CC Watershed's New Kyriale
  • janetgorbitzjanetgorbitz
    Posts: 908
    Did you see that CC Watershed has published a Kyriale? It is a print-on-demand softcover book being offered at Lulu for $5.99/copy (plus $3.99 for shipping at cheapest rate). If a bulk order of 36 copies is made, the cost per book is only $7.13 including shipping, per our webmaster...

    http://www.ccwatershed.org/blog/2019/aug/29/pdf-st-antoine-daniel-ordinarium-missae-126-pages/

    What do you think of the criticisms of the Parish Book of Chant (PBC) in the article? Should a future PBC edition include any changes in accordance with his comments? Particularly his comment about Credo VII? I hadn't seen this one before, as it is not included in the Liber Usualis or Gregorian Missal or the Graduale Romanum. Any insight as to why it was omitted in these Solesmes publications?

    Just for informational purposes: The price of a single copy of the Parish Book of Chant is $22, plus $2 Shipping. It is hardcover with a ribbon and includes 320 pages of very thin paper so that the book is not unwieldy. Bulk order pricing is as low as $12/copy (plus bulk rate shipping).
    Thanked by 1chonak
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 1,544
    Credo VII appears in the 1961 Kyriale, I suspect that it does not appear in the Graduale and L.U. because of the trouble of changing the page numbering, index and layout. Why it does not appear in the modern books I have no idea.
  • Usual CCW marketing material. At least they didn't take the "oUr bOoK iS tHe OnLy tRuLY cAThoLic OnE" angle this time.

    "Starting Pitches" - okay, as a suggestion? In what world is this a necessary feature?
    "7th Credo" - fair enough, but this isn't in many other resources as well.
    "VA Psalm Tone" - this has never been an issue in my experience, but if it were, does this really warrant being written out? It's not like the Gregorian tones are paragons of complexity.
    "Confusing Numbers" - unsure what he means here.
    "Ineffective Headers" - seriously?

    The price is an interesting advantage, until you realize this is 1/3 of the size of the PBC.

    CCW continues to have issues properly typesetting music. In the first 20 pages three different textual fonts are used for the Gregorian notation. Either they compiled the book from various sources or they have three different engravers not talking to each other.

    Looks to be an interesting book for personal use and reference (there's a theme here with CCW publications...) but the PBC is already a difficult sell for NO parishes, and this seems to be far worse.
  • StimsonInRehabStimsonInRehab
    Posts: 1,570
    Umm, there's also the fact that the PBC also includes chants outside of the Kyriale . . .

    I'm still holding out for the reprint of 1957's Mass and Vespers.
  • Janet,

    Some comments from my end. We use the PBC at one of our two parishes (not the one where I am primarily located, so I don't have a lot of exposure using it). It is also in use at the local seminary where I occasionally sing Vespers as part of a diocesan chorale group (our group doesn't use it for the Vespers). In both places I've heard only good comments about it from seminarians and the people involved in the music programs. From my admittedly brief opportunities to peruse the PBC, my impression is that it is a well-designed book that is a strong addition to any parish, particularly those having a chant-based music program.

    In regard to the specific comments:
    • Starting Pitches - as a choir director, I don't care about starting pitches. That's my job. :) I share my starting pitches with the choir, so that wouldn't be of use to them. For the PIP, I can't imagine they would be remotely interested.
    • Credo VII - I do happen to include this in my choir books, but honestly, how many parishes ONLY use I and III? How many actually use all six that are "standard"? (VII is nice, but is certainly not my favorite.) Not a show-stopper from my stand-point.
    • Vidi Aquam Psalm Tone - heck, if the celebrant is incapable of waiting, I'd either Recto Tone or mark-in the Psalm-tone myself, providing that mark-up to my choir. That's why we get the "big bucks" as directors. :) Again, not a show-stopper.
    • Confusing Numbers and Ineffective Headers - everyone has a different style... so I don't see this as an issue.
    • Cost - it seems to me that there are some essential differences that drive the cost differential. If not mistaken, Lulu is paper bound, not hard-cover. There is a difference between just the Kyriale vs. additional music resources. One factor people might consider is what drives purchasing the book in the first place - what one might purchase for the choir wouldn't necessarily be what one would purchase for the pews.

