5
Choral Sound
Running head: CHORAL SOUND
Spacing, Formation, and Choral Sound:
Preferences and Perceptions of Auditors and Choristers
James F. Daugherty
University of Kansas
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess preferences of auditors (N = 160) and choristers (N = 46) relative to choral sound of an SATB high school choir in two choral formations (block sectional and mixed) and three spacings (close, lateral, and circumambient).Six conditions of a 30-second homophonic choral excerpt were sung and recorded digitally. Auditors listened to ten pairs of randomly ordered excerpts, expressing preference for most pleasing choral sound. Choristers completed the Singer Evaluation Form. Auditor results indicated consistently significant preference for excerpts sung with spread spacing and no consistent preference for formation per se. Choristers (95.60%) thought spacing influenced their choral sound. Singers consistently and significantly preferred spread spacing and attributed to it improved vocal production, and ability to hear better both self and ensemble. Results suggested that choir spacing made a greater contribution to choral sound preferences of both auditors and choristers than choral formation.
Spacing, Formation, and Choral Sound:
Preferences and Perceptions of Auditors and Choristers
Choral methods materials routinely endorse various choir formations and seating arrangements. Cain (1932) compares them to “the proper disposition of troops on a field to obtain a definite objective” (p. 118). Kohut and Grant (1990) state that “noticeably different” changes in choral sound occur by moving sections of the choir, relocating individual singers, or singing in mixed quartets. While such comments illustrate an abiding belief among choral music educators, little empirical research is available regarding choir formations. There is still less empirical evidence with respect to spacing of singers and choral sound.
Aspects of human chorusing have been investigated empirically using individuals and small groups, yet a comparatively small number of acoustical studies have included a functioning, intact choir in the research design (Hunt, 1970; Killian, 1985; Lambson, 1961; Lottermoser & Meyer, 1960; Lottermoser, 1969; Ternstr?m, 1989, 1994, 1995; Tocheff, 1990). Two of these studies relate directly to the focus of the present investigation. Lambson (1961) employed a college choir singing both a homophonic and a polyphonic composition in both live and taped performances to investigate four choir formations: (a) sectional blocks; (b) mixed SATB quartets; (c) “acoustically compatible” voices placed in proximity; and (d) random distribution. Ten visually shielded adjudicators completed the 1958 MENC choral adjudication form. Judges were asked also to rank order preferences and identify riser formations employed. Auditors agreed that various placements produced differing sounds, but were unable to identify specific formations. Five favored mixed formation for the homophonic composition. Tocheff (1990) used a researcher devised voice matching process to examine “acoustical” or voice-compatible placement of singers. Two college choirs sang both a polyphonic and a homophonic choral excerpt in four formations: (a) acoustically placed sections; (b) unorganized sections; (c) acoustically placed mixed; and (d) unorganized mixed. In all, 32 excerpts (75 minutes of music) were performed in a live study of approximately two hours' duration. Five visually shielded adjudicators rated facets of each performance on a Likert type inventory devised by the researcher. Results indicated that acoustical placement of voices effected positively every variable of choral sound tested in both sectional and mixed formations.
In a pilot study, Daugherty (1996) assessed preferences of auditors and choristers relative
to choral sound produced by a high school choir in three formations and three spacings. Participants were 46 choral singers and 72 auditors (N = 118). Twenty-six presentations of a 46-second homophonic choral excerpt (19.93 minutes of music) were sung in a live performance format that lasted 47.20 minutes. Auditors listened blindfolded then expressed a preference for “most pleasing choral sound.” It was concluded that (a) varied physical positioning of singers appeared to engender significant auditor perceived differences in choral sound, but (b) difficulties observed in a live performance format raised questions about the data obtained. Among the difficulties observed: (a) auditors reported fatigue and loss of concentration; (b) physical shifting of position between excerpts created distraction and uneven, lengthy intervals between performances; and (c) latter excerpts were sung less energetically than earlier ones.
