Advertise on ChoralNet
Can you please cue us in here?Date: March 4, 2010 by John Sargent
 Hello,
I'm new (or returning) to the forum and have a question about singers with attitude. What do you handle a singer that constantly asks you to show cues to their section or who constantly points out the "errors" in your instructions to the choir? Tim Seelig calls them "nagivators". I'm well aware that a properly prepared score will eliminate most of this but there is always the one singer that finds the holes in your rehearsal.
Replies (18): Threaded | Chronological
Stephen Stomps on March 4, 2010 10:33am
Oh, such a polite word, navigator.
I have other, less polite words and so do you, obviously.
BUT, one might start with humor or thanks (for pointing that out, thankyou for your input).
Then, maybe," I welcome your input but these comments are impeeding my thought process and the
flow of my rehearsal. I have a plan and I will get to that. Please "
If the miscreant continues unabated, there might be a jocular but pointed invocation: One God, One Faith, One Director!
But, I fear, none of these will work very well.
The interruption might then be met with stone silence (beat,beat) OK,let's go on.
By this time, it is too late for improvement and you either put up with it or....
This is such a difficult problem and can create a seething amoung the singers and a feeling a lack of progress. BUT: YOU ARE THE DIRECTOR!
S
on March 4, 2010 10:56am
About the cuing issue - How about something like "I will trust your musicianship to let you know when to prepare and execute that entrance."
For other comments pointing out my shortcomings, I also start with humor and thanks - and sometimes a "remind me to check on that next week" (if I don't want the rehearsal to become sidetracked...).
SJS
on March 4, 2010 10:59am
In the course of a day's retreat with my choir, I asked them to write on a file card
I complied the anonymous results on our members-only webpage; and we took time to discuss thema couple of weeks later. The second set of responses was most useful in this context. Inevitably there were criticisms without personal responsibility attached (people DO love criticising others!) andthere were several comments about the back-seat drivers (who I tend to ignore). However, since then, those back-seat remarks have been almost totally absent. There's nothing like hearing it from your peers!
on March 4, 2010 1:07pm
Sometimes at the beginning of a series of rehearsals, or the very first time the problem of too helpful singers (or players) comes up, I take the opportunity to say something like:
There is a lot of talent in this room, and every individual has his or her own particular focus at any given moment. Some of you are irritated by diction inconsistencies, or fuzzy rhythms, or by minor note errors or out-of-tuneness, or by my doing something that is not exactly what the score suggests. I need all of you trust that I will attend to most of your concerns in the course of these rehearsals, some of your concerns will take care of themselves as we work together, and some I may choose to ignore for reasons that may not be clear to you. Your concerns are important, but my focus must remain on what is needed at every moment to move the ensemble along in its preparation of this music. I promise to work with you to produce the best end-product possible, but keep in mind that much of what I bring to these rehearsals is already a matter of choosing among viable alternatives.
I need each of you to enable me to work as efficiently and productively as possible. So here is my request:
As we rehearse together, if you as an individual make an error, it would help me to know that YOU know you did it, and that you will take responsibility for correcting it. A simple, quick raising and lowering of your hand to acknowledge that fact would be very helpful. (No expletives required! - keep your focus, and don't distract others.) If I detect an error in what I have been doing, I will acknowledge it and make the correction. But if YOU notice something that you think I DIDN'T notice, and that it is crucial to the final result, I ask you to make a note to yourself to ask the question when the next opportunity arises, and then move on with me. I promise that I will make an effort to ask for questions at the end of our rehearsal of each piece -- that is the time for you to bring up your concern, respectfully -- and knowing that by the time we get to that point, it may already have been "fixed." If it is something that you can fix on your own, just take care of it. If for some reason I don't ask for your questions, or indicate that we need to move on, there probably is a reason for that, as well. If it is really important, catch me after rehearsal, or hold the question until the next rehearsal. As we progress in learning the repertoire, I will also ask for specific focused questions before we begin each rehearsal.
A colleague of mine once put it very well: "I really do want to consider all of your questions and suggestions -- but not right now!" In a group as talented as this, it is amazing how much gets fixed just by DOING. So, if everyone is clear on my request, let's get back to DOING the thing we came here to do.
