[4] Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, New Edition, Vol. IV, p. 363.
[5] Seidl, The Music of the Modern World, Vol. I, p. 106.
[6] Coward, Choral Technique and Interpretation, p. 73.
[7] It is but a step from the conclusions arrived at above to a corollary relating to conducting from the organ bench. How does it happen that most choirs directed by an organist-conductor do not attack promptly, do not follow tempo changes readily, and do not in general present examples of good ensemble performance? Is it not because the organist is using his hands and feet for other purposes, and cannot therefore indicate to his singers the "continuous flow of rhythm" above referred to? When a conductor directing with a baton wishes to indicate a ritardando, he does so not merely by making the beats follow one another at longer intervals, but even more by making a more elaborate and more extensive movement between the beat culminations; and the musicians have no difficulty in following the baton, because it is kept continuously in motion, the points where the muscular contractions come being easily felt by the performers, because they can thus follow the rhythm in their own muscles by instinctive imitation. But when the organist-conductor wishes a ritardando, he merely plays more slowly, and the singers must get their idea of the slower tempo entirely through the ear. Since rhythm is a matter of muscle rather than of ear, it will be readily understood that conducting and organ-playing will never go hand in hand to any very great extent. There is, of course, another reason for the failure of many organists who try to play and conduct simultaneously, viz., that they are not able to do two things successfully at the same time, so that the chorus is often left to work out its own salvation as best it may; while, if the conducting is done by using the left hand, the organ end of the combination is not usually managed with any degree of distinction. Because of this and certain other well-known reasons, the writer believes that choral music in general, and church music in particular, would be greatly benefited by a widespread return to the mixed chorus, led by a conductor with baton in hand, and accompanied by an organist.
[8] Constantin von Sternberg, Ethics and Esthetics of Piano Playing, p. 10.
[9] C.F.A. Williams, The Rhythm of Modern Music, p. 13.
[10] This danger is especially insidious just now in our college and high school courses in the appreciation of music. Instructors in such courses are often so zealous in causing pupils to understand the machinery involved in the construction and rendition of music that they sometimes forget to emphasize sufficiently the product resulting from all this machinery, viz., beauty. The idea of these courses is most excellent, and in time those in charge of them will doubtless realize that the hearing of actual music in the classroom is more valuable to students than learning a mass of facts about it; and that if a choice were necessary between a course in which there was opportunity for hearing a great deal of music without any comment, and one on the other hand in which there was a great deal of comment without any music, the former would be infinitely preferable. But such a choice is not necessary; and the ideal course in the Appreciation of Music is one in which the student has opportunity for hearing a great deal of music with appropriate comments by the instructor.
[11] Gehring, The Basis of Musical Pleasure, p. 89.
[12] Wagner, On Conducting, translated by Dannreuther, p. 20.
[13] The metronome is supposed to have been invented, or at least perfected, by a Bavarian named Maelzel, about 1815, and for many years the Maelzel metronome was the only one in existence. Hence the letters M.M., still found in many scores, in connection with tempo indications.