Songbook: "Sing Out Joyfully" to Jehovah

[Thesauron]

I'm not particularly interested in who makes the decision, really.  I'm only remarking on how the words sound and flow when singing. I'm a bit sorry that sometimes, aesthetics are not considered when it doesn't seem to make much difference in meaning.

 

Like, in the vocal recording, it's clearly sung, "Our reasons for joy are abounding "... the word in the book is "abundant".  A curious thing..

Aesthetics are important, but not as important as accuracy, and you have to take into account that these melodies are to be used not only in English. In some language certain melodic features will make the song harder to understand when sung. The melodies also need to be fairly simple, and everyone with a bit of practice should be able to sing them, by using hands if need be. I'm not sure what happened to the song you mentioned, but as far as I remember it was recorded before the songbook was finished, and perhaps the spell correction was a last minute thing, and it was not worthwhile to do he recording again. Look at song 20 in the new songbook and try to follow when the choir sings it as number 148...

Here the technicians messed up an entire verse on one of the vocal recordings. They edited in the same verse twice. This was released to the website It could not be corrected until the choir gathered again some months later.

[Thesauron]

Use “Sing Out Joyfully” to Jehovah - a little tutorial.

https://www.jw.org/en/online-help/using-jw-org/sing-out-joyfully-to-jehovah-songbook/

[Thesauron]

Song 30 (91) has no changes

Song 31 (26) has had some changes to the way the music is written and to a large extent new lyrics. Example:
 

Quote

Oh, walk with God in holiness;
Consider things that are pure.
No matter how great temptations may be,
He’ll help you to endure them

 

Song 32 (27) has a new second verse.

Quote

Shoulder to shoulder we stand on God’s side,
Preaching the news of his Kingdom earth wide.
Now is the time for each one to decide,
Time to take sides with our God

[jayrtom]

Someone already made a comparison chart... 

Sing-to-Jehovah-vs-Sing-Out-Joyfully.xlsx

 

Source:http://blog.ministryideaz.com/2016/10/sing-out-joyfully-to-jehovah.html

Edited October 5, 2016 by jayrtom

[Hope]

1 hour ago, Thesauron said:

Aesthetics are important, but not as important as accuracy, and you have to take into account that these melodies are to be used not only in English. In some language certain melodic features will make the song harder to understand when sung. The melodies also need to be fairly simple, and everyone with a bit of practice should be able to sing them, by using hands if need be. I'm not sure what happened to the song you mentioned, but as far as I remember it was recorded before the songbook was finished, and perhaps the spell correction was a last minute thing, and it was not worthwhile to do he recording again. Look at song 20 in the new songbook and try to follow when the choir sings it as number 148...

Here the technicians messed up an entire verse on one of the vocal recordings. They edited in the same verse twice. This was released to the website It could not be corrected until the choir gathered again some months later.

I'm also only concerned with how the songs are sung in English.  "Shall" vs. "Will" are English words -- whether we use them or not doesn't affect any other language, I don't think.  I'm *only* speaking about the transition from consonants to vowels, linking to words that begin/end with vowels together, flow, etc.  The concept of "poetic license" is to have aesthetics that are pleasing or balanced from an artistic standpoint; some words just *sound* prettier.  I'm NOT advocating clinging to any falsehoods or old understandings - merely commenting on how the English words are flowing (or not) in the new renditions.  No big deal, really.

 

No doubt that wording ("abounding") changed in the book after the recording was made.  It was just funny to hear the chorus sing it that way... and have to be conscious *not* to sing it that way at the Hall - since I learn the  songs by ear.    It's all good fun.   

[Thesauron]

Someone already made a comparison chart... 
Sing-to-Jehovah-vs-Sing-Out-Joyfully.xlsx
 
Source:http://blog.ministryideaz.com/2016/10/sing-out-joyfully-to-jehovah.html

I'm sure they have. I'm making my own my way, though, if you don't mind, and I thought maybe someone would like to follow along...


Song 33 (38) has some altered lyrics. Sample:

Comfort from our God, Jehovah,
Always brings us peace of mind.
He will help us bear our burden.
He is loving; he is kind.

