Assumption Mass Propers in Triplex
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Our schola is singing EF for the Assumption of Blessed Virgin Mary. And I found that there are no ancient neums for the proper chants in Triplex. I'm trained in classic solesmes method, but I found the Semiology interepretaion is also very useful and can be done beautifully. If there are any expersts who know how to apply the anciant neums to newer chants like these, could you show them here, especially the Communio, 'Beatam me dicent omnes generationes,' ?

    I almost feel to put 'V' (the sign for lengthening the pes under 'me,' the second word in the Cummnios )and put 'c,' ( 'faster sign' under the first porrectus on 'dicent'), but I'm not sure.

    It would also be interesting to compare, if there are more than one interpretation. I don't think there can be really wrong or right here. This will be very helpful and learning for many chanters. Thanks.
    ( those who went to Solesmes in France, was there any discussion on what to do with chants who don't have ancent neums marked in Triplex?)
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    In cases like this what is normal is to look at the neums of the authentic chants upon which the neo-gregorian melodies were modelled. Check this file from Gregor und Taube for the particular case of the Assumption (take into account that the melodic lines have a few differences when compared with the GT, since they were restored by the site's owner, Anton Stingl, according to some criteria which I cannot find now in his site but which I'm sure he'll have around there somewhere).

    (I do not have my GT here, and so I do not know if this is the case for the Assumption, but it often gives in the margin the page of the authentic chants to check when there are no ancient neums. You could also see Cardine's Graduel Neumé, available at Lalande, but that book still has the old propers with e.g. Optimam Partem for the Communion.)
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Wow, Gregor und Taube ? This is great. Thank you so much. Now I see that in Triplex there are numbers next to the first line of each chant for Assumption Mass. It matched the page numbers in the Triplex which has the same chant with ancient neums, but Communio doesn't seem to give the right page number.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    I e-mailed you my transcriptions of these chants in St. Gall notation.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Yes, I got them. Thank you, thank you.
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    > Communio doesn't seem to give the right page number

    When I got my GT I also thought so, but no: it is correct. Communion Beatam me dicent, starting with «generationes», does correspond to communion Ecce Dominus veniet, starting with «eis cum eo». I have no idea where the melody of words «Beatam me dicent omnes» comes from. (Does anyone know?)

    PS - I checked all mode VI communions and saw that the melody of «Beatam me dicent» corresponds to the first words of communion Simon Ioannis, the initial Re being a prosthesis (and also to communion Voce mea, though here the formula suffered an apheresis since there are less syllables). I still do not know where the melody for «omnes» came from, though I guess it is a standard formula I am not acquainted with; but I will not bother more checking for that... :)
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    The last comment I wrote raises a question: why on earth do the two notes of the final clivis of «dicent» have moras vocis, when the corresponding clivis in both Simon Ioannis and Voce mea merely has an episem on the first note? It could be argued, of course, that the episem found in the Saint Gall manuscripts should affect both notes (as Cardine defends in Sémiologie Grégorienne, p. 17), but the fact remains that we face here a duplicity of criteria.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    It is matching ! (Page 26 and Beatam me decent) I'm glad you pointed out. I would have missed it. I should have gone further in checking the melody on Page 26.
    Well, the ancient neums for clivis with episema seemed to be used both for square notation clivis with two mora vocis and clivis with horisontal episemas (over one or two notes). Maybe the editor of the square notation used them interchangeably?
  • Hugh
    Posts: 198
    Mia, you may be aware of this, but just in case:

    With the EF Assumption gradual Audi Filia, the triplex/gradual verse on pp 406 - 7 (Specie tua) is not the EF verse. You have to go back to the Liber for the correct verse (page 1602-3): "Tota decora". Don't know how many years we sang the EF Assumption before I noticed that!

    I agree with your semiological suggestions above. I've been doing the Communio with those editorials for as long as I can remember.

    All the best!
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Here's the result of our first rehearsal reading from one large choirbook with staffless neumes only:

    Gaudeamus

    We had a little trouble on "mariAE" and "anGEli," but I think it's already sounding less... square.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    We haven't done this one yet, but here is the St. Gall notation from a thousand years ago and a practice file I made for my schola. Hopefully with more than one singer to stagger the breathing, the repercussions will not be as severe as I have demonstrated, and I will insist on a better [u] vowel from them as well!
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,939
    Does anyone have the Assumption communion antiphon in English? Since it's normally not a Sunday mass, I am having difficulty locating it.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Incantu, thank you so much. I was so happy that I found your singing Beatam Me and Gaudeamus in your previous thread just before you posted the one above.
    http://musicasacra.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=3478&page=1#Item_13

    (I am very excited to learn ancient neums these days. Very challenging. I showed your St. Gall neums and the text to my schola, they were very impressed. I started to add a few in our singing. They seemed to like it. Still a bit confused. I think they will start to feel more comfortible with them soon. Although my boys, 14 and 12, wirite down with their own notation signs.)

