I think it depends on the congregation, more than it depends on the setting.

There are some congregations that seem to refuse to sing anything. If this is the case, I don't think forcing the issue with them is at all important under most circumstances. In this case, I would use all the beautiful music I could.

If they love to sing - but only certain things ("less beautiful") - there should be some effort given to "teach" them to sing other things ("more beautiful"). If they refuse and don't seem to miss singing, see above.

If they tend to sing everything that's put in front of them that a congregation is capable of singing, I would be most conscious of balancing things they can sing with other things that may be more "beautiful" with things that may be slightly less "beautiful" that they can sing.

Ah, I see. I don't think it is possible for any piece of music to "appeal as broadly to any [or in this case, each and every] congregation at first blush."

It would be great if that were possible, and perhaps someday when sacred music as we typically define it around here is more of a norm or expectation in your average congregations, this will be possible. As of today, I don't think it is.

As a follow-up, I imagine a good composer, with more than a passing knowledge of a specific, particular congregation, as well as CMAA ideals, should be able to compose such a work.

Interesting.

Interesting.

This.

I think any congregation that WANTS TO can sing (many of) the Gregorian Ordinaries. The the extent that active participation includes congregational singing, I think this is ideal.

Beyond that- I think the composer would have to be writing for a specific congregation (as, I think, Clark was with his Mass of the Angels). Like The Mass of Creation (also written for a very specific congregational situation) it seems that music written thusly would have the best chance of spreading, as many parishes are more alike than they are different.

Thanks for the correctives, RC. To your question: yes.
Adam, again- I'm trying to discuss compositions YET to be written, and not necessarily chant based, though Clark's is by far the most innovative and worthy among those that are inspired by "known" sources.
FNJ and Chuck- I'm crying "uncle" here. What exactly is "interesting?"
My friends, this thread is laboring hard to deal with principles of need and compositional art, and not focusing only upon how to get the folks to sing. And I don't think locality is all that pertinant, ie. the Mueller Mass originated in New England, but is universally acknowledged as beautiful.

Melody first.. yes.

Melody first.. yes.

Yes, but not like more than five minutes and a cup of coffee before you start working on the harmony first.

My opinion- I don't think you can deal in "ideals" in the way you are describing. We'll know it's possible when someone does it. Until then, we won't know whether it is possible or not. If no one does it for a long time, we can assume it is impossible, but we will not be sure.

Melody first Text first.. yes.

Fixed.

Ah so, now I get it, Chuck. You and Noel are having a "Mr. Enigma 2013" contest pageant, and the other old hippy geezer can either take a long walk off the reservation, or crown one of you, chanting like Burt Parks, "Here he is, Mister Eni-ig-mahhhhhhhhhh." I'm onto and wise to y'all's antics.

Sorry to burst your balloon, Charlie ... bit I find it all "interesting" because, in large part, I don't understand what you and the people who are seeking a "killer app" kind of setting for the ordinary are getting at. In fact, I find the whole drift of this thread more than a little disconcerting.

I find it especially troubling that people are thinking declaring pontificating "melody first, harmony second" (and not even mentioning "counterpoint"). But then, who am I but a mere composer and, in this context, a sacred/liturgical/religious music composer (I won't join the fight over terminology issues raised elsewhere on this forum). Maybe all of the wise sages here who give us the "melody first, harmony second" oracle are themselves composers, who have invested considerable time and effort in the craft, and who, having acquired such wisdom and deep knowledge, can posit unequivocally that "melody first, harmony second" is and has to be the only way to go about composing the ideal setting that will appeal to congregations "at first blush" (or whatever).

Sad to say, I'm wired differently. And I have a suspicion or hunch that a lot of other composers, even composers here, are also wired in manner that is rather different from that posited by the paradigm "melody first, harmony second" approach touted here.

I'm supposing, brother Charlie, that you (and others) didn't want any of us holding back, so, for once, I am not. I must confess that I do find myself often biting my lip and then not saying anything when something appears that is troubling to me or with which I have some level of disagreement ... and usually I say nothing because, for the most part, I find it difficult to frame what seems to be an adequate or complete response (for the simple reason that inadequate or incomplete responses can be just as disconcerting or disagreeable). Unfortunately, by not holding back now, I am quite sure that I am guilty of the distasteful problem of not being able to frame anything like a wholly adequate response. Others can probably do better with their short "sound byte" quips and polemics than I, which sometimes I engage in, although usually in a stab at humor.