    My 2 cents.
  • smvanroodesmvanroode
    Posts: 726
    Overall: the PBC has a consistent layout and chant engraving, whereas the St. Antoine Kyriale uses different engraving styles and different fonts, it has periods after titles and something goes wrong with the hyphens in the lyrics (compare the three Ite missa est on p. 16 for example). These may seem minor issues, but to me they reflect the quality of editing. I also noticed that the St. Antoine Kyriale sometimes has doubled the translations: one above or below the chant, and an additional one inside the engraving, directly below the lyrics (see p. 5 for example). I wouldn't send it to the printer like that.

    What do you think of the criticisms of the Parish Book of Chant (PBC) in the article?
    Starting Pitches • The Parish Book of Chant lacks starting pitches; those who sing from the “Ordinarium Missae” on a regular basis appreciate how handy these are.

    Maybe starting pitches are handy for music directors who don't read chant notation on a regular basis. Those who would use the PBC or the St. Antoine Kyriale are probably knowledgeable. I don't see the need for these (as do almost all other publishers of Gregorian chant).

    7th Credo • The Parish Book of Chant lacks the medieval Credo VII (one of the best).

    Credo I and III got my parish covered. Maybe we learn Credo IV one day. I don't see any need for Credo VII, especially because all other modern chant books choose to omit it.

    Vidi Aquam Psalm Tone • The Parish Book of Chant does not provide an optional psalm tone version of the “Vidi Aquam” for the repeat—which means the priest has to stand there for a long time waiting.

    If you are in need of a shorter or simpler antiphon for the Sprinkling Rite during Easter Time, why not use the alternative melody provided in the Liber Cantualis #29B? That might also be something to add in a future edition of the PBC, just like the alternative tune for the Asperges on p. 35 of the PBC (which is lacking from the St. Antoine Kyriale).

    Confusing Numbers • The Parish Book of Chant uses a “double” numbering system which is inelegant and extremely confusing.

    Maybe he refers to the numbers of the chants and the page numbers, I'm not sure. I don't find these confusing at all. "Asperges me, #23 on page 34" sounds helpful to me.

    Ineffective Headers • The Parish Book of Chant uses headers at the top of each page which are poorly done, repeating “Parish Book of Chant” over and over again.

    The right pages in the PBC indeed read "Parish Book of Chant"; the left pages capture the section title. It could be an improvement for a future edition if the pages would be headed by section titles and subsection titles subsequently.

    Cost • The Parish Book of Chant costs $22.00 per copy, whereas the Antoine Daniel Kyriale costs $5.99.

    The $5.99 at Lulu is without VAT and without shipping. The hardcover PBC has 341 pages and a complete set of chants, also outside the Kyriale. Especially the chants for the Order of the Mass are very welcome for any OF parish using Gregorian Chant. The softcover St. Antoine Kyriale only has 126 pages and is restricted to chants of the Kyriale.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,300
    I would say the third edition of the PBC can only get better after a review comparison like this.

    Perhaps the CCW edition is targeting beginners in GC? Whatever.

    The problem with publishing (as a business) is that you can be distracted always looking for a 'one upper', and that is not a good reason to publish anything, and is CERTAINLY the wrong tilt to take in marketing. Never be on the defensive... in warfare marketing, you don't directly attack the opposition... you subtly hint at the shortcomings (or provide differentiation), if they are even shortcomings... usually just a different animal altogether. Unfortunately, defensive marketing coming out the gate usually erodes credibility and comes off as insecure.

    One should publish because one has something to offer that does not exist elsewhere. Period.
  • janetgorbitzjanetgorbitz
    Posts: 908
    Perhaps they were looking for a less expensive option for their parish that only included the Kyriale and then just decided to make it available for any others in that situation. I'm thinking that the Kyriale put out by Paraclete Press might be a good hardcover option if ordered in bulk (and discounted from the $17.95 price). https://paracletepress.com/products/kyriale?_pos=1&_sid=88f578a83&_ss=r

    I must admit that I'd be leery of purchasing a softcover book for use every week. I'm guessing it just may not hold up over time.

    I remember being very excited about the first edition of the PBC. One of the key things for me was the addition of the inclusion of the English translations for all the chants and the addition of several more than were included in Paraclete's Liber Cantualis (which I think was probably the inspiration for the PBC). Plus, the cost was quite a bit less when ordered in bulk, as I recall.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,474
    @Schonbergian: It's a copy-and-paste job: everything is scanned from other books, some CCW, others from difference Solesmes editions, which is why there are different type-faces, the only thing newly typeset are the cover pages and the indeces.