    And thank you for the link to St. Gall manuscript. Is there an index that show I can view a specific chant? It's fascinating.


    Hugh, thank you. I just double checked, you are rignt. What happened? The editor made a mistake? I hope others notice it too.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Is there an index that show I can view a specific chant?


    If you find an answer to that question, I should be very happy to know. I have only been able to find the manuscript sources through references in the Triplex, Graduale Neume, G&T, etc. Otherwise, I have just stumbled across chants when leafing through the manuscripts (virtually, that is).

  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Here's a lovely example of my ensemble rehearsing Audi filia. You will hear someone ask "Top?" at the beginning.

    Of. Assumpta est Maria and Beatam still need quite a bit of work.

    These, by the way, are for the debut performance by EUOUAE on August 13th in San Francisco. So we still have some time to improve! The program will also include the Mass of Tournai, organum from the Magnus Liber, and Obrecht's 6-voice Salve Regina.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Their singing is very beautiful. How many women do you have?

    In Beatam, the fouth and fifth note of 'o' of 'o-mnes' (fa and re), are we supposed lengthen them? (I'm not sure about the St. Gall sign on that.) Also, the clivis on 'ne' from 'generatione'? (fa and mi) Of course every director will do it differently, I'm just wondering whether you decide not to lengthen them for some reason. (I found analysis on the various interpretaions of different directors help me greatly.)
    thanks.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,369
    CharlesW - The Assumption propers in English are to be found in The Plainsong Gradual by Palmer and Burgess, originally published by St Mary's Press, Wantage, and now (thankfully) available as a reprint from the CMAA. In book two (which contains vols. 3 & 4) you will find beginning on p. 186 three sets of propers for this Solemnity: 1) Roman Use before 1951, 2) Roman Use post 1951, and 3) Sarum Use. I have extracted the ones corresponding to the current Graduale Romanum and printed them separately for my schola and would be happy to mail a copy to you if you wish to e-mail me your address. (They are also available in simpler psalm tone form in The Anglican Use Gradual.)
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,939
    Many thanks, but I didn't think to look in the Anglican Use Gradual. It's getting to where there are almost too many sources to keep up with. That's a very good thing!
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Mia - Good questions. My short answer is that these are two spots where my choir was not doing what I was showing them (or I was showing it poorly). I wouldn't say that the notes in question are lengthened, only that they are not shortened.

    In the first case, the short notes that precede the long ones are so long that no difference is heard in the actual long notes. This is not intentional.

    In the second case, the syllables themselves are of different lengths: ge(n)-e-ra-ti-o(n)-es. So even though the word starts with four long notes, in my interpretation the two in the middle will be less long because of the length of the syllable. Otherwise, we might as well write quarter notes and eighths if we want an exact 2:1 ratio. That's not what I'm going for.

    Having said that, this piece in particular needs some work!

