[HN Gopher] Let Everybody Sing (2016)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Let Everybody Sing (2016)
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 73 points
       Date   : 2024-02-28 13:31 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (bittersoutherner.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (bittersoutherner.com)
        
       | jdalgetty wrote:
       | I love the sites aesthetic
        
       | cameron_b wrote:
       | To go along with this, I looked up one of the songs recorded in
       | the piece to find the words and found much more[^1]. What got my
       | attention was the player on the right that seems to use some
       | DECtalk-like composition to generate the tracks.
       | 
       | [1]: https://sacredharpbremen.org/178-africa/
        
         | OkayPhysicist wrote:
         | There's something peculiarly sublime about the intersection of
         | a fundamentally low tech, folk form of music and the retro tech
         | voice synthesizer. Everyone should experience listening to the
         | "all parts" selection.
        
           | edjw wrote:
           | FaSoLaMix is a paid iOS app that lets you listen to a small
           | selection of well-recorded songs where you can listen to the
           | individual parts but sung by real people. Might be
           | interesting to people on here.
           | 
           | From the FaSoLaMix site [1]:
           | 
           | > "FaSoLaMix" is an iOS app designed to teach Sacred Harp
           | singing to newer singers. When someone wants to learn to
           | sing, our instinct is usually to recommend that the inquirer
           | go to a good singing and sit next to a strong singer. But not
           | everyone lives near many all-day singings. Our intent is to
           | give the listener the virtual experience of sitting next to a
           | couple of strong singers in whichever section suits their
           | voice. The app features high-quality recordings of many
           | Sacred Harp songs where the mix of the four parts can be
           | controlled manually. For example, a singer wanting to learn
           | the treble line of a particular song could leave the treble
           | track at full volume, mute the other three parts, and sing
           | along with the solo treble part for practice. While the most
           | obvious benefit will be to new singers, longtime singers will
           | also find it useful and fun. For example, experienced singers
           | may wish to mute one part and fill in that missing part with
           | their own voice.
           | 
           | [1]: https://fasolamix.com
        
       | edjw wrote:
       | If you're into this, you can sing it in places all round the
       | world. It's a very welcoming community of people
       | 
       | Couple of links to get going...
       | 
       | US: https://home.olemiss.edu/~mudws/regular.html
       | 
       | UK and Europe: https://sacredharp.uk
       | 
       | Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Harp
        
       | edjw wrote:
       | This article is from 2016
        
         | actionfromafar wrote:
         | This comment is from 2024
        
       | 082349872349872 wrote:
       | The ecumenicalism reminded me of "we don't dance":
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjLSo3cRh6g
        
       | echelon wrote:
       | I did not expect a Bell Street Burritos reference in this
       | article, but that's a staple food item for those in Atlanta. Kids
       | that went to Georgia Tech will know it by heart.
       | 
       | (I still prefer authentic Mission burritos. Bell Street Burritos
       | are unfathomably greasy, but have a distinctive Southern charm to
       | them.)
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | I've read both the linked article (which was great) and the
       | Wikipedia entry for Sacred Harp. But, I still don't quite
       | understand how this works. That's probably because I have no
       | understanding of musical theory and couldn't read any form of
       | sheet music anyway. With that said, my question is: what is lost
       | as a result of using this notation? I can see what's gained:
       | simplicity and ease of learning. But why wouldn't you use this
       | notation for every form of singing?
        
         | swores wrote:
         | I'm not an expert, but I have been able to sight read sheet
         | music (to play or to sing) since I was a young kid.
         | 
         | From the article and wiki page, I see claims that the sacred
         | harp system makes things easier, but I can't actually see if or
         | why I might've found it any easier to learn than the standard
         | western notation I did learn.
         | 
         | So my guesses are that either it's not actually an improvement,
         | or it's a small enough improvement on a good enough already
         | internationally recognised system that there just hasn't been
         | pressure for this niche form to take over in many places.
        