Charles Q. Sullivan
cqsmusic(a)hotmail.com
on March 4, 2010 2:24pm
Hi, John. In the case of cues (or cutoffs), I take any such request seriously and do my best to give them what they need. Did you ever have the opportunity to observe Robert Shaw in action? He had the magical abiltiy to be conducting the orchestra, the chorus, and giving all the necessary PREPARATIONS (sometimes only with a glance of his eyes, but remember that they have to inhale before their entrances!) and cues, all at the same time.
My conducting mentor at Indiana was Fiora Contino, and her orchestras, ballet dancers, opera singers, AND choirs loved her because she gave them what they wanted and needed, unlike some of the orchestra conductors.
In the matter of criticisms, you have to judge (a) their validity and (b) their appropriateness. I have some good musicisans in my ensembles, and if they feel moved to say something I take it seriously for at least a few seconds. Only if I had a long-term back seat driver would I go to some of the strategies suggested by others.
And Charles' approach is absolutely the best I have ever seen or can imagine!!!
All the best,
John
on March 4, 2010 3:57pm
>>who constantly points out the "errors" in
your instructions to the choir?
If those are really errors, say thank you, and fix. If those are not errors, share your opinions with everyone.
>> a singer that constantly asks you to show cues to their section
If you are just forgetting to cue, say OK and cue. If you are not cuing for some musical/artistic reasons, share your reasons with singers, and ask others whether they really need a cue or not. If they really need it, say OK and cue, but tell them you ultimately want to do other thing at that moment than cuing them. If they can sing without cue, say you will continue to do other things at the moment, but make sure to make eye contacts with the singer who made the suggestion once or twice when you are rehearsing that particular passage. See if the singer is satisfied, or still frustrated, or confused. If they are not sure, try once without cue and determine.
As a composer/conductor, I have been fortunate to do guest conducting, visiting a lot of choirs and observe other conductors work with various singers. I found that the most successful conductors are those who MAKE singers FEEL they are contributing to the whole artistic endeavor of making music (including score prep, making certain decisions and etc), and make singers know where they are and where they will go musically. On the other hand, many struggling conductors are those who make singers feel lost (like singers are not sure why the conductor is doing certain things in certain ways, or singers are not sure what they achieved in the rehearsal and what they would achieve in the next rehearsal or at performance, if they continue to practice with the conductor).
I know that some find that "navigators" are really annoying, but they are suggesting things because they want to make music which in their opinion "better" than current one. If you can recognize their musical ideas, and find a way to feel them welcomed to express their opinions in the most productive way for everyone (like encouraging inputs during breaks or after rehearsals), they will be great assets to the choir.
Be flexible.
on March 5, 2010 12:26am
In my former Chorale, "section leaders" were appointed for each section (SSAATTBB). I had the Chorale president and manager ask the membership to refer all questions during rehearsals to me through them. This made it a corporate solution and not just a conductors' petulant response. If the section leaders themselves couldn't answer the question they would meet with me at break time or after rehearsal, and get back to the singer with my take on the issue, or I would deal with it myself.
In a chorus of 120 singers, this cleaned up a lot of issues and saved a ton of time.
on March 5, 2010 3:02am
I am a reformed navigator. I was cured by becoming a choral conductor, and experiencing it from the other side
on March 5, 2010 9:23am
I have to take some exception to Ken-P's last comments on "navigators." While I agree with him that some "navigators" do indeed want to make "better music", there is also a tribe of "navigators" who really want to take over the ship! The director is the "captain" and while s/he can certainly make mistakes, ultimately the responsibility is also his/hers. The comment from John Sargent that there is always someone who finds the holes in your rehearsal really covers the real issue: there are people out there who make it their business to criticize, but not to really help. It's really an attention-getting device which all but screams, "Can't you see this wo/man is an idiot? Listen to ME! I know what should be done." If that were the case, the question then becomes: who is sitting in the chair, and who is standing up front? Now, if it's a legitimate issue of needing a cue in, the point's granted - but it doesn't need to be done, in my opinion, right there on the spot interrupting the flow. I would say to this person, "Can we handle this later, please?" and drive on. I like Stephen's progressive approach - but like him, I also think that by the time you get to the stony silence, things aren't going real well anyway and this is a personality, not a musical, issue. Unless the individual in question is absolutely critical to the musical effort, should they continue in this vein on a regular basis, I'd have a chat to the side saying, "If you don't like the way things are run, these are the options: provide me with a detailed listing of what's wrong; put up with what I'm doing; or walk." Although John didn't say this, I'd be curious to know if the "navigator" in this instance was a man or woman. Your response would have to be balanced to this fact as well. With a man, you might want to take a direct approach; with a woman, a more indirect and elliptical one. That may not be PC, but I think it's valid. Fred's suggestion about section leaders taking the "lead" to address issues for the section with the director is one I would heartily endorse (from personal experience) - but your leader has to be willing to TAKE the lead. It may be, though, that for this particular performance it's too late to implement this idea - but I'd look at it for the next iteration - and then explain it at the first rehearsal. Of course, your section leaders would then be the poor sods dealing with these "navigators" - but just like in the military, you have intervening layers of leadership (and that's the key word) to deal with progressively more difficult problems - and it keeps the next higher leader away from the petty stuff and focused on the mission.