The present study sought to isolate variables not considered by previous research, among
them: (a) consistency of tempo in sung choral excerpts, (b) consistency in the conducting of
seriated choral performances, (c) chorister and auditor fatigue, (d) uniform spacing of singers, (e) consistent profiles for choral formations, and (f) an adjudication format that does not presume ability to respond to single elements of a performance in isolation from other facets, or require auditors to listen and write simultaneously. The purpose of the present study was to assess preferences and perceptions of choristers and auditors relative to the choral sound of an intact SATB high school choir in two choral formations (block sectional and mixed) and three spacings (close, lateral and circumambient). To this end, three research questions were devised: (1) Are there differences in choral sound perceived and preferred by participants (auditors and choristers) when the physical position of choral singers on risers varies from close to spread spacing among choristers? (2) Are there differences in choral sound perceived and preferred by participants (auditors and choristers) when the physical position of choral singers on risers varies between a sectional block formation and a mixed formation? (3) Do perceptions and preferences of auditors differ according to experience, age, or gender; and do perceptions and preferences of choristers differ according to voice part sung, row within the choir, gender, or director rating (strong, weak, average chorister)?
Method
Design Issues
Given issues of consistency and fatigue in live studies, and since Lambson (1961) reports “nearly identical” auditor results in both recorded and live contexts, a recorded format is used for this investigation. Choristers sing each condition only once and auditors do not require visual shielding. To insure consistency of both tempo and conductor behavior in each condition, singers follow the conductor via pre-recorded videotape on a 21 inch television monitor, a procedure incorporated from the pilot study (Daugherty, 1996). Moreover, singers are assigned places randomly in both sectional and mixed formations. This measure is used to control for possible variables that are not concerns of this study, such as situating of strong and weak singers, compatibility or "matched" placement of voices, height, or voice quality.
Multi-faceted adjudication forms employed in previous studies were not documented as
valid dependent measures. In the present investigation, therefore, auditors are asked simply to express a preference for most “pleasing choral sound” overall. In this vein, other studies related to musical or vocal sound preference find that single, overall auditor evaluations can yield useful, reliable information (Garman, Boyle, & DeCarbo, 1991; Zuckerman & Miyake, 1993).
Participants
Choristers. The choir for this study was a curricular ensemble from a public high school in the southeastern United States. Members (N = 46) ranged in age from 16 - 18 years, with most choristers (70%) at 17 years of age. There were 30 female and 16 male singers.
Auditors. Auditors constituted a haphazard array (N = 160) of persons solicited according to variables of age (18 - 25 years, n = 80; 26 - 39 years, n = 80), gender (male, n = 80; female, n = 80) and choral music experience (experienced, n = 80; nonexperienced, n = 80). Choral experience was defined as at least two years’ membership in a choral ensemble at some point from first year high school onward. This group included persons with degrees in choral music education or choral conducting (n = 14), those currently working toward such degrees (n = 42), and those with a degree in some other area of music (n = 16). Criteria for the non experienced group included: (a) no musical ensemble experience (band, choir, or orchestra) from first year high school onward; (b) no degree in music, or work toward a degree in music; and (c) no private lessons on the same musical instrument for a year or more after first year high school.
Upon recommendation of an audiologist, auditors forty years of age and older were excluded from this study as a general precaution against possible presence of hearing loss. Otherwise, auditors were self-screened for hearing acuity by responding to two questions: (a) Have you ever been told you have a hearing loss?; and (b) How would you evaluate your hearing? (Normal, Better than normal, Slight hearing loss, Moderate hearing loss, Severe hearing loss).
Of all auditors, 118 (73.75%) described their hearing as normal, while another 38 auditors (23.75%) said their hearing was better than normal. Four auditors (2.5%) who reported a slight hearing loss were included in the study because a doctor had recently assured them that the loss was negligible. Seven other persons were replaced in the study either because they reported moderate or severe hearing loss, or subsequent inquiry was unable to ascertain the degree of slight hearing loss.
Materials, Procedure and Equipment
Choral music was excerpted from “Ubi Caritas” by Maurice Duruflé (Durand Publishing, No. 312-41253) for SATTBB voices. This composition was selected from music the choir was then rehearsing because it was a cappella, homophonic, and had a Latin text. Auditors in the pilot study stated that a foreign language facilitated concentration upon choral sound. Measures 18 (last half) - 28 were sung in each trial. Ex post facto analysis of the DAT from the recording session revealed that each sung excerpt was 30.5 seconds in duration.
