A fun chant exercise
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    I'm going to be giving a one-day workshop to teach a group with no experience reading staffless neumes to sing from 10th c. manuscript notation. I remember my high school English teacher giving us an assignment where we had to write instructions for making a peanut butter sandwich, and then she gave a demonstration where she followed each set of instructions to the letter, often with amusing results. This helped us learn how to communicate more effectively in writing. I came up with a similar exercise for learning to read chant, which I have modified slightly below for the sake of a written (as opposed to workshop) format. I welcome any feedback on its usefulness (for those who dare to give it a try).

    Take a short chant, maybe one that you don't have memorized, and while listening to a recording, take dictation by hand of the melody and rhythm using your own version of the neumes of St Gall. I did this with one of the example recordings from joqueschant.org. If you are not familiar with manuscript notation, you can reproduce almost any melody with some combination of the following symbols:

    / (virga) for a high note (or before a lower note)
    _ (tractulus) for a lower note (or notes in unison)
    . (punctum) a short version of the tractulus
    \ (grave) for considerably lower notes

    However, if you want to be a little more sophisticated in your transcription, you will soon discover when writing that

    / (virga) + \ (grave) = /\ (clivis) for two note descending figure
    \ (grave) + / (virga) = \/ (pes) for two note ascending figure

    and likewise

    /\ (clivis) + / (virga) = /\/ (porrectus)
    \/ (pes) + /\ (clivis) = \/\ (torculus)

    As you write these neumes by hand, you will discover that it is easier and faster to smooth out some of the straight lines so that the clivis and pes become rounded. [For a better idea of what the handwritten form might look like, see the first column of this table]. This will be necessary just to "keep up" with the music. For longer notes you will have time to make straight lines (or maybe even to go back and underline an important note by adding an episema).

    As you have probably guess by now, three notes ascending become ../ (scandicus) and three notes descending /.. (climacus) [in these two examples you will of course when writing by hand be able to write the two dots either ascending or descending].

    Then, would you believe you can have \/.. (pes subbipunctis) ../\ (scandicus resupinus) etc. All of these neumes are made of composites of the same basic shapes. There are a couple of other neumes in St. Gall that offer solutions to certain other notational problems, but I wonder how you would decide to notate them when you hear the melodic passages to which they apply.

    What is there to learn from this? Well, for instance on the question of repercussion: when I compared my transcription to the notation in the Graduale Triplex, I noticed that it differed in certain places. Where the GT showed two separate symbols, I had only written one. When I went back and checked the recording, I heard only one long sound in those places. If I were to sing this chant in a way that would result in the notation that I know exists, my performance might be different. The point, I guess, is that the singing came first and THEN the notation. It seems like we sometimes sing as if the composer wrote something down on paper, handed it to us, and then asked "OK now what does this sound like?" By learning to write based on what we actually hear, I bet we will approach singing from notation with a new perspective.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    If the recording in question was one done by me, have you considered the possibility that your transcription was wrong because I ... messed up?

    :-D

    :-)
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Well, Jeff you were obviously reading from a different notation in the first place. So, what this exercise pointed out was that there is some information that is not contained in the square notes. There are also places where St Gall suggests a different slightly different melody than the one in the Solesmes books, which one could easily figure out.

    However, for the most part I think it's amazing that listening to someone in the 21st century sing from a 19th or 20th century transcription (along with their own necessary interpretations) that I would, in taking dictation, come up with, for the most part, the same notation as a scribe 1000 years ago. This kind of reverse engineering (I suppose it's actually reverse reverse engineering) shows that for the restoration of chant done at Solesmes was, as one poster recently posited "more than adequate." I know you weren't fishing for a compliment, but your singing is also very clear.

    The things that get a little lost in the Solesmes notation, and a Solesmes method performance, include the round and square versions of pes and the clivis, the neumatic break, etc. I really begin to question the quilisma-note as well. I just can't imagine that a scribe hearing the sound that is created in the Solesmes interpretation (almost identical to the first and second note of the scandicus) would decide to notate it with two or three squiggles.