    To answer your earlier question, you hear the six women of EUOUAE on these recordings.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Thank for the explanation. It makes good sense. I should be careful about 'not shortening' in neum gruops, instead of 'lengthening.' (The last two notes on 'o' in 'omnes' I felt very awkward in our singing, because I lengthened them, an exageration mistake for beginners. samething with 'generationes.')
    This is really good. I can't wait to hear your next audio. All the 6 women sound very professional. I'm really fascinated with semiology neums and try to learn as much as I can. And I realized that now I am truly paying more attention to the text than before. (One note on Audi filia; I found it's interesting to see that at the end of 'tuam' there is a horizontal episema in square notation when St. Gall has pes quassus ? I'm assuming that it has to do with being a cadence.)
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    I believe at one time the first note of the pes quassus was considered long, possibly because it resembles the angular pes, by Mocquereau et al. Vollaerts (and echoed in Murray) considered the second note long, and the first either long or short. I believe his theory concerning the first note was largely based on accepting the middle note of the salicus as long, which has since been refuted by Cardine. In Gregorian Semiology, Cardine suggests that the addition of the oriscus to a neume indicates a tendency or leaning toward a more important note that follows. I apply this reasoning to the pes quassus, pressus major, and the "leaping" salicus. The episema in the Solesmes edition (which, remember, does not always suggest that there is a corresponding episema in any manuscript) is probably the result of the earlier thought.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    This is VERY interesting. Thanks again, Incantu. (I wonder oriscus' 'tendency or leaning toward a more important note that follows' also applies to quillisma? Maybe qillisma is a special kind of oriscus?)
  • -b
    Posts: 55
    Gregor and Taube! Thank you for this. I don't have the Graduale Triplex--yet. Is it online?? This website will be a great help. And of course, I'm always so short on time to sort through all this, so question: are these Gregor and Taube pages quite reliable? It seems you indicated they differ somewhat from the GT.
    I was in Wilko's chant group this summer and was so glad to learn these nuances in singing the chants. I had started "intuiting" them in chants with my choir, and was just wishing I could consult the source.
    Thanks for this discussion, Mia et al.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Mia, in the manuscripts you will find the scandicus and the salicus used interchangeably. Sometimes even a quilisma group is found in the same place. I would say that in the very least, these figures are closely related, and their performance ought not be too different from each other.

    I think you will also find (please correct me if I am wrong) that if there is a half step to be found in the quilisma group, the MI or the SI in question always falls on the quilisma note itself (i.e., never on the concluding virga).

    You will see in my transcriptions that I have indicated two pitches to for quilisma note itself, the first (in parenthesis) in unison with the preceding note. This is to agree with certain manuscripts that seem to show four notes in what is transcribed in the Vaticana as a three-note quilisma group.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    And to -b, it depends on what you mean by "reliable." If obedience to the Vatican edition is a concern for you, then you have to be aware that these transcriptions often show melodic variants and sometimes, I believe, "corrections." Otherwise, I would say they are very skillfully and carefully done. References for the manuscripts on which the they are based are found at the end of each suite of propers. You can compare them yourself.
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    > I don't have the Graduale Triplex--yet. Is it online??

    No. At musicasacra.org you have online the books for the Extraordinary Form, and for the Ordinary From you have the Gregorian Missal for Sundays. The PDFs at Gregor und Taube are the only online stuff I'm aware of with transcriptions of Saint Gall neums.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    How about this one?
    Gregofacsimil.net

    (I got it from another thread.)

    -b

    Gregorian Semiology by Cardine is the book that explains all those ancient neums.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    If you use the google CHROME browser, it will translate it into English!
  • -b
    Posts: 55
    Many thanks to everyone for helpful replies and suggestions. This is an exciting new chapter for me. Frogman, I'm not sure what translation you mean, German for Gregor and Taube, or French for Cardine. But both are languages I've spent some time in, so the chance to be there again is welcome. Now I look forward to learning St. Gall!
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    > How about this one? Gregofacsimil.net

    As far as I know that site concentrates on the responsories for Matins, and only a few of them have Saint Gall neums transcribed. I do not find there anything at all for Mass. It appears to be a fine source for responsories, though.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Thank you dvalerio. Finally I was able to navigate the site. I agree, I found some resposories with St. Gall, but none for Mass.
    Gregor und Taube is wonderful. But why they dont' use or indicate St. Laon? It seems that Cardine indicated in the Semiology book that St. Laon is also very valuable. (or even more accurate with the size of the neum and all.)
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    In the files available at Gregor und Taube, the melodies follow the Proposals for the restoration of melodies in the Graduale Romanum by Rupert Fischer, Luigi Agustoni, Johannes Berchmans Göschl, Liobgid Koch, Heinrich Rumporst, Alexander M. Schweitzer, Stephan Zippe, Inga Behrendt, Franco Ackermans, Bernard Huber, Joseph Kohlhäufl, and I hope I did not forget anyone (not everybody worked in all the 25 or so parts published till now).

    Why the Saint Laon neums are not included, and only those of Saint Gall are, is a question you would do better to ask Anton Stingl jun. directly; I do not see anything in his site justifying that option.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    I choose to use St. Gall neumes with my ensemble simply because I think they are more intuitive, more closely related to the square notes that are largely derived from them, and therefore easier to read. They are also simple to write and closely follow the movement of the conductor's hand. As a director, I consult the Laon notation, when possible, to give me more insight into interpretation of the St. Gall neumes (which vary from scribe to scribe and often rely on context for their meaning). I do not, however, ask my singers to read form them, at least not at this point.
Add a Comment