Page 26 - June/July.indd

Daniel Friderici’s RULES FOR CHORAL SINGING

Commentary Rule 3: Conrad initiates the theme of Commentary Rules 5 and 6: Friderici addresses
proper deportment of the choir in order to create what suitable practices for setting pitch for the choir, but his
would today be called a “professional” demeanor. Frid- description is not entirely clear. He seems to be saying
erici concurs, as also do Bernhard, Beyer, and Quirsfeld. that the director should give one pitch, which only one
Many music classroom teachers today would also agree choir member should reproduce, and singers of the var-
when looking out upon an ocean of apathy and poor ious parts are to derive their own from it. Presumably,
posture with only occasional promontories of energy if this is the correct interpretation, the other voices set
and engagement! their own pitches mentally so as to avoid the vividly ex-
pressed “bagpipe” effect that Friderici warns against.

Conrad addresses a different issue of pitch-setting but
Rule 4: In singing one ought to use his voice joyfully and one so important as to merit attention here. He observes

energetically. There is a great difference between singing that a monophonic choir possesses members of a vari-
energetically and shouting. Energetic singing in music is ety of vocal ranges and so needs to sing in a range that
entirely necessary and is so much as joyful, nothing slug- accommodates all in a “happy medium.” This means
gish, foul, or weak, so long as one doesn’t let the voice that modes with their characteristic intervallic structures
fall. Shouting, however, is forbidden in music. Cantors were transposed, more or less unconsciously, to diff erent
bring their great folly no less to light who bid the boys to pitch levels. Further, this required a far more conscious
shout with power and to open up the throat as wide as transposition for the organ in the common practice of al-

ever they can; thereby a fine, noble, and pure voice often ternatim performance from the Middle Ages on, in which
is entirely ruined. the organ and choir alternated verses of the psalm. This
had important consequences for the development of
Commentary Rule 4: Perhaps closely related to de- transposed modes, psalm tones, and the ultimate devel-
portment is the issue of energetic singing that does not opment of tonality and key. 18
transgress in either direction into weakness or shouting.
Conrad addressed the same issue from the side of weak-
ness that produced something “more in the manner of Rule 7: In singing, the dot in a foregoing or previous
a groan rather than a song,” adding the adage “zu lutzel note must be performed tastefully and be sung without
und zu vil verderbt al spil,” too little and too much spoil all any pronunciation. They are wrong who would sing
19
pleasure. [thus] (Figure 1).

Rule 5: In setting the pitch, one and no more should be
heard, on which account it is wrong when as many set
the pitch as so desire, or when the boys are allowed to
intone all together with the cantor and an inopportune,
unlovely, and improper bawling is raised whereby the
entire remainder of the song is deprived of its beauty. 16

Rule 6: Also, the cantor ought to develop the habit of
not setting the pitch for all voices individually; rather,
when possible only give the main pitch, and his boys
and the other singers accustom themselves to take it as
17
guide, since it is a great impropriety to deprive a good
song of its beauty with many starting pitches, just like a
bagpipe. Figure 1

24 CHORAL JOURNAL June/July 2021 Volume 61 Number 11