Thanks Jackson. I used Roman tradition melodies instead of Anglican tradition melodies in the introit and Alleluia verses, and the first verse of the Gradual. I figure that people using this are in the Roman/Latin tradition vs the Anglican. Are you ok with that? or do you think I should stick with Burgess' melodies?

Thanks David! That's a fantastic work!

If you do do any further adaptation of the P/B stuff, someone kindly encoded the whole collection into GABC, which you can find on gregobase and github, I believe. That will save you some trouble if you decide to render anything in square note notation anyway.

As for stemless notation, it is certainly my preference (for the little that's worth). I've found that simply grouping them close together under a slur usually renders a nice result. I'm attaching one example here. Really, you can experiment with even tighter spacing if desired / appropriate. The fact remains that you can't "neumify" modern notation, although you can still get close enough for government work.

One reason I personally advocate for stemless is that it removes the temptation to apply particular rhythmic interpretation. It's really hard to tell someone to ignore a tone of 8th stems, that they are counseled to pay attention to the rest of the time. (It can also become very cluttered.) Conversely, I've found that when transcriptions are stemless, people approach the music with a more neutral slate, and are more inclined to follow natural speech rhythms because that other superfluous data is stripped away and cannot influence them. Just a thought.

Regardless, the examples you have shared thus far are very nicely done. AND! I really appreciate that you use reciting tones when multiple syllables / words take the same pitch. That is SO MUCH nicer than a bajillion 8th notes all in a row.

EDIT: here's a second example with tighter spacing intended to imitate neume spacing more closely.

That’s why I use the half notehead. Black for short/flowing, white for “long” (appropriate as per context) and then double wholes as reciting tones. Something about the bars/wings on the sides that make you treat them differently in a chant context.

You know me, I'm a rather [in]famous fan of Dorico... So what I do is:
1. lower the default note spacing for the layout (Dorico has 4 spaces to the quarter for default. Something closer to 2 often works as a good launching point.)
2. I also apply a custom spacing ratio to something low like 1.10, so that noteheads more/less receive the same rhythmic spacing regardless of their value. This is how you end up with a score that allotts equal spacing to black and white noteheads, which is actually what we want in this context.
3. Lastly, I will go into engrave mode and use the note spacing tool, and manually contract each grouping of "neumes" until they look good to the eye. (Mind you, steps 1 and 2 already brought the notes pretty close together, which saves a lot of labor.) I often leave the first note untouched so that there is a larger bit of space between each group, and only contract subsequent notes. You can see the notes I contracted have the red handles in the pic below.

It's all very easy and fluid to do in Dorico because it gives you total control over these parameters (and truly supports open meter, so you don't have to apply a time signature and hide it... rather, you simply plop barlines where you want them. Simple as that.)

I had no idea Bartlett used Lilypond. For the SEP too? I presumed that was some LaTeX stuff.

I experiment with GABC from time to time, including the new S&S editor, but one major gripe I have with GABC defaults is the seemingly arbitrary way it decides when/where to insert hyphens. When you look at the PBC, it is utterly maddening because no one went back and manually normalized where they appear. (My own preference being to add them so that every syllable has them the way modern music does; this makes placement of the syllables more accurate to the neumes for people who aren't familiar with latin and are iffy square note readers, but I digress...)

Nostalgia for the Blue Book! Good work!
I was in a discussion yesterday about the alleged notational illiteracy of S. Texas Hispanic church musicians, and suggested that maybe there needed to be a NO Rossini in Spanish. I hadn't thought of there not being a NO Rossini in English. (Actually, there WAS a Rossini in English, but it was for the transitional Mass.)

Jeffrey, I think a blue book or Rossini in English is an important link in actualizing sung propers.
I bought SEP for my choir this year, but between only 1 person already reading square notes and the other choristers who don’t read any music, SEP is just too much to tackle on a regular basis unless all other choral music is halted.
However, something like this with the same tone every week… we could squeeze this in.

I had no idea Bartlett used Lilypond. For the SEP too? I presumed that was some LaTeX stuff.

SEP was typeset with Gregorio + Illustrator + InDesign

Christmas

Ash Wednesday

Lent 1-5

Trying these now in stemless notation. Been playing a lot of Source and Summit scores this spring and getting used to the clean, spare look of stemless. So I spent some time with Lilypond to try to replicate their results. Not quite as nice as Source and Summit, but at least it looks like it's from the 21st century.

Thoughts?

Wow!!!!!! These settings sing themselves. Ease of reading helps. Thank so much, davido.

Christmas

Ash Wednesday and Lent

Easter Sunday.

Easter 2-6

Yes, I think hyphenation is always a good assist. It seems to me that it is unwise to have some hyphens in some places, but not in others, especially because some could construe it as an error, and it might mislead others.
Carlo Rossini's Propers of the Mass to Psalm Tones is easily adaptable to English... someone did it for the 1965 English Translations. There is more variety in the psalm tones used than in the Burgess.
Bud Clark, whose name still crops up here, advocated using psalm tones selected to match the mode of the item in the Graduale. BTW, he despised the Burgess work.
All this having been said, this is a monumental work, and you are to be thanked for your hard work.

Having reached completion in the arranging/engraving side, I now have run into ICEL copyright. My impression is that distributing this for free on the internet will not trigger any royalty issues with ICEL, but that printing and selling copies would.
Is this true even on a LULU sale at cost?

Thanks. Thats the answer I was afraid of.