Good luck, and you're in my thoughts!
Ron
on March 5, 2010 12:16pm
I want to sing with Ken-P -- great answer! As a singer, I try to use the "rule of 3" -- if something goes wrong the first time, just let it go. Second time, mark it and pay real close attention next time. Third time, bring it up.
on March 6, 2010 8:24am
These are the singers that make me think of that obnoxious kid in grade school---you know the one--who has to/needs to prove him/herself to the teacher and other kids--they have to be smarter than everybody. You can be perfect in conducting, cueing and giving instructions and they will stop you and ask you if you meant to tell them to observe that rest! I've had a few singers recently that have driven me crazy and it's a short drive!
I am a big proponent of not over conducting and trying to let things work out before I step in---this makes this type of singer nutz but I have a few tricks I use to defuse them. In every rehearsal, I ask them to hold their questions until I stop conducting or they stop singing---no shouting out. And, I ask them to let me make corrections, give notes FIRST and if I don't address their problem, THEN and ONLY then, should they speak up. I also "try" their suggestions about cueing---some times, it makes no difference, some times, it makes it worse. There was only one case recently, that a suggested cue worked and that was in a Poulenc motet, otherwise, I have been proven right in my condcuting choices every time.
I direct a community chamber choir, doing challenging music and I am willing to give cues, go over things and even TAP DANCE if I have to get them comfortable but , in the long run, I am the conductor and they have to trust that I will address their concerns. But, in the cases of two singers who no longer sing with me, there is no pleasing some people.
Marie
on March 8, 2010 1:45pm
A Chorister's Guide to Keeping Conductors in Line
(from an article by Philip Cave in "The Singer")
3. Bury your head in the music just before cues. 4. Ask for a re-audition or a seating change. Ask often. Give the impression you are about to quit. Let the conductor know you are there as a personal favor. 5. Loudly clear your throat during pauses (tenors are trained to do this from birth). Quiet instrumental interludes are a good chance to blow your nose. 6. Long after a passage has gone by, ask the conductor if your C# was in tune. This is especially effective if you had no C#, or were not singing at the time. 7. At dramatic moments in the music (while the conductor is emoting), be busy marking your music so that the climaxes will sound empty and disappointing. 8. Wait until well into a rehearsal before letting the conductor know that you do not have the music. 9. Look at your watch frequently. Shake it in disbelief occasionally. 10. Find an excuse to leave rehearsal 15 minutes early so that others will become restless and start to fidget. 11. When possible, sing your part either an octave above or below what is written. This is excellent ear-training for the conductor. If she hears the pitch, deny it vehemently and claim that it must have been an overtone. 12. Tell the conductor, "I can't find the beat." Conductors are very sensitive about their "stick technique" so challenge it frequently. 13. If you are singing in a language with which the conductor is the least bit unfamiliar, ask her as many questions as possible about the meaning of individual words. If this fails, ask her about the pronunciation of the most difficult words. Occasionally say the word twice for her and ask her for her preference, making certain to say it exactly the same both times. If she remarks on their similarity, give her a look of utter disdain and mumble under your breath about the "subtleties of inflection." 14. Ask the conductor if she has listened to the von Karajan recording of the piece. Imply that she could learn a thing or two from it. Also good: ask, "Is this your first time conducting this piece?" 15. If your articulation differs from that of others singing the same phrase, stick to your guns. Do not ask the conductor which is correct until backstage just before the concert. In other words, make every effort to take the attention away from the podium and put it on you, where it belongs.