         | aidenn0 wrote:
         | Basing it off of [1], nothing is lost from traditional
         | notation, inasmuch as it's extra notation on top of traditional
         | notation. In this sense, it's a bit similar to furigana[2] for
         | Japanese, as an aid to readers. Something that surprised me is
         | that [1] is of a minor key, but the solfege marks are for the
         | relative major. I'm not a singer, so I can't say as to how/why
         | that makes sense.
         | 
         | 1:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Harp#/media/File:Windha...
         | 
         | 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furigana
        
           | arthurdenture wrote:
           | > Something that surprised me is that [1] is of a minor key,
           | but the solfege marks are for the relative major
           | 
           | Major and minor keys use the same shapes / solfege system.
           | The major scale is "fa, so, la, fa, so, la, mi, fa", while
           | the minor scale uses the same syllables but starts on la.
           | This means that the shapes always represent the same
           | intervals (i.e. pattern of whole and half steps) whether a
           | song is in a major or minor. It's hard to describe but makes
           | sense when singing.
        
         | arthurdenture wrote:
         | One limitation is that the shapes are really only useful for
         | singing, not for instrumental music. They also would not be
         | meaningful for music that switches keys or that isn't tonal
         | (i.e. isn't in a particular key at all). So they are a very
         | good fit for what you might think of as "church music" (at
         | least written before the 20th century), but for other settings
         | they would be either meaningless or a hindrance.
         | 
         | That's one reason shape notation never caught on; another
         | reason is that the notation was introduced by publishers of
         | American sacred music and not by, say, music conservatories.
        
         | taion wrote:
         | It's not uncommon for vocal music to have different conventions
         | like this, especially which the pitch isn't absolute so
         | standard notation isn't quite correct anyway. Note the use of
         | neums for chant - and those _are_ harder to learn!
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | I just took a quick look, but as an instrumental musician (4th
         | grade - freshman year in college), what I'm gathering is this
         | notation lets you use the shape of the note's head to tell you
         | where it is in position to the fundamental of the key the song
         | is in.
         | 
         | That's great if you process music in those terms... but as a
         | mostly sight-reading instrumental musician, I'm thinking about
         | what note is written, and what fingering that requires on my
         | instrument. When playing from sheet music, it never really
         | mattered much to me what key we were playing in, or if I was
         | playing the fundamental or a third; maybe if I were better
         | attuned, I might adjust my fingering ever so slightly, but if I
         | did that, it was unconscious and by ear.
         | 
         | Now, when I was playing in Jazz band, improvising bass lines,
         | the key makes a real big difference, because I'm going to play
         | like 1-3-5-3 and such, but then I'm just working from a chord
         | chart, not sheet music, and note shapes still don't help me.
         | 
         | I was never very good at choral music, and never thought in do-
         | re-me, etc. But I can see it being useful for people trained in
         | that; move the do to the new fundamental, and go from there.
         | Not sure how (or if) they handle accidental sharps and flats
         | that take you away from the key signature... maybe not, since
         | the emphasis seems to be on simplification.
         | 
         | The other thing that was touched on is arrangement --- rather
         | than a melody and harmonies arrangement, it seems like each
         | part is arranged to sound nice on its own as well as together.
         | This makes it easier to practice the parts individually ---
         | sometimes harmony parts sound really iffy by themselves, so you
         | don't want to practice it.
         | 
         | I don't think there's necessarily much lost by using these
         | shapes more, but I don't think there's much gained. And of
         | course, it adds more labor to typesetting or hand writing the
         | scores --- until you get to computer based typesetting where
         | you can probably convince the computer to do the shapes for
         | you.
        
