel Wakefield

Daniel,

I'm not sure whether the motive for lowering the key of so many hymns is to accomodate the aging of the church-going public, or just to acknowledge their vocal laziness.

Watching the worship services broadcast on TV these days, I'm appalled at how little participation there is in the singing. But I'm not sure the answer is to lower the keys. I really don't know what the answer is. To look at their faces, you'd just think they're not very interested in whatever is going on in the church service, music or otherwise.

Don't let anyone tell you that you've got to use some contemporary stuff "to get the young people involved."  The younger folks in the crowd look as bored as anyone when they're supposed to be singing, even if it's one of the trendy pop-rock tunes that the young people are supposed to love to hear in church.

Anyway, keep up the good work.

John

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

Some hymns for me anyway, were designed for a particular key i.e. they don't sound the same when transposed.

I couldn't imagine say Cwm Rhondda in F - it has to be in G. Likewise Lasst un erfreun has to be in D and Maccabees (Thine be the glory) has to be in E-flat.

---

Currently own:
ALLEN TC-3S (#42904 - 3rd Feb 1971) with Sequential Capture System

Speakers:
x1 Model 100 Gyro Cabinet
x1 Model 105 Cabinet
x3 Model 108 Cabinet

Two good points there chaps and would agree with both. I suppose the lack of energy I experience comes from the loss of the choir and not having strong leaders to carry the others. I know by speaking to my family they are sometimes hesitant to sing louder and hence more passionately because the rest of the cong. are quiet. Silly but understandable in a small church. It just doesn't motivate me as the organist sometimes to really belt out a hymn or caringly play when the response is the same, flat and quiet!

 The chord sequence between verses for 'At the name of Jesus' is strange if you take it up or down a few tones. Had a little go this morning at church!

during last Christmas celebrations I played Sleigh Ride at the end of a service at Emmanuelle URC/Methodist in Ormskirk (West LAncs, UK). I had written out a copy and taken the main theme at the end a lifted it a tone for the finale. Got to the end of the service, open my file, left the last sheet on the keyboard at home. So using my little brain for once decided to use the transpose key on the organ and took it up a tone at the end. It worked, sounded good and all was happy.

however, the week later I received a phone call from the following weeks organist saying Sunday was a disaster, one hymn no one could sing and Roy was none the wiser. During communion he went downstairs and his wife said there was obviously something wrong and they were struggling to sing the hymns. He went back and yes I had forgotten to turn the key back so they were singing a tone higher all morning and asked in one hymn to hit a top G! Not good for the aging cong. there!

Daniel

 

---

Daniel Wakefield

Daniel,

I have two words for you . . .  "Play louder!"

Yes, the people are reluctant to sing, and perhaps many of them truly fear hearing their own voices in song! Fear of being off-key, fear of making some mistake, maybe fear of being heard singing because it's "cool" to be stubbornly silent when the service calls for singing! (Even adults can have that hangup, it's not just a teenager thing.)

What you must do with the organ is to FILL the church with music, so pervasive, so audacious, so enveloping, that no one can hear himself singing at all! That's the only way that most people are ever going to raise their voices -- if they are quite confident that no one is going to hear them. If they can hear their own voices, they suspect that others can as well and they will stop singing. (Of course, the acoustics of the church play an important role here. In a really dead acoustic space people get the sense that they are singing ALONE and will normally refuse to sing at an appropriate level.)

For the actual singers in the church, this pervasive organ tone will give an undeniable pitch reference and keep them all in tune. Even those who are bold enough that they would sing out loud without the organ need that constant pitch cue that the organ provides.

So, don't hold back! That's what you are there for, and the reason the organ was built.

John

 

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

Greetings John and Daniel:

I have read with great interest your discussion of the new Baptist Hymnal. I must agree with most of what you have said regarding the changing of keys and the lack of singing enthusiasm. I received my advance copy of BH in July and gave a quick look over. At first glance I was very dissappointed at the obvious bent towards contemporary inclusion. What really bothered me initially is the inclusion of so many songs that are not "sing-able" by the average congregant. We struggled already with the basic hymns with the new generation of musically illiterate who could not read basic voicing, which contributed to the use of screens for congregational singing. Now we have created a hymnal that contains both standard four-part voicing and unison praise and worship hymns/songs that are more rhythmically advanced than the average congregant could read, IF he were to actually pick up a hymnal. The trend now is to display all singing on the screen and the hymnals remain in the pew rack unused.

Further, as the use of praise bands or orchestras has grown, the use of more than one hymnal has become the norm. Many churches have the TBH91 in the pew, but use The Celebration Hymnal (TCH) for the choir and orchestra. This has lead many Minister’s of Music to plan based on TCH and has basically rendered TBH useless and a piece of furniture in the pew.

This week, I have been confined to my home due to Tropical Storm Fay and have had an opportunity to fully examine this hymnal and give creative consideration to its use. I must confess, I have changed my opinion of this hymnal and will now recommend to my church its purchase. It will be nice to plan a service and not have to research 2 and sometimes 3 different hymnals for my choir, orchestra, and congregation. While I myself am a purest and prefer the hymns of our heritage, the church I am serving is more of a blended style and I work very hard to provide balance of excellence through the musical styles. Today, as I spent several hours looking at medley options and the blending of classic hymns with newer songs, I discovered some very exciting options for my congregation. I firmly believe this hymnal will serve us well for many years to come and will allow a singular usage throughout the music ministry.