[Hope]

22 minutes ago, Hope said:

I'm *only* speaking about the transition from consonants to vowels, linking to words that begin/end with vowels together, flow, etc.

 

Another "less smooth" transition is using "awe-inspiring" instead of "fear-inspiring".  Again - I get the reasons why... but "fear-inspiring" sings better (always a smoother flow when there is a consonant to a vowel - feaR-Inspiring; vowel to vowel makes a stop in your breath).  

[Brother_Bliss]

22 minutes ago, Hope said:

I'm also only concerned with how the songs are sung in English.  "Shall" vs. "Will" are English words -- whether we use them or not doesn't affect any other language, I don't think

 

No, they don't, and both words mean the same thing. It's just that "shall" has become somewhat antiquated. People don't speak that way anymore. We know what it means, but young and upcoming generations not associated with the truth might not understand "shall".

 

So what has started with updating the language in the NWT is having a domino effect in all our other publications. It is what it is, lol.

[Hope]

That's why art is not necessarily real life.  Art is meant to be prettier... a stylized impression of real life.  Rhythm, sound, color... all those things are important in music, dance, etc.

 

Otherwise, there's no difference between prose and poetry, walking and dancing, talking and singing, a photo and painting.

 

And why there are humanities and art appreciation classes... to learn to see/hear differently, right?

 

Just only my two pennies... I'm sorry if I'm out of line.  As I said - I *get* the reasons for the changes (singing Sheol is better than singing grave... but, oh well...).  I think the KJ rendition of Psalm 23 is one of the most beautifully flowing sets of word put to English.  It may take more brain power to understand exactly what's being said... but it is gorgeous, regardless.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Hope

[Brazilian2024]

The Song 82 Imitate Christ’s Mildness (120 ) had a slight change in music.

[Brother_Bliss]

24 minutes ago, Hope said:

Just only my two pennies... I'm sorry if I'm out of line.  As I said - I *get* the reasons for the changes (singing Sheol is better than singing grave... but, oh well...).  I think the KJ rendition of Psalm 23 is one of the most beautifully flowing sets of word put to English.  It may take more brain power to understand exactly what's being said... but it is gorgeous, regardless.

 

No, you're fine. I'm just jabber-jawing, lol. I totally get what you mean. There are several passages that I like better in the former NWT. In fact, it took me awhile to come around and warm up to the Revised NWT. I appreciate it a lot now, but there are still some expressions and aspects of the previous version that I wish were carried over.

[Hope]

This is getting to be off-topic... but I will never like "loyal love" better than "loving kindness".  Kindness resonates with me so much...  it honestly means more to me in a person than anything.

 

You don't have to love me... but please be kind.  It is enough.

[Thesauron]

I'm also only concerned with how the songs are sung in English.  "Shall" vs. "Will" are English words -- whether we use them or not doesn't affect any other language, I don't think.  I'm *only* speaking about the transition from consonants to vowels, linking to words that begin/end with vowels together, flow, etc.  The concept of "poetic license" is to have aesthetics that are pleasing or balanced from an artistic standpoint; some words just *sound* prettier.  I'm NOT advocating clinging to any falsehoods or old understandings - merely commenting on how the English words are flowing (or not) in the new renditions.  No big deal, really.
 
No doubt that wording ("abounding") changed in the book after the recording was made.  It was just funny to hear the chorus sing it that way... and have to be conscious *not* to sing it that way at the Hall - since I learn the  songs by ear.    It's all good fun.   

The difference between "will" and "shall" is important when making a bible translation, and as I remember the question regarding the use was raised when preparing a translation of the bible into another language a few years back, and the New World Translation Committee made their usual study, and here we are.

[Thesauron]

That's why art is not necessarily real life.  Art is meant to be prettier... a stylized impression of real life.  Rhythm, sound, color... all those things are important in music, dance, etc.
 
Otherwise, there's no difference between prose and poetry, walking and dancing, talking and singing, a photo and painting.
 
And why there are humanities and art appreciation classes... to learn to see/hear differently, right?
 
