Talk:Sacred Harp/Archives/2009

Use of instruments

Hello, Morganfitzp is right to point out the existence of those old recordings in which a piano or parlor organ is played; I've heard several of these. I've always had reservations in the back of my mind that the article didn't mention them and am glad that Morgan decided to do this.

On the other hand, my impression is that nowadays the use of an instrument would be considered extremely unusual--in fact, so unusual that if we include any sort of wording like "mostly" or "normally" in the main text, we would be misleading our readers.

The wording that I just put in is a compromise: it says "always" in the main text (which is written in the present tense), but includes a footnote making a nod to the old recordings. I hope this conveys an accurate picture.

Lastly: if anyone knows about any contemporary Sacred Harp singings that have used an instrument I would be grateful to hear it and would promptly make a correction in the article. Yours sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 23:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I do know a lot of people who use Sacred Harp music in all sorts of manners that diverge from the traditions commonly practiced by most Sacred Harp singers. For example, The Bread and Puppet Theater in Vermont uses Sacred Harp singing in its performances and sometimes these songs are accompanied by a drum or other instruments. I also know of a brass ensemble in Boston that plays selections from the Sacred Harp, arranged for six horns or varying pitches. And of course there are those aforementioned recordings that contain piano or organ accompaniment. This is why "always" seemed to lack accuracy, though I do agree that saying "mostly" or "normally" would be a diversion from accuracy as well. Luckily with have this discourse for people to look at. Or, better yet. readers could possibly venture to a Sing if there's one in their vicinity. Morganfitzp (talk) 17:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Opus, I think you have made a good edit, giving some info on instrumental accompaniment while recognizing the tradition is unaccompanied singing. There may be some "groups" in the sense of quartets, etc. that sing with accompaniment, but I do not believe there is a single singing anywhere in the tradition that allows accompaniment. There was a group of singers in southern Arkansas that met and sang with a piano accompanying. But this was outside the tradition and somewhat removed from it. The circumstance was a few people who had grown up with Sacred Harp trying to restart a singing with folks who were not familiar with it. They didn't think they could pull it off a capella, so they sang with a piano. They had almost no interaction with the larger family of SH singers. BTW, the lady who played the piano was a traditional singer and her grandfather taught SH singing schools. In the distant past (early 1900s) I recollect reading in a newspaper of a meeting of the Texas State SH Association where a night session was going to be accompanied by some instrumentalists (or they were going to play along or something). But the existence of such then was not traditional and evidently something of a anomaly. Rlvaughn (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Tradition or mere book?

Hello, I don't enjoy revert wars but I am again restoring the opening sentence that says that Sacred Harp is a "tradition", and deleting the version that says it is just a tunebook. (In the current version, the book is mentioned in the immediately following sentence.)

The reason I want to word the intro in this way is that I think this wording is more relevant and more accurate. There is a big difference between a tunebook that exists only as a historical document (for example, the two volumes of Wyeth's Repository) and one that continues to occupy the time and attention of thousands of singers. Moreover, all of the leading scholars who have written about Sacred Harp music emphasize the strongly traditional character of SH singing. For many singers, SH is closely tied to their family and to their ancestors; and even the newcomers tend to value the accumulated body of tradition that governs current singing practice. If you're not clear on this point, please read the work of Buell Cobb, John Beale, and Kiri Miller, all cited in the bibliography. Sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 18:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your reasoning. Plus, Sacred Harp has not been "a book" for over a hundred years, but rather three books. The footnote linking to one of the three was therefore misleading as well, IMO. Rlvaughn (talk) 21:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Rlvaughn, for this helpful comment, and also the one above. Opus33 (talk) 23:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)