    Anyway, I hope someone tries this out and shares the result. Tomorrow I'm going to have my choir write out Crux fidelis from memory. Now, of course we're going to get different results than what's actually in the manuscripts since the version of the hymn that we have received is quite different. But I think it will be useful to have this aid to memory when we're singing 10 verses from an edition where (like most) only the first verse is notated.
  • mahrt
    Posts: 517
    I used to observe students doing this spontaneously. In teaching the beginning music history for the medieval and Renaissance periods, I would begin by teaching them several antiphons rote; I gave them the texts printed out, and then had them sing the melodies in imitation of my singing. After teaching the melodies, I would then ask, did anyone write anything on the paper above the text. Always a few of them did, and they "reinvented" one of basic principles of neumatic notation: either the St. Gall system, marking the motion of the melody for each syllable, or the Byzantine system, marking the interval from pitch to pitch. Even if you have a scratchy voice, I think such rote singing works better if you sing it yourself rather than using a recording--but there are limits.

    These melodies learned rote without reading notation served as a basis for reflections on the use of memory in the Middle Ages as well as now, and for the rationale of the modal system--you work from different principles when you are analyzing a melody without any notation.

    I use the St. Gall notation with my chant choir, when they sing an introit or communion in a stodgy way, giving each square note the same weight and duration. I turn them away from the square notation, and write the melody on the blackboard in St. Gall notation and have them sing it. The desired flexibility of the melody comes almost immediately.
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 489
    During my breaks at work I am reading about the Metz and St. Gall notation per Mocquereau 's for the first time, so the above comments are very timely. I have also noticed how various notations and pointing styles influence the choirs flexibility and wondered if the St. Gall notation could be useful during rehearsal to help us intone notes and phrases.
    I may unconsciously react differently to a "/," or a "." by singing a note with a sense of directional movement or repose yet Mocquereau so often illustrates equivalence among neumes that it is difficult to distinguish any specific character between neumes. I understand how we can utilize the St. Gall notation as a historical reference to validate a mora, salicus, or repercussion but how does the St. Gall notation actively help the choir member sing? Which symbols would be the most useful to the singer?

    Le Nombre Musicale is beautiful.
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    I learned Kyrie Orbis Factor for the first time in a workshop Dr. Mahrt did in Reno for Kathy Reinheimer, and he did what he described above, teaching it to us first without the music. It struck me when, after we had learned and sung it several times, we turned to using the notation (regular square notes). Instantly our singing became stodgy and mechanical, compared to how we were singing when we had not seen the notes before.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Ralph, I think you just have to do it and many things will be revealed. I've also been using a 2mm chisel-tip marker ($2 from an art supply store) to write out the neumes. (I'm practicing to make a 23.5x33 choir book to use in an upcoming performance). When using this kind of pen, some of the neumes that didn't seem intuitive to me suddenly made sense, e.g. the "twisted" torculus. I also now understand why even though the clivis indicates downward motion, it begins with an upward stroke. In fact, it seems that the only neume that begins with a downward stroke is the pes (and its composite forms), which is itself an ascending figure. Now, part of this is an artifact of writing with a pen, but it also reminds me of something that Mahrt said at a colloquium, that chant, being prayer, wants to rise.

    It's also interesting to realize what we do when we make a "mistake." I've written a round pes when I meant a square, or vice versa. It's easy to go back and "correct" a neume with a "c" or a "t". In the case of a series of almost exclusively long neumes, it is much more efficient to write the short version, and then mark an actual short sound with the addition of a "c". It's only when long and short sounds are mixed that one has to be more careful about differentiating between them. The easier or more familiar a chant is, the less you need to write. For example, I think I could probably write out "Happy Birthday to You" using only _ and / and yet we'd still know the proper intervals and the relative length of the notes.

    As far as which symbols would be most useful, I'd say again that . _ / and \ and their composite forms are a good place to start. Special symbols like the quilisma and any neumes that contain the oriscus will be a little more tricky. I'm still trying to figure out the trigon, the transcription of which (first two notes in unison) only makes sense when comparing multiple MSS. I can only imagine that this figure carried a special significance at the time which led to it conventional use.
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 489
    Icantu: I did it! What a surprise. We started learning "Factus est repentes" with basic staffless neumes: We were able to establish a wonderful rising energy from the get go while eliminating that slow "stodgy" learning period when the choir maneuvers through a new piece like it's an obstacle course; and avoided sluggish singing habits.
    I hope we can learn Mass viii properly with this technique in order to maintain the lift and energy that so often seems to be greatly lacking in some of the ordinaries I have heard on broadcasts.
    I also noticed we sing better from one large 24"x36" hung on the easel rather than from individual 8 1/2" x11" pages. Something to thnk about.
    I remember clipping through the Gregorian Ave Maria when I was six years old. (this was the first song we learned)Our first grade class of 60 had no problem singing intervals like re-la -tay without neumes. Our visual was all in the director's hands.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Incantu

    is there a font for neumatic notation? If not, maybe I could help do so.
  • Adam Bartlett
    Posts: 533
    is there a font for neumatic notation? If not, maybe I could help do so.


