Rather than four parts... might look odd

[irresistible_grace]

New Genevan Psalter | The Heidelblog

"A single line of music, rather than four parts as is common in almost all contemporary North American hymnals, might look odd to some, but it has been maintained in this Psalter to be true to Calvin’s original intent of unison singing."

 

[irresistible_grace]

The entire post is worth reading!
That quote just stood out to me.

 

[Logan]

I'm curious as to whether there is any citation for showing that this is what Calvin actually believed.

Not that it would surprise me to find that it was Calvin's position that singing should be done in unison instead of harmony, but I like to take such claims with a grain of salt

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I've seen it cited numerous places that singing in unison was endorsed by Calvin, don't know if that's accurate. But I think I see more than one benefit from it. One, it's difficult (impossible?) for a singer to concentrate on a harmony line (whether reading from music or picking one out by ear) and not be distracted from the words. At least for me it is. I think the sounds of harmony are potentially distracting to others in the congregation- "how lovely that sounds!" And harmonizing is potentially a temptation to pride for individuals and congregations. I realize how ridiculous that sounds in the American Idol age. But performance, I believe, is how spiritual unity in singing can be undermined. That temptation is very subtle. Is it possible that the closer we can stay to chant, as far as vocal simplicity, the better?

 

[TexanRose]

I don't think harmony is distracting if you're used to it. If you've been singing, say, the alto line from your psalter for a number of years, then it takes no more concentration to sing alto than it would to sing soprano. I think harmony is great for a very practical reason: every singer can sing in a range that suits their own voice. It can be very distracting (both to yourself and to those around you) when you are forced to sing higher or lower than your voice can really bear!

 

[Logan]

That's a good point. I prefer singing the bass line simply because it's more comfortable for the majority of tunes. Likewise in our church (where we're accustomed to singing a capella), I haven't found it a distraction, but understand that people new to it could. Our precentor (or pastor) generally will sing the melody out of consideration for people new to it.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

And if the churches would begin singing the Psalms widely I wouldn't care how many harmony parts were sung! I love harmony and have a good ear for it. Problem is, in broad evangelical world, where I hope the Psalms can begin to be sung, most can't read music or harmonize by ear. To accommodate harmony, tunes are pitched up higher. You have to sing bass because of this, Logan. I'm always, for some reason, thinking not just about my singing of the Psalms but about what could work in congregations so unfamiliar with the practice.

 

[Philip]

Unison singing is generally unfair to certain voice ranges. The reason it was the norm in the pre-reformation church was because congregational singing was not generally practiced and because most choirs were monastic foundations of one sort or another.

The unison argument has little bearing, because the definition of harmony is multiple voices singing as one. In other words, the various voices form chords rather than individual notes.