on April 13, 2010 3:41pm
As a singer who might occasionally be lumped in with the "navigators", I agree with those who advocate separating the musical issues from the personality/ego ones. If a question or comment is worthy of the group's precious rehearsal time, then surely it can be phrased in a open-ended way that invites the director to solve a problem for the group: "I noticed that... ...we rarely seem confident about our entrance in bar 8... ...there are several interpretations of the vowel in "DOmine"... ...we aren't all agreeing on where to place the terminal 's' in "sepultus"... ...how would you like us to approach this?" If you can establish a general expectation that questions must be framed in this constructive way, it might head off some of the more irritating exchanges. As for pointing out errors--obviously this is a sensitive area where you can easily find yourself on the defensive, saying things you'll soon wish you hadn't. I think on the one hand, you have to have enough perspective and humility to recognize the areas where you're truly out-gunned. The most common example might be having a native speaker of some foreign language your group is trying to sing. Or you might have a PhD musicologist, a specialist in Renaissance performance practice, or an expert in medieval English sitting in your ranks. I've sung in well-managed, non-dysfunctional choirs where such people were warmly acknowledged as "our resident expert on X" and allowed to research & decide contentious or obscure questions on behalf of the group. In such cases you'll be respected for delegating to the best available knowledge rather than bluffing your way thru, say, a duple-to-triple meter change in early polyphony when you don't realize that the tempi should have a fixed proportion. But this doesn't mean you must give up control, or allow open season on challenging your leadership. My cathedral choir director has a few rules that maintain the boundaries well and without rancor, even in a mixed group of opinionated professional choirmen and 30+ very precocious boys operating under significant time pressure: (A) Singers must raise their hands and await acknowledgement before asking a question, and (B) all comments are to be held until the end of rehearsal. When he has no time for questions, he can simply ignore the raised hands until a better moment present itself--and he can always cut off critiques and extended arguments graciously by saying "let's talk about that privately at break." In this way the substantive comments eventually get addressed, while the grandstanding impulse dies for want of an audience. Outflanking is far, far better than head-on confrontation. When you reach that point, you've already lost: Those "stony silences" and angry outbursts are mortifying to 99% of your singers, and they'll kill group rapport and morale faster than just about anything else.
on April 14, 2010 5:00am
I liked very much the constructive questions. Our singes should be gentle and gracious in their questions just as we should be in our instructions and criticism. We don't say (usually) John, you dolt, you missed the cut-off, we say, basses, you are not together. There's no reason for questions to be impolite. (Someone called such people self-appointed assistant conductors.)
My best singers recognize that aksing quesitons has to be not only respectful of the conductor, but of their collegues as well. They don't say, "Someone's not cutting off right" but, as Adam said, "WE are not together," or even more humbly, "I'm not sure I'm cutting off correctly." I love it when a singer says "I'm not sure of the pitch here," when I know full well it's one of my best singers, and that singer knows full well that the question is phrased to blunt the criticism of others in his section. And he knows I know it, and that I appreciate the way he's phrasing it, taking the repsonsibility on himself.
My daughter, as a young-ish chorister who has inherited some musical skills from her parents, was having a hard time finding a way to address errors in rehearsals that frustrated her. She didn't want to become a know-it-all (at age 17 - how awful that would be). I explained she can wait to see if if the conductor addresses it, tell the conductor privately, or, if necessary, say "Can I hear the pitch here?" rather than "We have a disagreement," and I had to assure her that the conductor would understand that she wasn't unprepared, but was being helpful and gentle, and most of all, respectful.
And now I wonder what I did decades ago in her situation!
David
on April 15, 2010 2:02pm
I would be interested in knowing recommendations for choir members who rarely inquire, but who, on such rare occasion, would like to express some interest in an important cue?
on April 15, 2010 7:05pm
Just don't do it in the heat of battle. I always have asked the choir members if any one needs anything more from me once I have achieved my objective. Need a cue?
Sure. No problem.
But breaking my trajectory....? It is not nice to fool Mother Nature.
S
 Community tags: CWU Music Education - Choral
|
Help support ChoralNet by buying via these links
|