    Not worth the $5.99 +S&H in my opinion (to say nothing of the marketing hype). If I had wanted a fuzzy, scanned, version of the Kyrial for my choir, I would have done it myself, and run off a few copies on the office copy machine; I didn't: I wanted a clean new copy that would last, so I purchased 25 copies of the Solesmes Kyriale several years ago (the PBC, though it is excellent, is beyond what we need)---they were a good price, hard-cover, good paper, sewn binding, and they will last: these paper-back, perfect-bound things won't.
  • One thing that I didn't notice before is that they have the audacity to criticize PBC's heading style, which uses "Parish Book of Chant" on one page and the section in question on the facing page, when their own book simply reprints the heading from one page onto the other. One wonders how this is an improvement in any world.

    I remain perplexed at how a low-effort copy-and-paste resource like this could actually be marketed as a serious product. Only by CCW, I suppose. And knowing them, there will be a new edition in four months anyway.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 1,544
    Page 79 and the 'sources' are very amusing!
  • It's sad to see Jeff trying to tear down the PBC... especially when it's such a great resource, and so well produced. To compare a smyth sewn hardcover to a perfect bound Lulu print as if they were even remotely equivalent is crazy. In the Cathedral music office, anytime we ever received a book that was perfect bound, we cut the binding right off and coil bound it. Perfect binding just isn't helpful for anything that will be used more than once as it won't lay flat without breaking the binding.

    If his publication was legitimately an improvement, that would be one thing, but the advantages he lists are all invalid from my perspective, and is just another example where I associate his organization with sensationalism and low quality...
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,068
    Jeffrey's recent habits of marketing are completely out of line.
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,615
    I remain perplexed at how a low-effort copy-and-paste resource like this could actually be marketed as a serious product. Only by CCW, I suppose.


    I associate his organization with sensationalism and low quality


    Just quoting these for emphasis.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,300
    I made editorial comments way back in the beginning of CCW with regards to standards and best practices in putting together their first hymnal. All of them were ignored (and I just racked it all up to inexperience and ...age, to be frank.)
    Thanked by 1Marc Cerisier
  • I think we ought to be clear that there are things which CCW (or those associated with CCW) do quite well and which are of value. It may be that the Kyriale they have put together meets a particular need and is good in that capacity. I wouldn't compare it to PBC - it is apples to oranges in that respect.

    Years ago, SSPX put out a Kyriale (Angelus Press) which was thin and hardcover. Of course there are other Kyriales that have been published from time to time... books that may have been better points of comparison for the marketing.

    That said, there is just as much to be said against implying that everything that CCW does is poorly done (not referencing any particular comment, just a general observation) as there is with attacking PBC using silly points of comparison.

    CCW does have some good resources on their site. Some people find value in their hymnals / missals. I've heard really good things about the Symposium (which is not directly CCW, but is connected to the president of CCW). So good on them for those things. Bad on them where they cross the line with comparisons that aren't valid.

    We work hard for the greater glory of God (presumably). We do good things and build some very nice resources / books / events (presumably). Good on us for those things. And bad on us when we cross the line in the other direction.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,068
    Bad on them where they cross the line with comparisons that aren't valid.

    I say bad on them for bringing up the comparisons in the first place. How juvenile is it, to try to make your own brand of sacred music, for crying out loud, shine by constantly sniping at everyone else's?

    Sacred music has real enemies who would rejoice at the implosive campaign of infighting that the article, and many others like it lately, represent. Tearing down your own kind to try to put yourself on top is really problematic.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,905
    To sing Vidi aquam with one melody before the blessing and sprinkling and another melody afterward seems a strange procedure to me. No, don't do that. Sing the authentic melody twice, or sing a simplified version twice. Changing melodies in the middle of a piece gives the impression of a desperate last-minute change.

    Admittedly, it would save 40 seconds, and maybe the priest perceives that as "a long time". Maybe he needs to switch to decaf.
  • CCW's main strength is the website's collection of sacred music, in my view - their print publications are where they go off the rails (with all these shell companies like JPII Institute for Liturgical Renewal, the extremely idiosyncratic editing, and the extreme variation in quality). None of which would be a real issue if not for the obnoxious holier-than-thou marketing, which included some suspicious brigading on various forums for the Brebeuf Hymnal.