Okay, that said. The tenor of the conversation so far has sounded to me something like, "Let's all get together and assemble the perfect, one-size-fits-all, irresistible melody for, say, the Gloria; afterwards, let's all get together and put together the perfect, one-size-fits-all, irresistible, and versatile-with-cantor-congregation-2part-4part-descant-and extra instruments harmonization. And then we will have just what the Roman Catholic Church in the United States needs, and it will be something that will take the country by storm." Okay, I'm overdoing that a bit. Just note that it's still the "melody first, harmony second" arrangement that gets on my nerves ... that, together with the notion that this all has to be done, if not by committee, then by consensus.

Balderdash! When have any of you heard of any musical setting truly inspiring and appropriate to the liturgy that was done by committee, or by consensus, in the course of its preparation?

Notice that I've sort of ducked the "melody first, harmony second" (and counterpoint) issue, except, by inference, to take pot shots at it. I will say this ... as one who has done not a little harmonizing of hymn tunes and other melodies ... situations in which the melody, necessarily, came first. The predominant paradigm by which I compose my own original works is a tightly knit amalgam, or fabric, of counterpoint, harmony, melody, and motion (the terms are given, without prejudice, in lexicographic order). For vocal and choral compositions, these are enveloped around the text with which I am working, in an effort to lift it up and ennoble it. I'm not tooting my own horn (that would be an oboe which, as everyone knows, is "an ill wind that nobody blows well."). I'm just describing how I approach the problems of setting texts, especially liturgical texts, to music. Others may do it differently. They might even do melody first, and then find harmonic wrapping paper to make it work ... but to me, this sounds a lot like the song writing approach of the past few decades that we have had to endure. Just saying.

Specific examples from my own work? Some that best fit my own paradigm include:

      A cappella works
• Ave verum corpus (SSATBB, a cappella)
• Creator of the stars of night (SATB, a cappella)
• Kyrie eleison (SATB, a cappella, opt. organ)
• In manus tuas, Domine (SATB or ATBB, a cappella)
• Let the clouds rain down the Just One (SATB, a cappella)
• Non vos reliquam orphanos (SATB, a cappella)
• Nunc dimittis (SATB, a cappella)
• This Advent Moon (SATB divisi, a cappella)

      Accompanied works
• Gloria (SATB, organ)
• Let thy Blood in mercy poured (SATB, original hymn setting)
• O Mother Mary of the Cross (SATB, original hymn setting)
• Of the Father's Love begotten (SATB, original hymn setting)

Personally, I am of the opinion that the Gloria is one that would be of wide appeal, as easily singable just with the melody as it would be with the choir singing in parts. It was written with congregational participation in mind, through composed, no bouncing back and forth between choir/cantor and congregation. It is already being sung regularly in at least one parish. Try it yourself (I won't be offended if it's not your cup of tea):   Score   Sound.

And, as for melody first and harmony second, here are the melody (Score attached) and the harmonization (MP3 attached) of my own hymn tune St. Croix, which has yet to be published. Does it sound as if the melody for this tune came before the harmonization?

And, @CHGiffen... I think too much choral music nowadays is vertical... I would LOVE to see more contrapuntal interest in all choral music. If we're ready to move beyond discussing melody (where I was merely hoping to begin the discussion), I would stand completely by your point of view that it should be harmony that is at least somewhat contrapuntally organized that should accompany it.

I think Charles has asked a very interesting question here: participation or quality?

To me, the best answer has been those who have said "Kyriale" and left it at that. This is the model of both participatory music and quality music.

I haven't seen a crucial element mentioned here of what the nature of the ordinary demands. I still haven't decided yet, a decade into my career, what I think of the Viennese Masses. But something about I-V-I, Violins "DUN-dun-dun-dunning" out 16th notes for 5 minutes, and a cheery "Kyrieeeeeeee" with plenty of bel canto seems..... contrived. Just my gut reaction at this point. And something about brass, organ, 4-part chorale writing, descant kind of triggers the same reaction for ordinary settings. It just seems... weird.

I attended an Episcopalian para-church once, focused on ministry to people in their 20s and 30s. The music was comparable to a coffee shop. When the time came for the Lord's Supper, however, they did a traditional-styled canon. This included a sung preface dialog and Sanctus. What they did is simple chants, sung by a cantor, then repeated by all. It just worked, everyone seemed to like it, and everyone participated. There isn't a lot of consideration of that sort of writing for ordinaries, but maybe there should be?

I don't really have answers on that point. I'm just suggesting we think about what the function of the music for that moment in the Mass demands. For me, this is where so many settings fall short.

