Arlene is a forum member here.

Doubtful that a standard notation exists, as the softwares used for neumes are not compatible with those for standard notation.

There are the Chabanel Psalms here http://www.ccwatershed.org/blog/2013/jul/16/free-responsorial-psalms-catholic-pdf/ which are in standard notation, if that really is a game changer.

You could also look into something like musescore (free!) and notate them yourself as the weeks go by. The parishioners would only need the antiphons in front of them ... and that itself raises a question ...

Is it even necessary to provide notation for them? They should be able to catch onto the responses aurally, and they don't even need to know you're singing from those evil ancient symbols that formed the basis of modern notation and are part of our deplorable heritage of beauty as Catholics (see what I did there?) Every parish is different, I know, and some are ok learning the responses aurally, while others will answer with weeping and gnashing of teeth. Of course, those disgruntled folks usually can't read (if they can, they can't sight-read), but that won't silence their indignation and they'll leave huffing and puffing.

tl;dr - see if you can't use the Parish Book of Psalms without giving the notation to e congregation. The other options are musescore or the Chabanel Psalms.

I found the Charbanel, but I would really love to use the PBoP.

You know, the GIA settings by Guimont and Gelineau are very nice and closer to what they are now used to. They are well written and beautiful, so don't lump all of GIA into one category.

Hi! I did the typesetting for Arlene's book, and as far as I know no one has transcribed the melodies to modern notation, and no one has produced organ accompaniments. They work well sung a cappella.

The book was published with a "Creative Commons Attribution License" which lets anyone make adaptations of the material in it. So you are free to get any music software you like and transcribe an antiphon, and print it in your music sheet for the congregation, or transcribe the whole psalm for your choir; there's no further permission required. The only restriction is that you give Arlene credit as the composer. Also you need to have a copyright notice for the text, but that's not our requirement; the bishops' conference requires that. If you look at the PBP individual sheets available on-line at musicasacra.com/pbp, you can get the copyright language there.

Noel, are you mixing threads? The thread about the word "cant" is somewhere else.

Oh, and by the way, Philothea: Noel is kidding: that's what the purple text is for. (There are other users who specialize in purple prose, but that's another matter.)

You can download them free too.

From above - see, one simple message from overseas and we've got people canting.

They then asked me to come up, cant the Responsorial Psalm, and then I can go sit down again.

Or, it's just a missed "h" while typing - both highly forgiveable.

Anyone know of a good, iPad app for notation/composition?

I second (third?) Ryan and Ben's recommendation of the Chabanel Psalms. They are already in modern notation, the organ accompaniments are great, and many (if not all) of them have practice videos.

Which one(s) would you suggest for a parish that needs a super-smooth transition? You know, your typical boomer mass with no propers and all hymns? I was really hoping to use the PBP (and change the notation) because I have the book itself, but since it is meant to be chanted a capella, I think they will turn it down (the accompanist seems to be a leader). I have no problem changing the notation, but alas, I am not a composer, and cannot come up with accompaniment.

On the website, they are the ones labeled "Version found in the Vatican II Hymnal:"

Philothea, at my last parish I re-set things all the time from four-line square-note to modern notation for the adult choir, because there was a visceral reaction of contempt and fear toward the tradition notation from so many people, so i really sympathize.

(Save the Liturgy, save the World)

Thank you for bearing with me. I appreciate it immensely.

I have sung chant many times, but did not know how to READ it (and therefore did not understand it). Having a degree in music comes with learning sightsinging, but I wanted to play it on the piano, darnit! ;)

So I was having difficulty finding the "tonic" (I know now that there is freedom within chant and the starting note of a C clef can be anywhere, as long as you stick with a typical major scale (whole whole half whole whole whole half)). I am a child of modern Western music notation, so it took a while to depart from the idea that the staff has permanent note values (bottom space always F) and to concentrate on note relationships instead of note names and where to find them in the notation.

I do have a question though (and I realize this question stems from my Western music education not wanting to loose its grasp):

When looking at a C clef, isn't it easier to just look at the line on the staff that it rests on and call that Do? Or is this impossible?

Am I correct in understanding that the chant/neume staff does not hold permanent letter designations? That "C" or Do is just ALWAYS wherever it lands, as is Fa? So the staff shows absolutely nothing other than where the whole and half steps lay, depending on where the clef is stationed? I think that might be the hardest part to kick - assigning letter names to the notes ans staff. Despite being a musician, I don't often enjoy sightsinging (can you say as rusty as wet iron?) and so I often like to have a piano nearby to check against my sight reading to see if I did it correctly. This is such a great challenge! I'm excited.

Thanks again. Please feel free to chime in with any tips or suggestions. I need them!

Using square notes delineates the difference. Most parishioners will not notice/care about/sense the difference in the music when you move to chant, they will only wonder where their favorites went!

Catholic Choirbook - Oh, how I wish this was my experience here, but alas, it is not. A new priest has recently settled at a neighboring parish. He immediately changed the music from a flute & guitar Breaking Bread singing duo to chanted propers and Gradual. Of the people who have "retreated" to our parish, one of the complaints is that they don't like the music, how the heck do you read it, how do you sing it, I just dont like it, etc. It is a very visceral, and somewhat violent reaction. They see chant and they run for the hills. The musicians were unwilling to learn chant and no longer sing there. It is a daunting task for someone who has the authority to put such music in front of choirs, but an even more difficult matter for a lowly cantor to suggest it.

Actually ... you are NOT a "lowly" cantor. You probably have more influence than the DOM.

Remember ... you are a parishioner. Priests HATE it when people are getting restless and angry. You, complaining about the music, has a GREAT effect. And if you were to stop cantoring because you don't like the music - why - It would be said in parish council meetings and staff meetings "Philothea is a trained musician, a parishioner, and would have volunteered with the parish choir - but couldn't stand the level of the music here!!!!!!!!!!! Things must change, NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Trust me.