    They should stick to what they do best instead of trying to reinvent the wheel over and over again, failing each time. And the unprofessional behaviour, which seems to have amplified in the past few months, needs to stop.
  • StimsonInRehabStimsonInRehab
    Posts: 1,570
    How juvenile is it, to try to make your own brand of sacred music, for crying out loud, shine by constantly sniping at everyone else's?


    This publisher has proven himself, shall we say, opinionated on the subject of the accompaniment of Gregorian chant. And by golly, if you aren't faithfully reproducing the "Nova Organi Harmonium" school, you might as well commit ritual seppuku.

    Look - everyone's going to have their preferred approach, as well as their preferred resources. They're going to have their strengths and weaknesses. For example, I know that the arrangements of the hymns in both editions of the Traditional Roman Hymnal have been - less than stellar. Myself and quite a few musicians in the Society acknowledge this. But I understand why they have to use those, and on the plus side, I find the selections of chant and hymnody to be among the best of any modern hymnal put out for congregational use. Others may prefer the Adoremus, or the Campion, or the St. Michael Hymnals. Cool. I understand why. We learn to choose what books we need on their strengths, and we learn to supply for their weaknesses as best we can. But trying to display another company's weaknesses to your own advantage? That'd be like if Noah's sons, instead of trying to cover their father's 'shame', set up a booth and sold tickets.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,300
    Having been in the profession of publishing (for longer than I would like to admit... OK... I'll admit it... 1988 when I got my first Macintosh and took on the world of desktop publishing) one realizes that publishing has become a different kind of game since the internet.

    Sites like CCW who can quickly advance and take some common ground, even if it is a very small parcel, can succeed overnight when presenting the right material or gather an audience. That said, one needs to stand back and see the whole of things with respect to what has gone on before... I always felt that CCW hemmed itself in with regards to collegiality.

    CCW moved out because:

    1. The Church has had it with banality, and CCW seized the opportunity to move those who would walk, to the right.

    2. A vacuum of knowledge existed just before Summorum Pontifficum with regards to sacred music and the general public and CCW stepped in with a web platform and a voice. Timing.

    3. CCW quickly established a grass roots musical consortium offering peoples newly composed liturgical music for free. Many jumped in and this gave CCW good momentum to get blog readers.

    4. SP was put forward a few years later which was like firing retro boosters for the CCW pursuit.

    A new era has revoked the synergy of the NLM, and everyone including CCW is backpedaling. Many are coming to terms with the short sighted novelty of vernacular in the liturgy and the TLM is becoming the obvious fall back. The sun eventually emerges from the eclipse... and then it’s high time to leave behind the ‘dark side of the moon’... even if it is all you ever considered to be real (visible) in your lifetime.
    Thanked by 1spottedmetal
  • irishtenoririshtenor
    Posts: 1,080
    shell companies like JPII Institute for Liturgical Renewal, the extremely idiosyncratic editing


    This is perhaps what bothers me the most.

    1) What on earth is the point of the shell entity? Not to mention the occasional, though conspicuous, pseudonyms.
    2) Why do they feel the need to deviate from so very many standard conventions of hymnal editing/publishing?
  • shell companies like JPII Institute for Liturgical Renewal, the extremely idiosyncratic editing

    This is perhaps what bothers me the most.

    1) What on earth is the point of the shell entity? Not to mention the occasional, though conspicuous, pseudonyms.
    2) Why do they feel the need to deviate from so very many standard conventions of hymnal editing/publishing?


    And even when under the auspices of this institute or that, every book seems to be copyrighted/published by a different person or group. I wish he'd just own the work he does.

    I just witnessed a conversation on Facebook between him and a collegue of mine who knew nothing about the hymnal... statements like this one that he (Jeff) made just boggle my mind—
    I know there was reluctance for the institute to release the index because its so unique & awesome——whereas other hymnals are usually the same 45+ songs
    Is it normal to be paranoid about a hymnal that you're publishing with the goal that parishes purchase it? It's professionally printed, smyth sewn, on good paper. They certainly had to spend some money to get the first run printed—would you not want to sell as many copies as possible?

    It's so confusing...
    Thanked by 1Casavant Organist
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 465
    CCW began, as I understand it, and excels, as a clearinghouse and patron of free, downloadable resources, both new-composed and historical, to be assembled and used at the parish level as needed.