Just only my two pennies... I'm sorry if I'm out of line.  As I said - I *get* the reasons for the changes (singing Sheol is better than singing grave... but, oh well...).  I think the KJ rendition of Psalm 23 is one of the most beautifully flowing sets of word put to English.  It may take more brain power to understand exactly what's being said... but it is gorgeous, regardless.

The translators of Psalms asked themselves quite early if conveying the right meaning or a beautiful set of words were more important. In this 2013 revision they take a whole new approach and try to convey ideas more than exact words.

[Hope]

I.  Know....  

[Thesauron]

This is getting to be off-topic... but I will never like "loyal love" better than "loving kindness".  Kindness resonates with me so much...  it honestly means more to me in a person than anything.
 
You don't have to love me... but please be kind.  It is enough.

Loving-kindness does not fully encompass the meaning of the original word though. It's a tricky word since there really is no English equivalent. Insight put it well:

The Hebrew word cheʹsedh, when used in reference to kindness, occurs 245 times. The related verb cha·sadhʹ means “act in loyalty (or, loving-kindness)” and carries with it more than just the thought of tender regard or kindness stemming from love, though it includes such traits. (Ps 18:25, ftn) Cheʹsedh is kindness that lovingly attaches itself to an object until its purpose in connection with that object is realized. According to the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, cheʹsedh “is active, social, and enduring. . . . [Cheʹsedh] always designates not just a human attitude, but also the act that emerges from this attitude. It is an act that preserves or promotes life. It is intervention on behalf of someone suffering misfortune or distress. It is demonstration of friendship or piety. It pursues what is good and not what is evil.” (Edited by G. J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren, 1986, Vol. 5, p. 51) Hence, cheʹsedh is more comprehensively rendered “loving-kindness,” or, because of the fidelity, solidarity, and proved loyalty associated with it, an alternate translation would be “loyal love.”

http://m.wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002612#h=4

[Hope]

... i know that, too...  

[Thesauron]

Song 34 (29) is not altered.

Song 35 (70) has some altered lyrics as well as a new refrain.

Song 36 (52) has a new title, altered lyrics, and a slightly altered melody, which a bit confusing to me, but maybe I'll just need to study it once more.

Song 37 (66) has slightly altered lyrics.

[palmhat]

2 hours ago, Dismal_Bliss said:

 

No, they don't, and both words mean the same thing. It's just that "shall" has become somewhat antiquated. People don't speak that way anymore. We know what it means, but young and upcoming generations not associated with the truth might not understand "shall".

BBBBBBBut I like "shall"! My children enjoy saying "shall". A growing number of my friends are saying "shall". My wife has been using it for nigh on ten and nine years.  I have even caught some of my former workmates engage the "shall". "Shall" has an air of class associated with it. I have gone so far as to use it in contraction form, ie ("I shalln't").  Please,   no.... don't let this decaying world stop shalling. Let's give it the shall to live...... well, maybe not.

 

um.... what were we talking about?

Edited October 5, 2016 by palmhat

[On the huh]

 

[Thesauron]

 

Instrumental renditions.

[On the huh]

Yes my thoughts as well.  Of note is the fact the Kingdom Melodies have been removed from the main jw.org website (although still available through JW Broadcasting and JW Library).  Will look forward to these with anticipation.

[Hope]

I know that brother with the violin - he was an elder in a congregation I attended in Chicago 25 years ago..  

[Hope]

2 hours ago, Jonathan77 said:

Yes my thoughts as well.  Of note is the fact the Kingdom Melodies have been removed from the main jw.org website (although still available through JW Broadcasting and JW Library).  Will look forward to these with anticipation.

I'm so happy I have ALL of the old Kingdom Melodies (all nine albums) from the brown songbook.  When they come up, playing in my car, I feel such a lovely feeling of nostalgia to sing/hum along with those beloved tunes.  Good stuff!

[Musky]

Here is a PDF chart comparing the Sing to Jehovah and Sing out Joyfully to Jehovah songbooks

 

Sing to Jehovah vs Sing Out Joyfully Comparison.pdf