           | edjw wrote:
           | I've sung a lot of Sacred Harp and Christian Harmony that use
           | four-shape and seven-shape shapenote notation respectively.
           | I've never sung roundnote notation so a bit hard for me to
           | compare but I know lots of people who've done a lot of both.
           | 
           | A couple of things you gain with shapenote notation...
           | 
           | You don't have to learn key signatures to sing from shapenote
           | notation. So it's less work to pick it up.
           | 
           | Sightsinging is easier with shapenote notation. After a
           | while, you internalise the intervals between the shapes - you
           | just know what a fa up to a sol feels and sounds like.
        
             | toast0 wrote:
             | > You don't have to learn key signatures to sing from
             | shapenote notation. So it's less work to pick it up.
             | 
             | You don't really need to learn them in roundnotes either?
             | Like yeah, I know that C major is all natural, G major is
             | one sharp, etc but I don't really _need_ to know that, the
             | key signature is on the left side of the staff. I guess you
             | need to learn to apply those sharps and flats though, of
             | course.
             | 
             | > Sightsinging is easier with shapenote notation. After a
             | while, you internalise the intervals between the shapes -
             | you just know what a fa up to a sol feels and sounds like.
             | 
             | This makes a lot of sense. I never really internalized
             | intervals with scored music (although maybe a bit with
             | playing from chord charts); I internalized the position on
             | the staff to the fingering for the note. If I learned to
             | sing this way, I'd internalize position on the staff to
             | pitch; like B flat sounds like [hmmm] or something. I guess
             | you're saying singing by intervals is easier than singing
             | by named notes? But you can really do both with shaped
             | notes, so all the better. :)
        
       | velcrovan wrote:
       | As a no-longer Christian, I still find singing Sacred Harp
       | extremely compelling. There is a group that gathers at an
       | LGBTQIA+ affirming baptist church near the University of MN whose
       | meetings I used to join irregularly until my kids were born.
       | Communal singing is powerful by itself and pretty rare in
       | America, but in addition this repertoire/tradition has something
       | raw and real about it that transcends the dogmas of its authors.
        
       | rdtsc wrote:
       | You can hear a few more examples
       | https://www.youtube.com/@CorkSacredHarp/videos
       | 
       | I like some of the older ones from 10 years ago or so. You can
       | see them by filtering by "popular".
        
         | edjw wrote:
         | The YouTube channel [1] of the Sacred Harp Museum [2] also has
         | lots of good audio and video recordings
         | 
         | 1: https://www.youtube.com/@sacredharpmuseum8890/videos
         | 
         | 2: https://originalsacredharp.com/museum
        
         | senderista wrote:
         | A few years ago I purchased a few entire albums in FLAC from
         | their site. They are amazing.
        
       | pastureofplenty wrote:
       | Another thing that makes Sacred Harp sound "weird" is that it
       | eschews traditional voice-leading rules and therefore has no
       | prohibitions on parallel fifths, fourths, or octaves.
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_leading#Common-practice_...
        
         | senderista wrote:
         | I've noticed that some of the original 3-part harmony settings,
         | by self-taught singing masters like Billings, have
         | parallel/empty fourths and fifths, but that these were removed
         | in later 19th-century 4-part settings by "properly educated"
         | musicians. A good example is "Idumea":
         | 
         | https://musescore.com/user/1108766/scores/9410239
         | 
         | (BTW, there are several versions of this song on the Current 93
         | album _Black Ships Ate the Sky_, of which my favorite is
         | Shirley Collins'.)
        
       | taway789aaa6 wrote:
       | I know this type of music writing as "shape note singing" and
       | I've never actually heard it referred to as "sacred harp". There
       | is a tradition of shape note singing in some Quaker circles --
       | quite a bit different from the Southern Baptists, but probably
       | similar repertoire.
        
       | recursive wrote:
       | I had not heard of this, and I find it interesting and
       | compelling.
       | 
       | But I do not get the comparison to heavy metal. Heavy metal, as I
       | understand it is defined by dissonance, instrumental virtuosity,
       | and overdriven amps. Musically, it seems almost like the complete
       | opposite of sacred harp. What's the connection?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-28 23:00 UTC)