    Moving from this model into professionally-produced and marketed materials, one would need to adopt narrower approach and mindset -- e.g., CCW's website could offer fifteen different translations / harmonizations of a hymn for download, and then the user would select the right one for his parish's abilities and needs, but a printed and bound hymnal needs to choose just one or two of each [usually, see below]. Or, if someone typeset a particular chant for them in a different font &c., since their downloads are one-offs, no one would notice, but in a book, it's obvious.

    Unfortunately, a lot of the complaints I read about CCW's published materials seem to indicate that the company has attempted to retain, in these marketed collections, the same variety that is possible on the website (cf. the Brebeuf Hymal), and tolerates the same inconsistency that is quite acceptable for separate files available on digital media (cf. this Kyriale).

    I wouldn't be without CCW and Jeff's tireless efforts (ESPECIALLY the HUGE archive of fascinating, historical books), but I think their published and bound resources for sale, if I'm reading these critiques rightly, would be better received if a more restrictive and meticulous editorial philosophy prevailed.

    And I echo too: market what's good about your product. If you want to mention a "leading competitor" in vague terms, fine, but even Brawny doesn't mention Bounty by name in its advertising, even if it does show a side-by-side of each cleaning up a spill.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,474
    I will echo what has been said: What CCW excels in beyond measure--even more than musicasacra.com (sorry Chonak!)--is the Yuge collection of old sources: it's like an IMSLP/Petrucci Library for chant. I would love it if they offered some of their digital collections as reprints, which could be a very useful reference for scholars and enthusiasts, particularly some of the 19th century Graduals and Kyrials.

    But why put the "Sources" section in the middle of this Kyriale? It seems to make no distinction between one part of the book and another: The supposed reason for putting the preface and index in the middle of the Brebuf Hymnal: is it just to have some spurious "consistency"?
    We made the AMAZINGLY WONDERFUL and TRULY CATHOLIC decision to put the index in the middle of the Brebuf Hymnal, and so we are continuing this AMAZING practice in the [insert name of French-Canadian Jesuit here] Hymnal/Kyriale/Search-a-Word.

    There are conventions for a reason, admittedly, different conventions in different places (I think most American organists' heads would explode if they were confronted with the usual British hymnal layout), but they do serve a purpose: to break with conventions one needs a real reason, and the opinions of one member of an editorial board, no matter how many pseudonyms he uses, don't fit the bill.
  • The classlessness of CCW is enough reason to not bother buying their books. If you can't focus on the positives of your own product without tearing down another one BY NAME, you probably shouldn't be selling that product.
  • The classlessness of CCW is enough reason to not bother buying their books.


    This point particularly speaks to me... in seeing Jeff write to his friends on FB about how he's being attached on forums and other places online I was promptly unfriended (in less than 1 min) after honestly reacting to his post. Dialogue is good—it helps us to learn, and it's important to be able to explain why we hold a certain position. It's a shame to see the direction he's been headed recently—as he's done so much good in the past, and continues to in what he hosts on his website...
    Thanked by 2kevinf BruceL
  • Can't wait for next month's CCW publication, the Pope St. John Paul II Sunday Gradual for the Extraordinary Form.

    "Some might point out that these chants can be found in the Liber Usualis, which is without question a very nice book, as this pdf copy demonstrates. However, the Liber Usualis has a number of disadvantages:

    Starting Pitches • The Liber Usualis lacks starting pitches; those who sing from the “Ordinarium Missae” on a regular basis appreciate how handy these are.

    7th Credo • The Liber Usualis lacks the medieval Credo VII (one of the best).

    Vidi Aquam Psalm Tone • The Liber Usualis does not provide an optional psalm tone version of the “Vidi Aquam” for the repeat—which means the priest has to stand there for a long time waiting.

    Ineffective Headers • The Liber Usualis uses headers at the top of each page which are poorly done, repeating the section header over and over again.

    Cost • The Liber Usualis costs $76.00 per copy, whereas the John Paul II Gradual costs $25.

    Catholicism • The Liber Usualis was not designed to be the most Catholic-est book of Gregorian chant ever made.

    Those are some of the reasons why our new publication was necessary."

    And then the book is just Liber reprints sold on Lulu.
  • TCJ
    Posts: 638
    I can't imagine what person would need starting pitches marked on the chants. If a person knows where to find DO then he doesn't need them. And if a person cannot find DO then the starting pitch is going to be worthless anyway.
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 1,900
    Were to find DO is the whole point, I should think. If there's time to zone out during the Intercessions one can pick an appropriate key by surveying the entire chant, but if I'm flipping open a book and sightsinging it's reassuring to see that I've penciled in something that worked once before.

