Funny this topic should appear today, as just this morning I was thinking about how we refer to a song as one the “XYZ” <insert the singer of your choice> sings, yet the “song” is from tehilim or gemoroh.
The one in particular I had in mind was “Omar R’ Akiva, ashrechem, ect”. Now, if asked “who sings that song” I would reflexively (and wrongfully) respond, “its XYZ”, when in reality it was R’ Akiva.
But when you think about it, the point the original writer / speaker / composer had in mind was to relay a message (faith, simcah, ect). So does it really make a differnce if the message is relayed in a vehicle that has been adapted to today’s audience? Ok, I would never suggest this to be the case for kriyas hatorah, where mesorah must stay unchanged. But perhaps the “tune” with which select mizmorim are conveyed, need not be in one particular type.
A good example is the middle part of the to’chacha. True, its a fearful piece and one that needs to be heard as a dire warning. But one singer (a pair actualy) set those words to a soulful tune. So which was the “real” way the words were said? Was it fire and brimstone? Or was is said to the tune of trop? Or did it switch in middle from dire to supportive / reasuring and then back to dire?
I think the answer is yes to all the above. If the intent was to convey a message, the message (in some circumstances) needs to be modified so that it reaches the listener with the biggest impact.
(I hope this is still considered on topic!)