Psalm tone endings
  • love_to_sing_psalms
    Posts: 22
    What is the purpose/application for the alternate endings of the various Gregorian Psalm tones? Does anyone really know for sure?
    -Are they designed to fit the various syllabic endings within a Psalm and may be draw upon as best fits the text of a given line?
    -Are they intended to create various emotional expression that matches the mood/thought of the lyrics?
    -Are they variations, a couple of which are to be chosen for each Psalm based on the overall mood of the Psalm as a whole?
    --O what basis are they chosen?
    The first would be my inclination, yet this does not seem to be how I have heard them or seen them used.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Thomas_Mary
    Posts: 73
    +
    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    The ending of the psalm tone should have a natural flow into the antiphon so that the transition is pleasing and easy to sing.

    That is precisely the reason for the different endings. Well said.
    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,768
    It makes sense of the endings being specified together with the antiphons in books like the Liber usualis. The other method is to use Euouae, q. v.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen love_to_sing_psalms
  • love_to_sing_psalms
    Posts: 22
    Are we sure the antiphons were not composed so as to flow naturally out of which ever of the Psalm tone endings the Psalm ended with?
    Theoretically, if the endings were selected phrase by phrase as best fit with the natural syllabification/accentuation of the text, then would not antiphons be composed accordingly to flow naturally from whichever ending fit the last line of each Psalm?
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,768
    I would guess it has never occurred to singers to switch the endings for each verse. How would the leader communicate the choices?
    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • love_to_sing_psalms
    Posts: 22
    Many have suggested, the Gregorian tones came to us from the the Jews as was used in the synagogues. (The Masorites eventually employed or developed cantilation marks to point the Hebrew text and, from what I understand, there are hand signs that correspond). Perhaps hand signals could be employed.
  • Thomas_Mary
    Posts: 73
    +
    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • PhatFlute
    Posts: 219
    why have some tones have upper-case characters and some have lower-case characters for endings?

    thanks, Ph
    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • Protasius
    Posts: 468
    The letter corresponds to the last note of the ending. If there are several endings finishing on the same tone, there has to be some indication of the difference.
    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • JonathanKKJonathanKK
    Posts: 542
    The upper-case is used if the psalm tone ends on the final of the mode.
    If it doesn't, the letter is lower-case.
    That is why you have 8G, but 1f.
    Thanked by 3CHGiffen love_to_sing_psalms Richard Mix
  • JonathanKKJonathanKK
    Posts: 542
    love_to_sing_psalms:

    The whole point of the psalm tones is that you have a single formula which is used for each verse.

    In contrast, your idea of a collection of formulas being adapted to a text based on the number of syllables as well as mood/affect is rather descriptive of any number of pieces like Credo I or the tract Qui habitat, which are composed in this (at times, very) flexibly-formulaic way.



    Thanked by 1love_to_sing_psalms
  • love_to_sing_psalms
    Posts: 22
    JohnathanKK, Is the formula for composing in this manner written down anywhere? Is there a source from which I might be able to study about this?
    Is there are reason this kind of composing is done for traditional and contemporary liturgical compositions, but not for the Psalms? Can the formula be applied to prose?
  • love_to_sing_psalms
    Posts: 22
    PS, why are there so many alternate endings for some tones and so few for others?
  • JonathanKKJonathanKK
    Posts: 542
    Do realize that the formulaic "psalm tones" are used for chanting the divine office, where the intent is to sing all 150 psalms every week. In the office, you need to sing the psalms to a strict formula both for the sake of time and for ease of learning.

    On the other hand, scholars have made the observation that the "through-composed" pieces of chant tend to use something of a vocabulary of phrases.

    The process by which these pieces seem to have been made is called "centonization" in the books I've read.

    The idea of "centonization" is useful, because it gives you a clue about how to analyze chant; now we can all go home and look for the patterns, the parts, the formulaic gestures.

    However, I'd guess the only people who really compose chant this way nowadays are people having to come up with English versions of chants. That, and this must have been how the monks came up with the few "inauthentic" (recently composed) chants, such as the introit Signum magnum or the propers for the feast of St. Therese as found in the Liber Usualis.

    But I'd expect that in both these cases the composers are/were guided by the results of lots of analyses.

    Vale in Domino,
    Jonathan

    P.S. Regarding the numbers of endings, I'd expect that you'd have to do a survey of how antiphons in the different modes begin. My hypothesis would be that a mode whose psalm tone had fewer variant endings (like mode 2) would have fewer ways of beginning an antiphon.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen love_to_sing_psalms
  • SkirpRSkirpR
    Posts: 854
    The upper-case is used if the psalm tone ends on the final of the mode.
    If it doesn't, the letter is lower-case.
    That is why you have 8G, but 1f


    Just as an fyi, Solesmes has abandoned this practice in their recent Antiphonals. All termination letters are now given in lower-case.
    Thanked by 3JonathanKK CHGiffen love_to_sing_psalms
  • love_to_sing_psalms
    Posts: 22
    Wow! Thanks Jonathan, for the insight, the links and the overview!
Add a Comment