    Likewise, if I don't have a tuning fork handy for the Communion I very much want to know in what key the organist played the Agnus.
  • shawnk
    Posts: 46
    A good starting pitch depends so much on the size and make-up of the ensemble that one group's starting pitches may be completely useless to another group--I'm looking at you, gallican castrati!!

    Credo VII is worth including, but it's not at all a deal-breaker. We use it on occasion, but it's too repetitive to use regularly; so repetitive... until the moment when it's not, and then half the choir falls apart.
    Thanked by 1Incardination
  • To be fair: I daily check up on his blog, because he has some wonderful contributors on there, and he himself has a lot of interesting info to impart, even if I might take issue with a few of his assertions (not sure if I need to point him in the direction of Mr. Louis Tofari concerning the matter of "dialogue masses" yet or not . . .) And, I am told by a reliable source, the Symposium he runs is top-notch.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,474
    Stimson...I am on the CCW e-mail list: Is it just me, or has the number of contributors diminished to the point that basically Ostrowski is the only writer there now?
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 683
    I shall limit my comments to this: If my dear friend Jeff O. is trying to grab a market share from PBC, he should be made painfully aware that nobody involved with PBC is getting rich, to say the least. (Janet? Do you know something I don't?) THAT Book of Chant, in an OCP/Omar W./throttle-the-market sense, has yet to be created. Godspeed to 'em.
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 683
    (I might add that, as far as numbering goes, I eschewed the advise of a knowledgeable colleague who rabidly HATES the use of both selection numbers AND page numbers. I must say, having worked with other hymnals that include both in the index, I invariably have to look the thing up twice to figure out which number is which. Some conventions really are not worth preserving.

    And besides... it's 2019: Why are we still printing books at all?)
    Thanked by 2Kathy CHGiffen
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 683
    PPS. I was happy to get the right notes in the right place the majority of the right time. I never EVER want to have to go through the process again for any PBC3, which in any event will only happen if they a) change the Missal translation yet again, or b) discard all the chant books in favor of some new semiological edition. I see neither happening before I am peaceably and happily dead.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,337
    RR, never tempt Divine Providence. With the right genes (and the right winds), you could live to be 110 - in a rightly-appointed atomic-powered cave, of course.
  • has the number of contributors diminished


    I've noticed that to some degree, although he enlists quite a few "guest columnists" and some of the old guard is still there (including the always-delightful Veronica Brandt and the always-excellent Lucas Tappan)
    Thanked by 1BruceL
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 1,523
    I don't know Jeff personally. He was at my first Colloquium, but we didn't really meet there. So I don't know what's going on. But it could well be, since he's trying to support a family on what he's making by doing what he's doing, that he's falling short of what he thought the market could support, and that the increasingly vigorous marketing is an attempt to squeeze blood from the turnip of sacred music....which, if it's the case, would seem to call for compassion from the rest of us, because we're trying to live off that turnip too,

    After 3 years of introducing Credo IV, I MIGHT, next summer, start V or VI. If the Credo is a communal profession of faith, one might not want a lot of variety. Sarum got on fine with just Credo I. So Credo VII isn't a big draw. As for pitches... I did my main chant learning in a group that chose odd pitches designed for men and women to sing in the same octave. When I started my present job, I really had no notion of how to pitch, until Dr. Mahrt explained it in a few short sentences which ALSO made the whole topic of chiavette make sense for the first time. So reciting tone is on A or Bb (depends on mode and clef; if 3rd line is DO, it's handy to have it be Bb, so you can read it in treble in 2 flats on the organ). Unless that doesn't work. We did Precatus est Moyses on B DO, a half step higher than we might normally, because the low notes were a bigger problem for us. The point is: why not spend a page explaining a rule rather than defining pitches for every chant? Teach a man to fish, etc...
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,300
    God Bless JO, and anyone else who is trying to promote sacred music of the authentic species. My sympathies are with all of you, good marketing or not!

    I have come to the point in my music career where money no longer dictates my musical affairs nor my preferences, opinions, or anything else. Old age and treachery (and the devotion to stark honesty and truth) will always win over youth and enthusiasm (and the need to feed a growing family).
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,905
    [I've deleted a couple of comments in order to remove some erroneous discussion that arose out of a misunderstanding.--admin]

    I think this thread has gone into mere speculation, so let's let it pass. I'm sinking it.