Interesting...means, I am buried in a comedy silent movie organ project that came up out of the blue and I am learning neat stuff - for example, Harold Lloyd violently opposed the use of piano for silents, the organ was always his choice. Will be performing in one of the small Princess theaters in the town that his costar grew up in and attended...so seeing her face on the screen is rather amazing....let me go back to the 1920's. please...back then people did not accompany movies playing the lovely theater organ slush we hear played so nicely today - back then you'd be fired for it. Most theater organists were local church organists and they were hired to play the movie and NOT play recognizable music that would distract people from the movie. The music was 5% or less of the experience. Sort of like being a Catholic church musician, eh?...interesting in that I think you have a very fine idea. A Mass with melody for men and congregation with female voices singing, well written along the lines of some of the Anglican ones. Great idea. If we cannot write something better than the popular things, why are we on earth in the first place? Sorry it took so long to respond, going back to creating the cue sheet. Ritard when gas gauge shows empty before train wipes out car. Play "city gentleman" again as he walks away from the second wreck in the same day...

I'm sorry, but I thought this thread was about post MR3 settings of the Ordinary in the OF, not about maintaining the glory of the Kyriale or of other pre-MR3 settings. It is what I was trying to address. I'm not sure that the Church's chant settings, while very much an ideal to strive for, are what MeloCharlie had in mind. I thought the discussion was intended to concern itself mainly with settings that would be readily singable by both congregation and choir alike.

The thrust of my viewpoint as a composer is that melody does not have to be the first element constructed (composed) in a well crafted tightly conceived work, but that melody can and will flow naturally from and be well complemented by the entire musical fabric. Just as many, many congregations, both Catholic and Protestant, sing well crafted four part hymns, with nearly all people in the congregation singing the melody, while the organ and choir will often supply the four part harmony with no degradation of the congregational singing, the same thing can happen with well written four part settings of the Ordinary. And it does not mean that the melody voice for such hymns and settings has to come from chant.

I agree that in four part writing, all parts should be singable. Composing good hymn and ordinary settings should not have as its model anything akin to providing organ accompaniments for chant or (various kinds of) back-up for songs. This is not band-in-a box or strum along music. My point was, and is, that it is possible to have settings that are both artful and utilitarian. And to have a beautiful, singable melody line that nearly all people will sing and that will be seamlessly coherent with and integratged into the rest of the musical fabric, it is not necessary and indeed it just might be unwise to compose that melody first.

Let's see what our composers do with this - a Glory to God. Men of the choir with melody with congregation, higher voices in unison sometimes or on a descent, with organ accompaniment.

Let's see what our composers do with this - a Glory to God. Men of the choir with melody with congregation, higher voices in unison sometimes or on a descent, with organ accompaniment.

In fiction writing classes (especially sci-fi) they often have to make the distinction between having an idea for a story and having a premise. One is useful. The other, not so much.

I don't know why I thought of that just now.

Okay, gents, I've seriously lost track of where everyone's gone with the thread. What's the beef about now?

Noel- I was just trying to humorously suggest that you have provided a premise, not an idea.

Really? After all our discussion in here, we're going forward with just this? Not that it's necessarily a bad idea, but it is somewhat idiosyncratic - and what of all the unfortunately male-starved choirs out there?

I'm with Rich on this, at least part way. Unison settings, even unaccompanied ones, might be worth pursuing. And of course I'm a traditionalist for SATB accompanied settings (at least of the Gloria) that have a sense of power and strength that fits the text, with a melody that the congregation can find very singable.

However, the observation that I've made that congregations seem to respond to melody leadership, whether by cantor or choir in unison by the strength of the male voice singing the melody.

For reals, yo. This is probably the only liturgical-gender-role wherein I am of a decidedly sexist opinion. (Ok, also subdeacons- but that's it.)

I first noticed this as a cantor myself, in my teen folk-mass cantor days. People sang with me much better than with any of the female cantors, even ones with better voices and better technique than myself.

(Ok, it didn't hurt that I truly wanted people to sing, and most of the other cantors wanted to perform. But that's a whole other thing...)

Well, on the current discussion of male-voice-melody-leadership, I will throw out there that anybody doing an SATB setting of something expected to be sung with the congregation should make sure that - even if the melody is the soprano (or alto) - it should also sound acceptable in the men's octave.

In other words, in choral parts for congregational music, don't write a lot of close harmony between the soprano and bass, which would put the melody when sung by the men in the congregation below the bass part - unless there's a lower note in the accompaniment - or you're okay with weird inversions. (I realize this happens with many hymns all the time, but for some reason I'm okay with that.)