Diary of a Music Transition: Part 4 (final) – the wash-up

I realised last Sunday that I’m getting on average one person per week telling me that they think the changes in our AM music have gone well.  I’m really appreciative when I hear from the folk who were previously anxious.

We were especially cautious in the first few weeks about volume and the drums.  The drummers were playing songs that a few months previously would’ve only been played on the organ, but are really written for a contemporary ensemble.  They are drummers experienced in playing contemporary songs in other services, but not to a congregation more comfortable with traditional instrumentation!  But no-one is complaining at this point.  They’re singing with joy and gladness.  I’m so thankful to God for this.

Here are some of my reflections about the transition of our AM services from 2 traditional services and 1 contemporary service to 1 blend of contemporary and traditional and 1 contemporary family oriented service:

1. Blended services allow more people to be involved in serving the congregation in music.  This obviously comes at an organisational cost, but we’ve really needed to do it to help a wide range of people (both the involved and the uninvolved) to continue to feel enfranchised.  But whereas it’s tricky to involve violinists, brass players, choral singers etc in your straight contemporary service, in a blended service, they are able to play and sing alongside drummers, bassists, keyboardists, guitarists and contemporary vocalists.

2. Blended services have shown me the value of what we’re calling “cross-over” songs.  These are songs that can be done in any of our 4 congregations, because they can be played on the organ or with a band, sung by a choir or just a couple of vocalists, and have parts for strings or other instruments as well as chords for guitarists.  These are songs like: In Christ Alone (and pretty much everything that comes from Stuart Townend or Keith Getty’s pens!), O the mercy of God, Beneath the Cross (my version), etc.  The songs on CCLI’s Song Select that give you access to both 4-part charts and a lead sheet are useful because different players can play the same song but with either dots or chords to suit them.  But the main advantage of cross-over songs is that they enable us to express unity with those in different congregations, and whenever we get congregations together for some sort of all-in activity, they have a common repertoire!

3. The organ still works a treat, but unless you’re in a cathedral, I reckon you get the greatest benefit from it when it’s not the only instrument being used in a Sunday service.  It still has an amazing way of encouraging congregational singing, just by the tones and sound energy it creates when played skilfully.  But with the exception of those people specifically looking for traditional music, most Aussies are happy for variation in instrumentation, but don’t want the music dominated by the organ.

4. It’s made me wonder if the members of our family services and youth services might actually be helped in their engagement with the beautifully rich hymn tradition if they occasionally sung them on the organ… and yet the number of skilful organists available to do this is definitely diminishing.

5. Choirs and multi-part vocal groups are a great way to involve willing, gifted people in our music and to make traditional stuff sound really good.  I’d rather have a choir singing traditional stuff than individual vocalists because it gives a “congregation-like” lead to the congregation – a gathering of singers leading a bigger gathering in singing.  I also think choirs particularly suit traditional hymns because they are usually arranged with 4 parts in the first place.

6. Before I sign off, making you think that it’s been all sunshine and light, I need to say that I actually have had negative comments.  It hurts me a little to mention this, but there’s no point hiding it… The few negative comments I have received?  They’ve come from the musicians.  These folk are part of my team and I love them to bits and am so appreciative of the ways in which they serve.  I also understand that musicians hold music more dearly than the rest of us.  If they didn’t, then I don’t think we’d get as much out of them as we do… they put so much effort in because they have a deep driving motivation to contribute to music being as good as possible.  So what do I make of this?  Well, I’m not actually unhappy about it at all.  I think I need to hear whatever it is they have to say.  I don’t have all the answers, and I don’t necessarily think that the service configuration we now have is perfect.  So I need to face the fact that any change brings strain, and as music minister, I need to bear some of that strain.  If there are people we’re disenfranchising, then I need to be challenged about that.  If there are problems or complaints about the way we’re doing things, I need to engage with them, and see if there are improvements we can make or things that need to be said so that we can all move forward together.  And don’t get me wrong, we’ve also had lots of very positive comments from the musicians too!

Well, it’s been a long process, but I’m glad we are going through it.  Our changes are not settled down yet, so there may well be more observations as the months unfold!  I’d love to hear your thoughts, particularly if your church has been through a big transition like this too…