Salva nos, Domine (Charles H. Giffen)
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    Since sometime in January, I have been working on a Latin setting of the antiphon Salva nos, Domine for Compline, having previously composed an English setting "Preserve us, O Lord" several years ago. I had made a more-or-less direct Latin version from the English version but was not entirely satisfied with it.

    The new Latin setting represents a considerable reworking of music of the English setting, and I think it is a much better work (I'm not sure when or if I'll rework the English setting). At any rate, here is the new Latin setting (just finished last night) in both SATB and ATBarB a cappella versions. Comments welcome.
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-SATB.pdf
    76K
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-ATBB.pdf
    77K
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-SATB-a.mp3
    2M
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-ATBB-a.mp3
    2M
    Thanked by 2PhilipPowell Chris Garton-Zavesky
  • liampmcdonough
    Posts: 283
    I really like it. It has some nice harmonic moments in it; I especially like the harmonic progression into the second page.

    Some thoughts:

    1-I think the syllabification might sound better in the ensemble if the altos matched the tenors at their parallel phrases in the 1st measure.
    2-To my ear the c on b1 of m2 in the bass is harsh, especially jumping to the 9th with the tenors. If I were to edit this I would keep the basses on the G in b1 and then move to c on beat 2. Another version I like would have the sopranos move to c on b6 of measure 1. If this was changed then I'd have the basses walk stepwise down to a g on b1 of m2. Just an idea that played well for me.

    3-The direct 5th at the last beat of m7 in the Tenor and Bass sounds to angular to me and sticks out

    4-I don't like the leap of a fourth in the tenor at the cadence in M5 b2, and would consider keeping the tenor on A or formulating 1st inversion chord with the f# in the bass

    5-I like the resolution of the alto to A on the final cadence, with the tenors falling to the F; this sounds more elegant to me.

    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    Here is a revision based (mostly) on @liampmcdonough's thoughts. Specifically:

    1 - The syllabification issue was an oversight and has been corrected.

    2 - I wasn't totally happy with my original and the idea of having the sopranos move up a step going into the final beat of m2 had not occurred to me. I've made that change (and the corresponding change in the stepwise descending bass part in m1. But I also felt it necessary to change the melisma in the soprano and alto parts at the beginning of m2 (otherwise they would be dropping down a fourth at the beginning of m2).

    3 - I wasn't particularly bothered by the direct 5th in the tenor on beat 6 of m7, but it seemed more an effect of the upward leap of a fourth from beat 5 to beat 6. My solution has been to change raise beat 5 of the tenor part in m7 up a fifth (a step above the note in beat 6). The resulting upward leap of a fourth from beat 4 to beat 5 is much less offensive, since the leap is up to the octave above the already sounding bass note.

    4 - I took the first inversion route, although that also entails changing the alto note on beat 2 of m5.

    5 - I don't like the final chord missing the fifth, so I didn't take up this suggestion. I did make a slightly different change in the last measure (3 beats instead of the two on the penultimate syllable - which was actually in the original - and an extra note in the alto part).

    X - I also changed the tenor melisma on the word "in" in the penultimate measure, thus avoiding a clash between the tenor and soprano in beat 3 of that measure.

    Thanks for the suggestions (much appreciated!), and I hope my revisions are satisfying enough.
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-SATB-x.pdf
    76K
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-SATB-x.mp3
    2M
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-ATBB-x.pdf
    77K
    Giffen-Salva nos, Domine-2022-ATBB-x.mp3
    2M
    Thanked by 1liampmcdonough
  • achoyce91
    Posts: 167
    When the music decrescendos at m4 and crescendos back up (m5) is a particularly intriguing moment. The harmonies are quite pleasant. Good work! And I love the music analysis going on here! Maybe that's normal for this part of the forum. I'm new.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • achoyce91
    Posts: 167
    The B natural on Beat 2 of measure 7 is really nice. The second recording sounds substantially better. More reverb?
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    Thank you for your kind words, #achoyce !! I think the second recording benefits from the lower tessitura (I think the reverb settings were the same).
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    Howells, in slow motion?
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    Howells? ... which setting(s)?
  • achoyce91
    Posts: 167
    Howells! I was listening to Hymnus Paradisi today and following along with the score! Greatest sacred work of all time? Or tied with Pange Lingua?
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    It reminds me of the opening section of A Spotless Rose, actually. Lush harmonies, even in small choirs, and an undulating quality to it.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
Add a Comment