The greater challenge for us as ministers of music is to inspire our congregations to sing. I feel that many of us have failed in our roll as music leaders and have contributed to the downfall of the hymn. In my PhD research, I asked 1000 ministers of music why they use contemporary music exclusively or why they have switch from hymns to praise and worship. The over-whelming response was that their congregations indicated that hymn singing was “boring” and that they preferred a more contemporary sound.  In response I asked the ministers of music whose fault it was that their congregations said the hymn singing was boring AND now that they have switched to contemporary is there a greater enthusiasm for “singing” or does the congregation continue to sing half-heartedly if at all. Most replied they have not truly noticed an increase in participation, but they have noticed a greater satisfaction level.

I would submit to you that most congregations perceive that hymn singing is boring because the music leadership is lazy and does not fully exercise their role of music preparation. Too many ministers of music allow rote repetition of the hymn instead of giving creative consideration to the presentation of the hymn. The editors of the hymnals contribute to this by placing brackets around the first or last phrase of the hymn as introduction indicators and too many organists and ministers of music use these as a crutch instead of being creative in voicing an introduction that invokes the singer. Today, with the inclusion of praise bands or orchestras in the church, they are so many options available for creative worship planning to fall victim to useless brackets. When I select a hymn I sit down at the piano first to determine the best introduction options. Many times, I then move to the organ and experiment with different registrations. Once I have a few options in mind I call my accompanists and discuss my ideas. I also give consideration to the instrumentalist I have available, could the hymn begin as a solo voice trumpet on the first phrase with a response by the brass section, then the introduction of the organ. Each hymn offers different interpretations and each should be looked at independently for it unique interpretation. Only then can hymn singing become alive and inviting to the congregant.

Your thoughts….

 

---

R.H.Patterson
Minister of Music
Administrative Director, Opera Jacksonville

Dr. Patterson,

Wow! Thanks for your thoughts on the new hymnal. I too have become more of a fan of this new book since I posted my original rather critical review. A good friend who is younger than I am has helped me learn to appreciate some of the new songs to a greater extent. Not that I've started to "love" them in the same way I love the great hymns, but I am enjoying them more and more.  I see your point about the new hymnal eliminating the need to have 2 or 3 different hymnals on hand to get variety.

As you say, it's disturbing that so many of the new songs are not "sing-able" for the typical worshipper. That continues to bother me, and has been the most alarming thing to me about the whole contemporary music revolution that has shaken our Baptist churches in the past 30 years or so. 

The hymn as a musical form is perfect for group singing, with fairly simple rhythms, block chords, intuitive melodies in reasonable vocal ranges, and no requirement for instrumentation beyond a piano and/or organ.

So much of the new stuff, though, is just the opposite -- terribly complex rhythm and counting patterns that intimidate anyone who doesn't already "know" the song from hearing it on the radio (!),  melody lines that just go all over the place, way too high and way too low for anyone to sing, and so many of them just don't really work without a "praise band" to accompany (or worse yet, canned music on a CD).

No, I don't think this new crop of music will solve the problem of people not participating in the singing at worship services. On the contrary, it feeds the idea that the music at church is just for the "professionals" -- the praise band, the praise team, the gifted soloists -- leaving the average worshiper as a spectator.

I love your ideas about making HYMNS appealing with the creative use of introductions and other things we can do to make them fresh and exciting. Ever since I was in seminary in the late 70's I have felt the same way, though I've not served in churches large enough to have orchestras or a great many talented players. But I have believed for a very long time that it was largely OUR fault, as church musicians, that people perceived hymns and other traditional music as boring. We ought to be ashamed! Some of these hymns are among the greatest musical compositions of all time.

Your research questions and answers are fascinating. What you discovered about attitudes toward church music is right in line with what I have been picking up in the course of traveling about the state doing organ service and visiting with church musicians. It seems to me that we are caught in a self-perpetuating downward spiral. We've tried to change up the music to bring in more "young" people, to liven up the services, to alleviate boredom -- but the end result is less committment on the part of young people, less participation, just as much boredom. So we take it to the next level -- harder rock music, more glitz and show, abandoning traditional music altogether.

Where will it end? When will church finally become indistinguishable from a nightclub or Broadway musical or rock concert? I am concerned, deeply concerned.

Thanks for sharing. Your church is fortunate indeed to have your creative genius aiding them in worship.

John

 

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

My two cents,

 Well, here I go again.  It seems to me that when the keys are lowered on some songs it just ruins their whole melody.  I guess that has to do with my perfect ear for music since I have had several professionals tell me that very thing.  I have just grown tired of what I hear in churches since I do watch some via TV, and I know one Baptist church that has just ruined their music with the Praise and Worship band with the happy clappy tunes that sound like the same line is said over and over again by one singer mouthing and screaming the solo part in a mic. 

Then, when and if this same church does sing just a very few hymns, the pipe organ plays which perks up my ears a bit, but then, it sounds like it is tuned to play for a carnival.  I don't know if they have changed the pitch of it to match those damned horns, and all kinds of instruments at one time. Well in short like Lawrence Welk, but very far from professional sounding.

It is just a mess, and instead of hymnal, I noticed most of the people young and old just stand or sit there when the camera is passing around through the congregation.  I have never seen a hymnal, but all words are on that screen.  As mentioned they do not seem interested in a thing going on there.  Now, I wonder why people ever bother to go to church.  At least I can turn the TV off.  I no doubt with get scolded or hear hell roar, but I am aware of  churche preachers and leaders who get up and fuss and scold the people because they are NOT worshipping God and all the mess going on.  I am sure if you have read my previous post you know the kind I am talking about for darned sure.

This church I have mentioned is the First Church in a larger city that it is shocking to see how time has changed matters.  I do know of a good many great musicians who are not needed these days to play the organ or piano, but this junk is wanted or even the taped music is played in some cases for someone to squeal a solo.

 

James