Very early a cappella choral music, although notated on 5-line staves with various F-, C-, and G-clefs, tended not to have sharps and at most one flat in the key signature, suggesting that it notation, even though not in neumes and often quite modal, was not initially regarded as a fixed pitch notation. It was with the advent of fixed pitch instruments appearing in vocal/choral music that pitches came to be fixed (although different pitch standards held in different areas). The use of alphabetic letters to name notes was simply an alternative (rather early) to solfege nomenclature. Such early choral music might have been sung at any of several (modern) pitch equivalents, and still is often transposed, even today. G-clefs do not tend to appear in chant manuscripts, because the relatively higher pitch would put such music out of the range of most male singers.

Don't rule out a 'dual citizenship' arrangement, so to speak, if your schedule permits involvement in both places.

I'm usually a voice for unity and peace and I HATE it when the "sacred music question" is presented as a war or in political terms. But there IS a political dimension to it in some parishes, and unfortunately, Sacred Music often fails because it's proponents tend to be more pastoral and sensitive than the other side, the other side being defined as those who want the status quo.

Those who want the status quo will not hesitate to ORGANIZE when sacred music that they don't like is introduced. They will write letters, stand up at parish council meetings, engage in e-mail and telephone organizing, and ultimately, leave the parish and be very, very loud about it and their reasons for doing so.

On the other hand, my experience with those parishioners who want sacred music is that they will often be very charitable; they will approach the DOM and say "I know I'm not like most people, but I really love chant and what you have been doing at mass." They, when asked by the pastor, will usually say "Well, I know that a lot of people ARE upset, but I like this music." If Father, in an effort to be fair and get to the truth, pushes back rhetorically even a bit, they will usually back down and say "But if this music isn't good for the parish, Father, I understand."

All the while, those who want the status quo will yell and scream, sometimes literally. They will say "I don't CARE WHO WANTS THIS STUFF, IT'S AWFUL." They will say "YOU CAN POINT TO DOCUMENTS ALL YOU WANT, THIS STUFF ISN'T BRINGING THE NEXT GENERATION IN." And on and on it goes.

Which side do you think is more often successful?

Do not hesitate to make the hard decision. Do not hesitate to actually leave the parish, and be very clear about WHY you are doing so: "The music in this parish, the normal GIA and OCP fare, does NOT feed me. I cannot pray with this stuff and I'm going to the parish up the road that does sacred music."

The "other side" would and will do no less. And they are usually the ones who get their way because of it.

Or that Western Catholics aren't as in love with their heritage as Eastern brethren.

My husband and I have many times felt dissatisfied at our parish (ESPECIALLY with the neighboring parish now doing propers and striving for a beautifully devout liturgy) due to more than a few liturgical abuses but it seems that God wants us to stay there, this not-so-common opportunity being one of those "doors".

And I can tell you that all the neighboring pastors very quickly get together and on that pastor for doing something different that is causing people in their parishes to want change.

I am here, you are there, blessed be the name of the Lord! I know these people, you don't. I also get away with doing sacred music that would quickly get squelched in other parishes in the city, because I know where the invisible lines are that I shouldn't cross.

Interesting how music will be liked and appreciated by a congregation if you don't use loaded words - Gregorian, chant, Latin liturgy, etc. When no label is attached to it, the music stands well on its own.

Don't rule out a 'dual citizenship' arrangement, so to speak, if your schedule permits involvement in both places.

I would *love love LOVE* to sing there. I have thought about it extensively. Unfortunately, I think my presence at the other parish would actually harm my ability to bring my current parish closer to following the GIRM. I could very easily see the parishioners (if they see me there or hear of me being there) seeing me as a "Traditionalist" and would resist any attempt of mine to introduce anything resembling what is at the other parish.

But I could very well be over-analyzing this, and should trust in God more.

Barring an invalid Liturgy, the Mass is the Mass, and leaving a parish because we don't like the music, or the priest, etc, seems to put our own preferences above the reality of what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass truly is

Thank you for that, because it puts in words some of the thoughts that I have had.

My home parish is very much oriented to "contemporary" at the principal Mass, though if you must have contemporary then it is a much better contemporary here than is common elsewhere - a useful lesson that sometimes the things we would not always choose on our own may have real value when done to the best of our ability. Perhaps having to deal weekly with the liturgical equivalent of Ten Guitars is a test; there is however no doubt about the meaning of active participation in this church.

I could head down the road a few miles and get OF and chant every Sunday morning. This is now a special treat and perhaps I now tend to value it even more for that reason.

I want to add - there are generally not considered to be "territorial" parishes anymore. Although a parish HAS geographic boundaries, quite frankly, the days of being married to the parish where you live are long long gone. And you aren't going to bring them back by observing them, because probably half or more of your parish isn't.

Mad_Dan, I will ask, by not supporting the church several miles up the road who is following Church teaching, are you hurting them? Are they having trouble getting traction with enough members, because just enough people love it there to go there once in a while "for a treat," but won't leave their current parish? If so, look for the reverent liturgy to disappear and look for the parish to possibly even close. The powers that be will surely determine that there isn't a market for good liturgy done well.

"(only to be argumentative, I respond....)"

"I wasn't trying to actually argue with you."

Hmmmm....

Seriously though, this: "If they are going to find a reason to shut down and/or complain ANYWAY- why bother taking the time to remove one minor mote of fodder?" is a brilliant point. When I get a complaint, I try to discern quickly whether the person is a habitual complainer or actually has a point. If the former, I ignore them as part of a sea of noise and keep on with my bad self.