Rules for propers - psalm verses need help
  • gcasa
    Posts: 13
    Hi, I am setting the propers of the GR on the vernacular (not english) and I use the ornate/solemn gregorian tones for the antiphon and the simple ones for the psalm verses (I took the psalms from the SEP) but I am not sure if I should write the intonation for the psalm verses only for the first one or I can write the intonation for the simple tone for each verse?

    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Ant

    or

    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Ant
    Psalm verse without intonation
    Ant

    case 2.

    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Psalm verse without intonation
    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Psalm verse without intonation
    Ant

    or

    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Psalm verse intonated
    Ant
    Psalm verse intonated
    Psalm verse intonated
    Ant

    Thank you for answers in advance.
    Thanked by 1Kathy
  • You can actually do any of those ideas and they will work. To save yourself the time, you only really need to write out an example intonation once, and then it is assumed (at least in the LU) that the example applies for all of the text that follows. You still have to point the text, though, so make sure to be careful in doing so to ensure that they will work for your chosen termintation formula.

    I'm doing something similar: I am using the antiphons from SEP, then chanting the verses using Gregorian psalm tones from the LU. Of course, I have to repoint the text.
  • gcasa
    Posts: 13
    @ClergetKubisz
    Yes, that was the idea to write in the manner that you described.
    I am asking it because when I chant the office it is done in this way...
    Ant.
    intonted psalm verse
    other psalm verses without the intonation
    Ant.
    I have consulted the Ordo cantus missae but nothing is spoken on this subject.
  • If you are seeking to publish, I'd urge you to reconsider. What you are asking is allowable, though perhaps inadvisable, especially in a bound collection. It gives the impression that all one needs to do is sing the texts (in translation) to Gregorian patterns.

    Form matters, as you understand since you asked the question. On a bigger level of form, the office should sound different than the sacred liturgy, our highest prayer. The two have always been musically differentiated for good reason.
    Thanked by 2Ben Yanke CHGiffen
  • gcasa
    Posts: 13
    @MaryAnn Carr Wilson
    I am asking this beacuse in st. Peter Basilica there is a use of chanting the Antiphon from the GR and the psalm verses in the solemn or simple tone according to the compatible mode.

    I am fully aware of that problem but in a country where the propers haven`t been chanted in any form (on parish levels) for 50 years it is a good start.

    I am asking for the preferable/permissible mode of chanting because I have a particular case where I have an entrance procession for an ordination and it could take some time so I have to add the psalm between the antiphons if it was a shorter procession I would use the metod of the Rossini`s propers - Antiphon and psalm verses on the solemn psalm tones for the introit.
  • I'm aware of the use at St. Peter's and beyond. The psalm tones are used to extend the Introit (or Communion) because the litirgical action takes more time. One hears the antiphon and the psalm tone, alternating. Of course.

    But to have only psalm tones used for a long time, especially in the case of an ordination, would get tedious pretty quickly. Sure, it's better than a lot of things that could be sung. But it's still not a great idea, and it gives fuel to those who claim that Gregorian chant is boring.
  • gcasa
    Posts: 13
    @MaryAnn Carr Wilson
    We are going off topic, because I have asked if it was permissible and which of the proposed option is the best one to use.

    Put yourself into my place and give me an answer what to do: You are in a country where nobody used the GR since the council and almost nothing has been translated of the gregorian patrimony but only some hymns. Latin is almost never used and if it is used it always ignite a fire on the question of preconciliar liturgy. During the solemn liturgies for the proper there are only national popular compostions of religious chant. The gregorian chant is only heard when there is a sequence, adoro te devote or tantum ergo or some seasonal hymn. And now in this ambient trying to introduce a full chanted GR introit is not an option. To make something like SEP needs a lot of time and scholarship. I don`t see a better option than to use harmonised or solo gregorian propers set on solemn or simple psalm tones to introduce more gregorian chant. If you can suggest a better option I am listening.
  • Gcasa,
    Sincerely, I do not mean to be discouraging of your efforts in general.
    I have been in the situation where more solemnity is called for and yet Gregorian chant is still not desired. I've also been in the situation where organizers do not want Latin but would like simplified chants in the vernacular.

    As to time and compositnal ability, I do have some suggestions for you. In order to avoid a texture (psalm tone only) that is too plain for te solemnity you desire, you might:
    1) ask someone on this forum- one who speaks of is at least familiar with your language- to arrange a simplified introit for you. Many here would do this free of charge. I would also volunteer, and free of charge, especially because this is for an ordination. Then, alternate that arrangement with the psalm tones.
    2) alternate the psalm tones with organ improvisation if your organist is comfortable with that.
    3) choose a dignified vernacular hymn, and then use the psalm tone proper when the ministers reach the sanctuary.
  • In order to give strong roots to sacred music reform, I think it's vital to introduce chant in a way that is inspiring. If it is too simple, or too redundant, we run the risk of people being turned off. It happens a lot. I have heard statements like this from the faithful-
    "If this is all it is, why can't we sing hymns?"
    "Is it always this slow/ repetitive/ boring?"
    If you are using vernacular adaptations to transition slowly to Gregorian chant- and this is fully allowable in the OF, and it's working in many places, then it's best to introduce chants that are beautiful and musically substantial and that sound as close as possible to Gregorian chant.

    On a psychological level, we are taking something away from many of the faithful when we stop using everything they are used to. I think it's worth using caution to carefully substitute things they will still find beautiful and substantial.

    Said another way- when considering the propers, we need to go beyond utility and strive for beauty, even when it is simple beauty.
  • I'm not sure what country you're in but it sounds an awful lot like our situation in Quebec. Our schola does do Gregorian chant from the GR (once a month at different parishes), except we do the responsorial psalm instead of the Gradual, and we do it in French which is our vernacular. We face the same hostility as you do with regards to Latin, chant, pre-Vatican II, blablabla. Fortunately we have found some parishes willing to risk hearing us. We do the Ordinary Form Mass exclusively (more because that's all there is in the small city that we're located).

    That said, have you considered the option of the following the Graduale Simplex instead of the GR? The antiphons are much simpler (along the lines of the Divine Office), and the psalm tones are the simple ones for the psalm verses. So you have a somewhat more ornate melody for the antiphon (but not as much as the antiphons in the GR) and simpler psalmody. There's still a contrast, and the melody of the antiphon may be much easier to adapt to the vernacular.

    If you do follow the Simplex, the formula follows your first example.