That... was... awesome.

Wow: I think I'm gonna make a ringtone out of Jeff singing that antiphon!

Well, maybe not. I'd have to pay the publisher.
;-)

With those accustomed to Spirit & Song, Respond & Acclaim without accompaniment sounds very similar to the Chabanel Psalms.

I found the video to be quite interesting. And it's thought-provoking to hear all these without accompaniment, as you can judge just the nature of the words in combination with the melody.

Of course, composers might complain that their music isn't written to be unaccompanied and that adding parts makes it richer. Fair enough. But the chant can also be accompanied, though probably not with drums and guitars. ;-)

I respect Jeff all the more for not adding affectation to the non-Chabanel settings, the Cortez notwithstanding.
I wonder, given my skepticism over whether a toehold will ever be provided such monumental efforts of Jeff MO, Adam, Frs. Weber and Kelly, and Richard Rice by the publishing monopolies, a recognitio by some impeccable editor within their ranks and employ.
Could the solution to this impossible dream lie in a coordinated publishing effort that would compile:
A. Corpus Christi Watershed projects
B. Simple English Propers
C. PBC
D. PBEH
E. Weber/Kelly/Rice addendums

into a single pew/choir/organ/(dare I suggest) leadsheet accompaniment volume? Something that WE could present our local PTB as the honorable solution to "alius cantus aptus?"
I also suggest that if some consortium among the above project proponets actually materializes, a both/and or either/or Spanish language compilation could attend the massive project.

Media delivery to the PIPs will be of utmost concern to pastors/celebrants. And common sense suggests that RC bishops/pastors/churches will not ever pervasively consider visual projection, and weekly Order of Music leaflets won't be accepted by same as a viable alternative either. So, we have to give them a book. That is mandated by both common sense and respect, and generally by the direction of celebrants who literally want everyone on the (same) page.

I also think that with Lulu and other print possibilities, the concept I articulated over at the Cafe regarding local parishes and sees to "craft" their own boutique worship book within the auspices of CMAA. Unity and diversity could be a great "selling" point to wary decision makers.

And such a volume could also be defended as not impinging upon the large publishing houses' right to market new product with which local musicians could augment their weekly repertoire choices as they see fit within the legislation of Musica Sacram and the GIRM.

And with such a volume in hand, CMAA could set up shop and a booth at NPM events so righteously it hurts to think about it.
Something to ponder.

I appreciate all your comments very much.

I would like to respond to this, if I may:

Of course, composers might complain that their music isn't written to be unaccompanied and that adding parts makes it richer. Fair enough. But the chant can also be accompanied.

Carl, I'm fairly certain you're aware of this, but "just for the record," perhaps the distinguishing factor (in my view) of the Chabanel Psalms is their organ accompaniment. We even devoted many pages at the front of the 180-page organist booklet to re-printing the "theoretical principles" behind the Chabanel psalms, as articulated by Van Nuffel (of NOH fame). View the entire 180-page book here.

That being said, I have come to believe that truly "acceptable" melodies are not reliant on accompaniment. This is my belief.

So, if I have "pulled the rug out from under" the other melodies, I did the exact same to the Chabanel melodies.

Besides, I know for a fact that many people sing the Chabanel Psalms without any accompaniment (for various reasons). I would not feel good about myself if I composed melodies that only sounded good with accompaniment. I'm fairly certain that all the Chabanel composers feel the same.

It is more difficult to write a melody that does not rely upon accompaniment. But melodies written in this manner can be sung with accompaniment, as Jeff O has said. Much of what I prefer to call poor or bad music that is sung in Catholic churches today in not singable without accompaniment. And this is why so many Catholic churches are populated by people who do not sing, since the accompaniments rarely provides sufficient support to the singer.

But take a melody that is singable without accompaniment and is consistent, meaning abandoning the ridiculous practice of verses that are varied in rhythm - and it succeeds with or often in spite of accompaniment.

Imposing rhythm upon the words that distorts the spoken flow of the language then adds to the mess.

Churches were built with flying buttresses for a reason. Church music was once composed for a reason. We have lost all reason and it is time to recover it.

I have mixed feelings about accompaniment. We do all our chant a capella, if only because my skills at the organ are less than pitiful. And there's no question that many modern settings of the Responsorial or Alleluia require accompaniment to sound good, so we sing selections off the Chabanel website or even (heaven forbid!) something I compose myself.

Of course, I've heard comments like: "We need the congregation to sing more! Maybe accompaniment would encourage them to do that!" Fortunately, I have a great excuse, but I also find that doing everything a capella is more prayerful and, well, special. I don't think it SHOULD sound like all the other Masses.

But I understand that it's a matter of taste. Most people, in our parish at least, want to have lots of singing and lots of sound. Which leads to instruments and amplification. Heaven help us if we have to have a SPOKEN Sunday Mass, people might totally melt down.

Oh, Jeff MO, you sang the Cortez immaculately. How you managed to do that, OTOH, is a thing that escapes my understanding. And I really don't want to bust Jaime's chops, he's a very congenial gentleman, it's just that example was the most sing-songy by comparison. Maybe it benefits in real practice with accompaniment; which says something right there....

JQ's hit the neume on its head.

The Cortez would not be very easy to include in Gregorian notation . . .