Editions of the Roman Gradual
  • SteveOttomanyi
    Posts: 41
    I am seeking feedback from directors who regularly use some edition of the Roman Gradual (the straight 1974 edition, the Triplex, the Novum, the Restitutum, etc.).

    We are finally restarting choirs and I'm unsure which edition--if any--I should purchase for our choir. Some choirs use photocopies, and others use the books. I'd like to know what yous guys have done.

    Things to consider (at least, the few that have occurred to me): size of type (the older I get the smaller it seems to get); the weight of the book; the potentially daunting appearance of the text, and overall ease of use.

    A particular question is whether to purchase, for the rank-and-file choir members, the 1974 Graduale Romanum or the Graduale Triplex. I will be instructing the choir according to the Rhetorical Method, which involves a study of the interpretation of the multitude of firugæ in modis, so that, as a general rule, they will know how to sing melodic figuræ when they encounter them. In that sense, they may not need the Triplex, but I kind of like the idea of having it. But there is a significant price difference, and I would want to be certain the Triplex would be worth the considerable additional expense.

    As for the Graduale Restitutum, I am very tempted to use it--the price is certainly right--but the photocopies are a pain, and there is also the small difference between holding a well-bound book and a binder of photocopies. Also, the restored text is sometimes jarring to me, and I don't always agree with it--in particular, the many "restorations" of the B in mode III and IV--but I digress. The positive is that there are many texts that make much more sense and align properly with the adiastematic manuscripts, and it is more of a performing edition than other.

    I appreciate any pertinent input--my thanks in advance.
  • trentonjconn
    Posts: 648
    Speaking as a rank amateur, I have always found three ring binders with printouts of the relevant music, in order, to be easiest. This way, there is no switching between a kyriale, gradual, hymnal and whatever scores one uses for motets. Everything is free, everything is in the order in which it needs to be, the texts and notes can be enlarged, etc. I appreciate the heft and beauty and tradition of using actual texts, but practically speaking it would seem binders with disposable contents are simplest and most user-friendly. Just my two cents.
    Thanked by 1SteveOttomanyi
  • JonLaird
    Posts: 246
    Steve,

    I posted a question recently to see how many other forum users refer to adiastematic editions on a regular basis as a performing edition, and as you will see there, there are strong negative opinions concerning such editions. Consider that fair warning about some other responses you may receive.

    At a previous parish, for a while my schola used the Gregorian Missal. This was great because it is a beautiful edition, and the repertoire at that particular mass was 100% contained in that one book.

    Later we transitioned to using Graduale Restitutum scores, and I began something like what's known as the rhetorical method, although I was not aware of such a method at the time -- in fact, your mentioning it is the first I've heard of it given a name. My main point, which my singers are surely tired of hearing, is to read and sing the neumes as gestures rather than concatenations of individual notes. Our experience is that this produces a distinctive lively result that vivifies both text and music. My main hesitation about this particular edition is the same as yours, as well as the fact that the translations are all in German, and with one or two exceptions my choristers know neither Latin nor German.

    At the moment we are in somewhat of a transition phase which I will not detail here, and we are not using the Graduale Restitutum scores. I am getting most scores from GregoBase and printing them with the translation at the bottom. It happens that, thanks to nabc, some scores there are Triplex transcriptions. I print those when available, and for others I instruct an interpretation as appropriate.
    Thanked by 2SteveOttomanyi Andrew_Malton
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,936
    Just to be clear: are you novus ordo or vetus ordo? If novus, then I'd recommend the gregorian missal since it includes some translations which are very useful for laypeople.

    I have the novum; it's OK, but not my favorite. I despise the triplex, not because of the St. Gall markings, but because the current reprints are terrible. The binding of all three books are fine, but the triplex is a low-quality scan that is printed very "fuzzy". Some of the markings in the margins are clearly written in ballpoint pen, and then the whole annotated copy was scanned in low resolution and then printed poorly. It's a shame that so much scholarship should go into that book and it just looks like crap. Couple in all the markings that very few people actually know how to interpret, I'd avoid it for a normal choir. Specialist schola, perhaps, but general choir: no.
    Thanked by 2SteveOttomanyi tomjaw
  • GambaGamba
    Posts: 552
    I do not want to disparage the many wonderful things shown by the additional notations in the Triplex, but I would vote for the straight GR for any program that includes volunteers and/or has a quick turnaround time between liturgies. Certainly for pros trained in semiology or for the purpose of performing The True And Authentic Chant for an academic event, the GrTriplex is invaluable and the GrNovum even better.

    But for volunteers, or for groups that sing weekly or more on minimal rehearsal, I think having the Solesmes rhythmic signs is absolutely essential. They provide a way to get everyone singing approximately the same thing on the first read, and, I’d followed religiously, make explicit one of several acceptable musical interpretations of the chant. Then, the director, armed with their research and consultation with other sources, can tell the singers which dots to modify, which quilismae to add, and so on to reach the desired goal, but there is not the blank-slate, all-notes-equal presentation of the newer books.

    The additional signs in the Triplex also eat up the space volunteers need to pencil in their personal notes (“look up”, “faster”, “hold”, “not loud”, that sort of silly thing).

    A church where I worked had the Gregorian Missal for the choir (and people). That was really wonderful, but we kept running into situations where we needed chants it did not contain (Votive of BVM in X season, ordination, Missae pro diversis, weekday Mass on a special parochial or school occasion, etc.) So I regularly had to hand out xeroxes of extra chants, which then would get lost next time such an event happened, etc. With the GR, you have just about everything, and only have to xerox on the rare occasion that the textus receptus of a given chant is so corrupted that one simply must sing from a new edition, or to add psalm verses to something.

    The Gregorian Missal’s translations are indeed handy, but I always distributed simple lists to the Schola of the chants we would be singing for each Mass, which eventually would be retyped into orders of service for the people. It is pretty simple and quick just to throw the translations on such a sheet and ask them to pencil them into the book.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,936
    The additional signs in the Triplex also eat up the space volunteers need to pencil in their personal notes (“look up”, “faster”, “hold”, “not loud”, that sort of silly thing).
    Very true. It's a very cluttered layout. The editors should have nearly doubled the spacing between staves from what it is currently.
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 690
    No matter what source i tend to print things out for myself so that my poor older eyes can see quickly and clearly on a nice letter-sized page and so I can mark up my copy without scribbling in a nice book. Some people i sing with rely on their phones or ipads, using apps like Square Notes. Or reading off an arrangement the director emailed to us using the screen (if they don't have a printer).
Add a Comment