    St. Meinrad has two fonts for staffless neumes: St. Gall and Laon. They are pretty good, but there are difficulties because of all of the possible combinations of the symbols, etc. The fonts also are not exhaustive because of the number of neumes found in these manuscripts.

    I would love to see someone create a set of graphics of all of the neumes in the two tables at the beginning of 'Gregorian Semiology'. Francis: this something you would be up to?
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    I find that the problem with musical fonts is that they are difficult to use. I create vector graphics and then literally drag them into place in a professional layout app. You can see the results of this in my hybrid notation found on this forum. It leaves the typesetting mechanical decisions to the user and is not predetermined by the programmer. This calls for artistic sensibilities but allows the greatest flexibility in every way. In other words, the placement of every character and it's relative size is determined by the engraver (user).

    Does that sound attractive?
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Francis, I have been dreaming about a St. Gall font for the past few weeks. In the meantime I have been writing out, by hand, the text and neumes of the propers for the Assumption. While I learned a lot in this process (really, you have to do it!), I've decided that using an uncial font for the text andd only writing the neumes by hand will make my work go a lot faster, and it will probably be easier to read from a distance. We'll be using a large choirbook, although the largest format I have experimented with is 11x17. I wonder if my print shop can do 24x36 and how much that would cost... My next thought was, rather than writing the neumes by hand, wouldn't it be great if there were a simple font I could use?

    After spending some time with the St. Gall neumes, I don't think it's necessary for a simple, utilitarian font (i.e., one that is not going to be used for archival transcriptions of an entire family of manuscripts) to have all of the variations of the symbols. Remember, this notation developed as a memory aid for a melody that one already knew. We have a different knowledge base, including the benefit of diastematic notation for learning pitches.

    I have no interest in teaching my choir to decipher all of the different forms of each neume, when from manuscript to manuscript certain neumes are used interchangeably (e.g scandicus, salicus, and even quillisma). Other variations are clearly corrective, in cases where the copyist wrote a long or a light neume by mistake, and then went back and added a c or a T to restore it to its proper form. The T and the episema are also used interchangeably. We don't need two different symbols for this in a simple, utilitarian font.

    I don't think I would notate liquescents neumes at all. First of all, an augmented virga is the same as a diminished clivis, so there's no need to make two separate symbols. But since the performance of these has to do with pronunciation more than pitch or rhythm, I would advocate using an unaltered neume and underlining the letter that is to be liquescent.

    What I plan to do is to memorize the chant first, and then (without copying from any one manuscript) write it out the way I would like it to be sung. My primary interest is in being able to see the difference between long and light versions of the pes and clivis, and between the long tractulus and the punctum. As long as what I've written could havebeen written by a scribe who heard the chant the way I would sing it, then it does not matter to me whether or not there is any one manuscript that agrees neume for neume with this transcription.

    What would be involved in creating such a basic font? I know nothing of how fonts are made... I could imagine coming up with a scheme for the character map, however (P=square pes, p=round pes, etc).
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Adam, where can one find the existing St Gall font? I searched and couldn't find it.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Here is the beauty of what I can offer. Point me to the existing font. My system can take an existing font and convert each character into an individaul graphic in vector format. This is the best format for sizing characters because it uses mathematical bezier curves and not pixels. So if you create large manuscripts the characters will never get the jaggies as pixel based characters do. Also, when you load the characters into a layout application, you will then drag each individual character on the page and place it and size it to you hearts content. I do this now with GC notation. It is a perfect solution to your cause.

    For an example of vector based publications see the Gregorian Missal on CMAA's resource page. (correction... see "oops" below) When you zoom in (even at 2000%) the characters maintain perfect resolution.

    Point me to the existing font and we can proceed.

    ++++++++++++

    update

    oops.

    correction. It is not the Gregorian Missal that is saved as vector format... it is the Anglican Use Gradual.
  • Adam Bartlett
    Posts: 533
    @incantu & francis: I will email you.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    oops.

    correction. It is not the Gregorian Missal that is saved as vector format... it is the Anglican Use Gradual. (also, Aristotle uses the correct distillation method on his psalmody!)
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 489
    I hope mmore comes of this.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Adam & Incantu

    is there a better source for authentic neume characters? I would like to see that table of Gregorian Semiology.
Add a Comment