For random sectional formation, choristers stood in contiguous sectional blocks according to respective voice parts sung; each of the choir’s voice sections occupied all rows of the riser unit. The random mixed formation used in this investigation was such that no two singers of the same voice part stood contiguously. Choristers were kept in the same rows for both formations. Once positions were randomly assigned for sectional formation, mixed formation positions were randomly determined in conjunction with a predetermined chart for distributing voice parts as equably as possible. Retaining singers in the same rows sought to mitigate any perceived differences between formations possibly attributable to row change.
Choristers stood on portable Wenger choral standing risers. Each riser unit contained three steps. Each step was 18 inches wide. Elevation from one step to another was eight inches. Nine contiguous riser units were employed, connected per manufacturer’s instructions and forming a modest semi-circular curve. A windowed arrangement, whereby singers had a sightline to the conductor between the heads of singers in the row ahead, was employed with each formation.
For close spacing, choristers stood on each row of the riser units, hands at side, with the upper arm of one singer no further than one inch from the upper arm of another singer. For lateral spacing, 24-inch dowel rods were placed between the upper arm of one singer and the upper arm of a neighboring singer; dowels were collected before singing. Circumambient spacing followed the same procedure for lateral spacing while adding a vacant row’s space between each row of singers. The second riser step was left vacant and the front row of the choir stood 18 inches in front of those choristers on the first riser step. In this study circumambient spacing was achieved by leaving the front row of singers in place while moving the riser units back 18 inches. Precisely the same distance was maintained between the front row of the choir and the microphones in all recording formations to insure integrity of the choral soundscape.
One week prior to the recording session, the choir rehearsed both "Ubi Caritas" and other music in each of six positions: random block sectional formation with close, lateral, and circumambient spacing, and random mixed formation with close, lateral, and circumambient spacing. A log was maintained to insure a similar amount of rehearsal time in each position.
Choristers were aware only that the ensemble would be asked to sing in different
positions for a recording session. Choristers and conductor were asked not to discuss or share nonverbally their perceptions of various placements until after the recording session.
The choir practiced once with the videotaped conducting in the week prior to the recording session, and once on the day of the recording. The video monitor was centrally placed 10 feet in front of the choir during recording. The backs of the monitor and the video cassette playback device were covered with a thick material to eliminate any equipment noise.
A chorus member controlled playback of the videotape with a remote control device. He rewound the tape during formation transitions, and whispered “Ready!” directly prior to commencing playback, alerting singers for the conductor’s breath and preparatory beat.
The recording venue was a recital auditorium at a university school of music. Two identical Schoeps CMC-5 omni condenser microphones, along with two Schoeps MK-2 omni capsules, were used for recording. The microphones were placed in a spaced pair configuration with a distance of six feet between them. Microphones were situated 15 feet from the line formed between the ends of the semi-circular riser configuration at a height of 11 feet from the stage floor. Microphones were angled slightly upward. In all details, this arrangement followed expert recommendations for recording choral ensembles as detailed in Miller (1992). The entire process was accomplished and monitored by a professional recording engineer experienced in recording choirs. Once microphones were placed and the recording level set, nothing was touched during the recording process; the only changes were the positions of the choristers on the risers.
Excerpts were recorded on an Ampex 467 (R-60) Digital Audio Tape (DAT). Signals from the microphones were brought into a Soundcraft 220-B mixing board. Here only amplitude levels were adjusted. No EQ (frequency equalization) was added. The signal then went to a Panasonic SV-3700 digital audio tape deck.
A zero dB calibration signal was recorded onto the DAT prior to the recording of any choral excerpts. This 0 dB amplitude level on the Soundcraft 200-B equaled minus 12 dB on the Panasonic SV-3700. Such calculation was made for alignment purposes for the later transfer of excerpts from the master tape to the auditor tape. The entire recording process was monitored by the recording engineer using AKG 240 headphones, the same headphones later used by auditors. Immediately upon conclusion of the recording session, two survey instruments, the Singer Evaluation Form (SEF) and the Ensemble Director’s Evaluation Form were completed. The SEF was adapted from the pilot study and subsequently piloted in revised form with a university recital choir (N = 24).