(Bumping now that it isn't the busiest time of the year.)

Any thoughts on this?
Anyone planning to use it next year?

I listened to the audio sample you provided and I know it says "relaxed" but I think your tempo is too relaxed.

> I listened to the audio sample you provided and I know it says "relaxed" but I think your tempo is too relaxed.

I slowed the sample down so it was easier to listen to the harmonies.

OH ALSO, you should totally program this for Easter

> switching alto and tenor

i definitely agree with this.

---
BUT

okay so i guess my big question here is:
Is the key change just here at the end cheesy and on the nose, or is it - as i am hoping - a beautiful musical expression of Christ's rising, and a fitting end to the piece?

Adam,
I haven't looked at in tremendously great detail, but it seems that the key change is gratuituous --- what you called "cheesy and on the nose". Mind you, the vertical presentation before the key change is jarring to my ear. Is this intentional?

Programming it for Eastertide this year---perhaps at May Crowning Mass.

Also, is it possible to extract the Alleluia (quoting the [in]famous mode vi Antiphon) for use as the Communion Antiphon (or, rather, in my place, the Vespers Antiphon) at the Easter Vigil?

Oh - and if there is any way you could make a recording of the whole piece, I would very much appreciate it.

On a piano in the lobby of building 1900 at the Googleplex, in the middle of the night.

This is true. Though I believe what I included is a complete and correct utterance in Latin.

(Not that it matters, I don't think I like it.)

UPDATED:
Here is a recording with actual singers.

https://adammichaelwood.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/regina-caeli-vocal-rough.mp3

Also, ignore the antiphon stuff in the above comments.

something like this might work -- I'd want, given the alleluia following, TWO alleluias to give a balanced beginning!

Not at all -- but that the individual part must be 'perfect' and the whole must be understandable.

Oh, also - did you like, generally?

Well, bar lines do change things. In the recording, the soprano's "LI" fades away and the bass "NA" marks the bar ..
Do you think the accented "GI" of "Regina" in your chant excerpt indicates a rhythmic accent, or a vowel pronunciation? In modern terms, it would look like a 3 4 bar with the second note as the second scale step and an unaccented neighbor, followed by another 3 4 bar with the "LI" of "Caeli" as an unaccented harmony tone with the "CAE" the accented appoggiatura. That interpretation supports the dot on the note .. but does not support a rhythmic accent.
I'm not ignoring your question "do you like it?" but that's always a difficult question to answer .. I like bits of the melody and don't like that the setting seems sometimes to detract from the beauty of moments of melody or note combinations.

again I appreciate your engagement with my work, but I wonder if your contemporary-music context makes it difficult to get what I'm going for with the chant rhythm.

honestly, I think I was successful (more or less) on what I was trying to do, and where I think I could use the most help/development as a composer is the harmony, and so would appreciate critique/advice on that aspect in particular. It is my weakest skill, and what I was attempting in this piece was really on the edge of what I am capable of.

About the barring: Where the difficulty seems to be is with the first two bars, after that you seem to be barring based on the musical-textual accents of the Soprano, but in the first two bars you go against the bar. I would suggest altering the barring there to match the rest of the piece, which will make the accents line up. Also, have you considered using Mensurstriche as is sometimes used in early music? This might also be a graphical solution.

> the upper voice has an e flat and the lower voice has an e natural,

That bit is not part of the composition any more.

> Where the difficulty seems to be is with the first two bars

I think part of the difficulty here is that I originally wrote this harmonization with an English adaptation, which was *close enough* that it convinced me this was fine. But the accent was slightly different:
"O Quee--en of Heav'n" - pushing the accent to the last beat (where "-li" is)

However: even that was a concession because I originally had:
O Queen of Heav-en

which - IN THEORY - has the same accent pattern as "Regina Caeli", BUT
doesn't work with the original chant because, without bars or etc,
the tune itself puts a "li" on an strong accent,
but you don't notice it because:
- chant frequently subverts textual accents in order to even out the line
- many flavors of chant performance practice try to have no accents at all
- you're not trying to critique

So: in my opinion, the rhythm/accent I have above is essentially a direct quote from the chant. The recording above is how I intend it to sound, but that was communicated to the performers not just through the score but also in conversation and rehearsal. So, the relevant question is: would re-barring or otherwise changing the score make the intention more clear?


> Mensurstriche

I thought about this approach, as the "barlines don't actually matter" was kind of what I wanted. But I thought it would just make things more confusing for the people most likely to sing this (amateur church choirs).



> Hugo Distler's approach to this sort of notation might work better, Adam. If you're not familiar with his works,

Very curious, please.

Also, i did a quick Google search and I think now I'm going to say him when people ask me who my celebrity look-alike is. (I wish I was as skinny as he is, but it's the current year, so whatever)


---

Still curious if anyone has thoughts, critiques, or advice about the harmony/counterpoint. And the actual way the piece sounds.