It would be nice if the actual ℣ and ℟ characters could be used, instead of V. and R.

Otherwise looks excellent. I previously shied away from TAG in favour of Palmer/Burgess mainly because of the five-line notation, so it'll be nice to have the option of either in four-line notation moving forwards.

Well done!

One comment: Do all that you can to keep an entire chant on the same page. For instance, on p. 7 (p. 25 of the PDF) I think you could just push the first line of "Dicite pusillanimes" onto the next page. Those page turns (or having to print out multiple pages for e-editions) can be a real annoyance. You may add 20-30 pages to the book, but well worth it in the long run.

Oh, if I may. Could you include page numbers? Sometimes I need to print single pages and this would be helpful.

@Roborgelmeister: We could make the downloadable PDF have red staff lines. Would that be advantageous?

The graduals & alleluias will follow in another edition; however, bear in mind that there is no “alius cantus aptus” provision in GIRM for the interlectionary chants; thus, I believe that, absent a bishop’s explicit approval, it would be illicit to use English adaptations of those chants in the Mass.

@Heath: I would love to know a way to make Gregorio avoid page turns—at least for the cases where there’s only 1 staff after the page break. I’ll see what I can find.

Is the clef on page 95 incorrect? It looks different than the 5 line staff version.

Bumping this thread to learn the current status of the project.

It's available again:
https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/bruce-e-ford/the-american-gradual-2020-part-i/hardcover/product-124ep6my.html

MJO: I happen to know of two people who are doing some adaptations: A seminarian in Boston who is adapting the Graduals and Alleluias of the "Chants Abgrégés", and I am currently adapting the melismatic Graduals to English. It is being done; it's just slow work.

The problem is that the Graduale Propers are a moot point until ALL missalette, hand-Missal, and hymnal publishers are FORCED to include them in their publications. One of the problems in the non-Ordinariate world is the insistence by some priests that everything come from the missalette du jour, textually and/or musically. This is an hindrance to the restoration of music in the Roman Rite; the other is that the Money Changers (aka "Finance Council") are willing to cough-up money for just about everything except music, this makes the purchasing of books and even the printing of participation aids nigh impossible.

Now, as far as the "problem" with setting the Missal antiphons, particularly in re. Fr. Weber's "Propers", this is a bit of a fallacy.

Firstly, ALL of the Offertory Responsories in Fr. Weber's book are from the Gradual, since the Missal does not contain them.

Second, in a quick perusal of the "Processional" published by the Society of St. Gregory (UK), which includes all of the antiphon texts for the Introit, Offertory, and Communion from both the Gradual AND Missal, about 98% of the Missal Entrance Chants ARE the Introits of the Graduale. This is true, also, of Weber's "Propers", Fr. Kelly's, et al.

The greatest disparity is with Communion Antiphons. While many, particularly during the Seasons, are also from the Gradual, during Ordinary Time, many often are not. This is a two-edged sword. The problem of the Ordo Cantus Missae is that it redistributes the chants of the 1961 Gradual for the new calendar, a further problem is that the 1974 Gradual is a private publication of Solesmes, and so leaves out certain "Neo-Gregorian" pieces. The result of this is that, combined with the three-year Lectionary, the links that *used to* exist between the Communion and the Gospel do not exist, and in some years, certain Communions from the Gradual appear very odd and out of place within the context of the rest of the Sunday formulary. The more general Ordinary Time Communion Antiphons from the Missal, usually taken from Psalm 33(34) or 118(119), are then a welcome alternative---and if one is insistent that only texts from the Gradual be sung, one would substitute one of the Ad. Libitum Eucharistic Antiphons listed in the Gradual.

What I think would complete a volume such as Weber's would be an addendum with the handful of Graduale chants which differ from those of the Missal.

For what it's worth: I almost always use Weber; but if the Gradual lists a specific chant for a certain year of the Lectionary, I use Bartlett's "Simple English Propers", which only set the Graduale texts.

Lulu is offering a 10% discount on printed books this week. The coupon code is LULUFAM10, valid through Oct. 16, 2020.

One of the problems in the non-Ordinariate world is the insistence by some priests that everything come from the missalette du jour, textually and/or musically. This is an hindrance to the restoration of music in the Roman Rite;

I've experienced this as well. Very frustrating. There's a reason I've increasingly turned to worship aids whenever possible the last 5 or so years.

The problem of the Ordo Cantus Missae is that it redistributes the chants of the 1961 Gradual for the new calendar, a further problem is that the 1974 Gradual is a private publication of Solesmes, and so leaves out certain "Neo-Gregorian" pieces. The result of this is that, combined with the three-year Lectionary, the links that *used to* exist between the Communion and the Gospel do not exist, and in some years, certain Communions from the Gradual appear very odd and out of place within the context of the rest of the Sunday formulary.

Bingo. The same is true for some of the other chants, such as a week ago when we had a (seemingly) odd chant about Job at offertory that had no apparent link to any of the readings or other chants. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) I also wonder why certain chants were chosen for certain weeks. Sometimes the follow the gradual, sometimes they don't. Then some modern editions prefer missal "chants" over graduale chants, and the whole thing makes for a confusing mess, especially if you reference more than one resource. Some editions only set year A or option i, and not the others, so if you're trying to genuinely follow the 3 year cycle it's quite difficult. Then there's the issue of the graduals themselves; heaven help you if you'd prefer to sing those (in english) rather than a responsorial psalm. It's a real headache and I don't like it.

Serviam, the Vir Erat has always been such a head-scratcher for me, too. (I never use it any more)

From 11 years ago on this forum:
https://forum.musicasacra.com/forum/discussion/2454/vir-erat/p1

...and scroll down about halfway down this thread for a fruitful(?) discussion on it:
https://forum.musicasacra.com/forum/discussion/14913/a-sorrowful-swansong..../p1

A link between communion chant and gospel reading the old Graduale / lectionary did not happen except perhaps on feasts and Sundays outside of the post-Pentecost cycle (as well as Lenten weekdays), and most of these have been retained in the new Graduale. Others have been added - the Sundays of Lent being a prominent example (e.g. the 2nd Sunday of Lent, where the older communion chant (Intellige) has been replaced by one connected to the gospel (Visionem)).

During Ordinary Time the new Graduale also chooses communions for certain years that match the gospel (e.g. 4th Sunday, Yr. A, from the Beatitudes). So I don't see any days where a link between reading and communion chant has been severed. And if this has happened, it seems it would be the result of changes in the lectionary, not the
Graduale.

Look for them in The Plainchant Gradual, or any collection of Propers for the "Interim Missal" of 1964.

Though the Proper of Time is pretty navigable already, for other chants I had to make start at the Plainchant Gradual index on CPDL. Help is always welcome!

OT 29-32 are explained on their respective pages.