Plainsong Accompaniment by J.H. Arnold
  • angelgirl1151
    Posts: 53
    Does anyone have this book as a full PDF with all 175 pages? None of the online marketplaces are selling the blue cover edition and I can't seem to find my copy..
  • Paul_OnnonhoaratonPaul_Onnonhoaraton
    Posts: 434
    try jeandelelande.org
  • Jeffrey CogginsJeffrey Coggins
    Posts: 360
    The link above doesn't work.

    http://jeandelalande.org/HOME/OrgAcc_TREATISE.htm

    http://jeandelalande.org/UPLOAD_to_LALANDE_LIBRARY/g2gO_54.pdf
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    Working fine at 2:46 Sunday.
  • Jeffrey CogginsJeffrey Coggins
    Posts: 360
    There's an "e" instead of an "a" in the first one.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    these are great.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    'Forgive us Lord, for we have sinned: we have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep, we have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts, and there is no health in us: strengthen us, we beseech thee, that we may no longer burden and debase thy sacred chant with all manner of unseemly accompaniments while pretending that no harm is done because they are only on quiet 8 ft stops, and, are so seemly and discreet that they do not impede the natural flow of the chant... even though we all know that, just the same, they do just that.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    mjo... you are too funny. a purist to the nth degree.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Thanks for the riposte, Francis.
    To be called a purist is a high compliment, for it indicates that one is well schooled in our various musics in their classic form and use that understanding in our approach to all performance, even though we do not always necessarily hie to the letter of the law.
    We should all be purists, meaning that if we expect to excell in composition we are masters of XVI century counterpoint even though we don't write purely in that manner any more, except possibly for some effect (or affect). The same goes for the other arts: painting, literature, what have you... no one is any greater than the depth of his grasp of what the Masters did and how they did it.

    On another level, I am not a categorical purist. I can think of many imaginative ways of accompanying chant on the organ or otherwise, accompaniment that would be radically different than the syrupy droning of an 8' bourdon (&! maybe even a 4'!). If one insists on accompanying, then one should let his creative genie loose and improvise a stunning, glorious toccata-like texture in which the sacred chant is enshrined. This is much more honest (not to mention Less Boring and Non-Syrupy and [most of all] less emotionally sterilised!) than those moaning rhythm-destroying catafalks of the soul of chant which some seem to find great pleasure in muddling the chant with.

    I'm sure, though, my good colleague, that you have noticed that those who accompany chant do so for only one reason: they like it. Arguments as to the propriety or impropriety of doing so are all moot. They like it because of things and places that it evokes in their minds, and because, to them, the chant is somehow not whole without their accompaniment.

    And! You, too, are too funny, because I rather believe that you know better.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    MJO... more of my thoughts on purism.

    "Well, I am such a purist that I require a gothic acoustic to sing chant, and therefore, I won't sing it at all unless I have the right building." (TIC)

    Point being, when does being a purist get in the way of reality, or better said, at what point does unfettered theory and philosophical bearing begin to override and even suppress the very practice that it originally espoused? Is not all human invention art of some form? How can one say that a particular art has 'arrived' at its perfect form? Is not all art imperfect? Even the chant (although divinely perfect in many ways)?

    Perhaps purism is actually the philosophy of reducing a practice, an artform, or a craft to the very essence of hoping to define how it originally came into being? How was Gregorian chant ORIGINALLY sung? No one knows. So, since we don't really know, we then create a false purism called 'authentic period instruments'. I hope you don't play any Renaissance music without those!

    Hmmm... na... I never bought into that one either. The church is living and ever changing in her practice and traditions, (I prefer to call it growing and maturing), and what was practiced in the 1200's isn't what was practiced in the 1400's. I compose music in the 21st century style, however I build them on the tradition, rules and practices of the Church's patrimony throughout the ages. It's the thread of continuity that carries us on into the future of the new with profound respect and honour of the past.

    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
Add a Comment