Medicea!

I'm not sure it's fair to suggest that all CMAA publications are old/classic/whatever Solesmes.

And thank you for hearing my real questions, which are what sounds best? What works best?

Just FYI : at the past Colloquia, there have been three semiologists on faculty: Jeffrey Morse, Charles Cole, and Edward Shaffer; and other people include elements of semiology in the basic framework of the OSM, such as Dr. Mahrt.

I suppose that one of the things that OSM has going for it for beginners is a standardized method of conducting -- as modern music does. Morse, Cole, and Shaffer, while all completely clear in their execution and intent, have completely different methods of directing, which could potentially be confusing for a chant novice used to modern music.

Perhaps "Non-Solesmes Method" would work, too.

Such is the nature of people who hate.
Hate is hate.
It is fundamentally irrational.
It doesn't discriminate, nor can it.
Those who hate are to be pitied.

As one priest said about chant, "I hate that music. It makes my toes curl."

Told this story a million times. Before an ACDA convention, spent a couple of hours drinking Scotch and bs-ing with Roger Wagner. Asked him about all those rules in the preface to the Liber Usualis, said "...how does one interpret all that?"

Roger was VERY clear: "Sing it as though it were MUSIC."

Between that advice and understanding the pre-eminence of the Word (text), it becomes a lot easier to understand/sing, and easier to impart to singers, too. To the 'text' end, one might have a copy of Solesmes' Gregorian Missal handy; very good translations of the Propers. Yes, it also helps to know some Latin.

If a congregation can handle an occasional episema or quilisma, then certainly a schola can hande a salicus!

It's not about if they can - it's about if they should.

Musical. Sing it as a prayer. Don't over complicate what is so profoundly simple and natural.

This is the same as asking "which crucifix is more correct?" How far should the knees of the corpus extend from the cross? How many thorns should grace that crown? Should the left foot be nailed atop the right or vice versa.

Dont strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. In childlike fashion give praise to the Almighty with a pure heart from which comes a pleasing voice.

I'm confused, Charles - is the, um, Latin theology the gnat or the camel?

Not purple enough, @CharlesW.

Kathy, are you trying to stir turds? ;-) My take-

Old Solesmes – by this I take it to mean the practical ideas of Dom Mocquereau including further and continual development by Gajard and others until about the early 1960s or so at which point all hell broke loose. I consider this http://media.musicasacra.com/books/applied_course_chant_carroll.pdf to represent it at near its most developed point. Some associate certain practices of Justine Ward with it such as counting 2s/3s (I believe this is Wardian I havn’t found evidence otherwise) I don’t consider this part of the method. Mocquereau himself was a musicologist/scholar on one hand and a musician on the other. His research is distinct from his practical method. In ‘old-Solesmes’ I find a practical way of harmonizing the different structural elements of the chant, paleographical/neum shape information, melodic movement, textual structure into a cohesive whole; it took me a long time to understand the underlying ideas.

anti-Solesmes – I don’t know what you mean? Early-mid 20th century pre-Mocquereau style anti-neo(old) Solesmes? Germanic anti-French resistance to Solesmes? More recent musicological ‘it’s obsolete’ anti-Solesmes

New Solesmes – Is what? Trying to incorporate recent musicological theory’s is fine but also to a degree a million things to a million different people. If we are talking about Cardine, well I think he is misrepresented. His research seemed to be concerned with proving, finally and decisively, that the rhythm of chant comes from the text and different neums don’t have fixed time values. Also, finding the most accurate interpretation of neums and standardizing them,( repercussion always on the strophae for example) and implementing them in actual performance. I think he succeeded at the first he wanted others to continue his work with the second but it seems to have been abandoned.

The Eternal Question- where will you spend eternity? Hopefully chant interpretation choices are of minimal impact on the outcome.

Which sounds the best? What kind of "best?" – Rather subjective, There are good and beautiful as well as poor performances from the various schools of interpretation. In my personal opinion well executed “old Solesmes” and “new Solesmes” are nearly nose to nose. Newer is maybe just a little more free and expressive, hard to get that slight edge cohesive enough with a group of ordinary non-pro folk though.

Which is best for teaching a beginning schola? - I think that the leader of a new schola should get familiar with “old Solesmes” (even if they don’t prefer it they should understand what it is at the least) and get to where the principals are understood. I don’t think the ordinary singer needs to know much about it, I don’t think that counting rhythms are of strict necessity. For new scholas I feel the most important skills to develop are use of solfege and good vocalization (pronunciation, phrasing and accentuation) of Latin.
Why?- 1. The leader of a schola will only benefit from understanding the different elements at play in the chant and how they interact. 2. Standardized treatment of neums. 3. It’s a systematic approach. 4. A new schola will start off with syllabic and neumatic chants all that is necessary for beautiful coherent performance is good phrasing and accentuation of the text ( I have yet to encounter any adherents of “old Solesmes” who mark up syllabic chants with ictuses). Good vocalization of the text is a prerequisite for decent performance regardless of interpretive school.

Which is best for leading a congregation that is chanting, for example an ordinary or the Adoro Te? - Rote.
Why?- They learn by rote imitating the choir, however the choir sings it, that’s it. What else realistically would you have them do?

Which is best for a schola singing by itself, for example an Offertory? – Either, ‘Old-Solesmes’ or a responsible Semiological approach are good. I have come to conclude that ‘old Solesmes’ has an edge. It depends somewhat on situation and preferences. I would advocate that “OS” is the better choice.
Why?- It is a system. My schola of ordinary people and mixed ability/experience can learn a new offertory (or Gradual or comparable level chant) to an at least acceptable level in 15-20 minutes. I can conduct on the fly without much, if any, preliminary work. If one adds over the next couple of weeks a couple of additional rehearsals the music becomes internalized and more polished, nuance can be incorporated and refined. It is my opinion that a practical approach is necessary to restore chant to actual liturgical practice and that being excessively scholarly limits the chant in actually getting out into the world.

Which is best for a solo singer?- A free flowing expression of the text, study of the paleography can really bring out wonderful nuance and expression. This involves trial and error feeling out of the music from the page and giving it life.
Why?- it is most expressive, fluid and free which is also most beautiful. It is considerably easier for a soloist to do this than a group.

Thank you M. Jackson Osborn.

Yes I think we could have an interesting conversation... I believe we have bumped noses on this subject on here in the past and I remember feeling somewhat misunderstood, of course this medium has it's limits for exchanging ideas.

I think that if the collapse hadn't happened in the 60s the 'method' (I think 'system' is more accurate than 'method) would have continued to develop organically. Perhaps Cardine's work would have shaped it, I don't know.

I am reminded of all those detailed analyses of and debates on How to Chant, published in the early 1960s in the Caecilia and elsewhere. It was like standing on the deck of the Titanic, arguing about which intonation system the orchestra was using.

We know Old Solesmes gives solid musical results (when used by real musicians). I have not heard other methods giving appreciably more musical results. The worst chant tradition is that held by those who are paralyzed by the notion that there's a right and wrong way to sing chant, and are paralyzed by that knowledge into not singing chant at all.

The worst chant tradition is that held by those who are paralyzed by the notion that there's a right and wrong way to sing chant.

Hear, hear!
Those who know it all don't and therefore can't learn it all.
(Pity!)